Assignment 3: Stakeholder Analysis and Annotated Bibliography: Identifying

Conversations

Overview: A first step before making a reasoned argument (Assignment 4) is to listen to the

conversation. In our daily lives, issues are often framed for us as dichotomies, with two sides, a

“right or wrong” or a “for or against.” A nuanced look at any issue, however, will reveal that

there are as many sides as there are stakeholders involved. In academia, it is our responsibility to

embrace an issue’s complexity before solidifying our opinions. One way to accomplish this is to

create an inquiry question within the scope of a current debatable issue. These questions guide us

as we research an issue and analyze the major stakeholders in the issue. In this assignment, you

will choose an issue and an inquiry question within the course theme of Healthy State or outside

of the class theme. Your exploration will result in a synthesis of the major stakeholders to

present a fuller and more accurate representation of the issue than a surface glance allows.

Purpose: To inform yourself, the class, and the instructor about an issue’s complexities,

including the major stakeholders and potential arguments for the identified stakeholders.

Audience: After listening to the conversations of multiple stakeholders, you will inform your

instructor and your classmates about four stakeholders in your issue.

Field Research/Interview (optional): A major component of this analysis can be to seek contact

with actual stakeholders. You may contact at least one expert, or other important stakeholder, to

gain a firsthand account of the expert's relationship to your issue and inquiry.

Annotated Bibliography: Before writing your stakeholder analysis (details below), you will

create an annotated bibliography to document your research as you discover relevant

stakeholders. An annotated bibliography is a list of citations to books, articles, and documents.

Each citation is followed by an annotation—a brief, descriptive summary, as we learned in A1,

and an evaluative statement. The purpose of the annotation is to inform yourself and the reader

of the relevancy, accuracy, and quality of the sources cited. Note: you are not allowed to use

articles previously read for the annotated bibliography.

Requirements:

Annotated Bibliography:

• Provide six annotations, 150-200 words each—this will be done prior to the analysis itself.

• Four of the six annotations must reflect different stakeholder positions.

• Two of the annotations must come from scholarly, academic sources

• One of the annotations can come from an interview/field research with an expert

• You may not use articles previously read in class

The Stakeholder Analysis:

• Introduction: Include an interesting introduction which provides a hook for your

audience, gives a clearly stated overview of the issue or problem you are considering

(including your inquiry question that guided your research), provides background,

including the necessary history and contextual information that your audience will need

to understand your issue. You should also define unknown terms for your audience.

• Stakeholder overview: Out of your annotated bibliography you will extract four

stakeholders, bringing them together for analysis of their positions within the realm of

your inquiry question, showing your audience how each stakeholder would answer your

inquiry question.

• Development: A thoughtful and thorough analysis of relevant stakeholders that makes

clear the similarities and differences in their positions, including their relevant values,

what is at stake for them and what they stand to lose or gain by the issue’s outcome.

• Conclusion: Conclude your analysis by discussing potential arguments for each of the

four stakeholders.

• Coherence: Organize your analysis so that the paper is unified and focused. Use clear

transitions to guide readers through your stakeholder analysis.

Analysis Details

• Format your analysis and document your sources according to MLA conventions.

• Avoid distracting spelling and grammar errors to improve credibility.

• Type your analysis in a readable, 12-point font and double-space it.

Calendar:

• Annotated Bibliography and Stakeholder Analysis Workshop: Apr. 8th and Apr. 11th

• Annotated Bibliography and Stakeholder Analysis Due: Wednesday, April 13th

Paper Length:

Annotated Bibliography: Provide 6 citations, each about 150-200 words (totaling approximately

900-1200 words)

Stakeholder Analysis: 3-4 pages, double-spaced (approximately 900-1200 words)

Worth: 20% of your final course grade

**NOTE: At the end of your paper, include the following honor pledge: “"I have not given, received, or used any unauthorized assistance."

Excellent Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

Stakeholder Analysis:

Development of Stakeholder

Positions

The analysis explores the

similarities and differences

in the stakeholders’

positions on the issue,

noting what they value, what

is at stake for them, and

what they stand to lose or

gain from the issue. The

analysis also shows how

each stakeholder group

would answer the inquiry

question and notes how and

why groups answer the

question in different ways.

Rather than referring to

stakeholder groups in

general terms, the analysis

cites specific evidence from

research to back up the

analysis.

The analysis explores the

similarities and differences

in the stakeholders’

positions on the issue,

though the exploration of

what they value, what is at

stake, and/or what they

stand to lose, or gain could

be more thorough. The

analysis indicates how each

stakeholder group would

answer the question, though

it could spend more time

exploring how and why they

would answer the question

in different ways. Though

the analysis cites some

sources, at times the

stakeholders are referred to

in general terms without

specific evidence from the

research to back the

analysis.

The exploration of the

stakeholders’ positions is

incomplete, and may not

explore the various

stakeholder groups’ values,

stakes in the issue, and what

they stand to lose/gain. The

analysis may not discuss the

stakeholders’ answers to the

inquiry question, or the

answers stated in the

analysis are incomplete or

not adequately developed.

The analysis speaks about

stakeholder groups in

general terms and may not

cite specific evidence,

leading to concerns about

plagiarism.

Stakeholder Analysis: Issue

introduction and

Stakeholder Overview

The analysis provides

background and contextual

information about the issue

being discussed, noting any

pertinent history, defining

important terms, etc. The

analysis clearly states the

specific inquiry within the

larger issue the student

researched. The analysis

also clearly distinguishes

four different stakeholder

groups and introduces their

positions within the realm of

the inquiry question.

The analysis includes some

background information

about the issue, though it

may need to be developed

more to give the reader

adequate context for

understanding the issue and

the inquiry. The analysis

states the specific inquiry

the student researched,

though its connection to the

larger issue could be clearer.

The analysis identifies

several stakeholder groups,

though some of the groups

may overlap, indicating the

student may not understand

the nuanced positions of

each.

The analysis provides little

to no background

information about the issue,

or the background

information that is present is

thin. The reader may have

trouble understanding the

context of the inquiry. The

analysis indicates that the

student may not have a

strong sense of the various

stakeholder positions, since

they are not well defined

and may blend into each

other.

Annotated Bibliography:

The AB represents a variety

of reliable sources,

including at least two

scholarly sources, and

balances both informative

and opinionated sources.

The information comes from

reliable research, including

library databases. It

demonstrates close and

critical reading by briefly

and objectively

summarizing the text, using

short quotations, paraphrase,

and author tags where

appropriate. The evaluation

of the source explains the

source’s reliability,

relevance, usefulness to the

project and notes major gaps

in the source.

Though there may be some

question about the reliability

of some sources on the AB,

for the most part research is

reliable. The researcher may

benefit from searching other

databases and/or resources

that are equally or more so

reliable. The bib needs a

better balance of informative

and opinionated sources.

Annotations may need more

development of summary

and/or evaluations to

understand the reliability,

relevance, usefulness to the

project, etc.

The AB does not represent

key perspectives and/or is

comprised of lower quality

sources. The bib may have

sources that are unreliable

and/or have sources from

only one database and/or

only from the web.

Annotations have weak

summaries and/or do not

provide support for source

evaluations, OR summaries

may be adequate, but

evaluations are thin or

missing.

MLA Standards

MLA style is followed

precisely. The correct

format was used for the type

of source being portrayed.

The AB is correctly

formatted: double-spaced,

entries listed in alphabetical

order, aligned left except the

hanging indent after first

line of citation, no extra

spaces between entries.

Minor citation errors are

present. In general, the

format for an AB is

followed, but one

requirement may be

overlooked.

Citation does not follow

MLA style and/or citation

errors are prevalent. The AB

may have multiple format

errors and/or does not

follow format.

Conventions and Style

The language, tone, and

voice of both the AB and the

Stakeholder Analysis are

those of a careful and

critical reader, and the

documents are edited for

clear communication that is

free of distracting errors.

While the Stakeholder

Analysis and AB could be

more carefully edited for

style, they are generally

clear and readable.

Because of poor editing

and/or style choices, the

Stakeholder Analysis and

AB are confusing or unclear

for readers.

Inquiry Question

 The answer to the research question turns into your thesis statement/claim.  Multiple and different sources and perspectives are needed to answer the question

(not just a yes or no question. Bad example: Is the sky blue?).

 Often a good inquiry will lead you to good research – everything will fit into a broad question, which is not helpful for research (needs to be focused on a specific issue. Bad example: Google search for “dogs.” Not as bad example: Google search for “What are the long-term health effects of tooth decay in Maltepeke-Yorkie puppies?”).

 To brainstorm and develop: what are your hobbies and interests? What’s your major (potential) and why do you care about it? What matters to you?

Theme Topic Issue Inquiry

Question

Women’s

Rights

Women and

Competitive

Sports

-Steroid use

among adolescent

girls involved in

competitive sports

-How much

are adults

involved in

steroid abuse

among teen

girls?

College College

Admissions

-Impact of college

admissions

standards on the

makeup of US

colleges and

universities

-Should CSU

make

admission

harder?

Internet

and

Social

Media

Privacy -Social networks can have different

privacy controls

and settings

-Whose ethical

responsibility

is it to

understand

social media

privacy

policies? The

user or the

provider?

Internet

and

Social

Media

Freedom of

Speech

-Employees are

being fired,

suspended, or

reprimanded for

content they’ve

posted on their

social media

accounts

-Do employers

have the right

to use what an

employee

does/says in

their personal

life against

them?

E

1

C. E.

Maurice Irvin

CO150-038

31 March 2017

Annotated Bibliography

Bailey, Conner. “Local Solutions to Inequality: Steps Toward Fostering a Progressive Social

Movement.” Rural Sociology, vol. 78, no. 4, December 2013, pp. 411-428. Business

Source Complete, doi: 10.1111/ruso.12032. Conner Bailey’s article “Local Solutions to

Inequality: Steps Toward Fostering a Progressive Social Movement” published in Rural

Sociology focuses on the role of researchers and community activists in eradicating

poverty in rural/more suburban communities. Bailey’s solution to intergenerational

poverty gives power back to local businesses and uses local communities’ resources to

sustain the economy and individual needs. By “reorient[ing] our economy to a more

human scale,” (412) Bailey argues that communities will be better equipped to

adequately sustain all of their citizens’ needs consequently eliminating persisting poverty.

The source can be deemed credible because it was published less than five years ago in a

reliable academic journal. Furthermore, Conner Bailey is a Rural Sociologist teaching at

Auburn University which provides immense ethos for an article focused on solutions to

persistent, rural poverty. Overall, the article offers a perspective on rural poverty, which

all of my other sources lack. Bailey’s article provides a necessary perspective that will

further develop my assignment.

Darity, William and Darrick Hamilton. “Bold Policies for Economic Justice.” The Review of

E

2

Black Political Economy, vol. 39, no. 1, 7 January 2012, pp. 79-85. Google Scholar, doi:

10. 1007/s12114-011-9129-8. The article “Bold Policies for Economic Justice” by

William Darity and Darrick Hamilton published in the Review of Black Political

Economy offers the two solutions of a federal job guarantee and a substantial child

development account to address the problem of intergenerational poverty. The authors

argue that it is the government’s duty to, “ensure that the opportunity to work for decent

pay is a citizenship right for all Americans” (81). They also argue the “baby bonds”

program would offer “asset-building opportunities for all Americans” (83) which would

provide the children born into disadvantaged households the opportunity to climb up the

economic ladder and deter their poverty from persisting into proceeding generations. The

source can be confidently identified as credible because it is up to date, uses factual

evidence to back up its solutions, and the authors are both economists so they are

qualified to speak on ways to alter the economy. The source is beneficial to my

assignment because it explores the racial aspect of poverty which will be pertinent to talk

about.

Ramey, Craig and Sharon Ramey. “Head Start: Strategies to Improve Outcomes for Children

Living in Poverty.” Investing in Young Children: New Directions in Federal Preschool

and Early Childhood Policy, ch. 5, 2010. Google Scholar. Craig and Sharon Ramey’s

article “Head Start: Strategies to Improve Outcomes for Children Living in Poverty”

published in Investing in Young Children: New Directions in Federal Preschool and

Early Childhood Policy focuses on reforming Head Start programs through improving

staff knowledge and performance, collecting and analyzing data on its effectiveness, and

identifying instructional strategies which fail and enforcing successful strategies. Head

E

3

Start has been a federal program utilized for young children living in poverty to be able to

receive an early education and proper care. Ramey and Ramey understand that “when

children do not receive essential early learning experiences they are harmed in permanent

ways” (61). So they advocate for immense changes in Head Start in order to assure that

children living in poverty have minimal disadvantages and receive necessary learning

experiences to develop. This article demonstrates credibility through the credentials of

both authors who are world-renowned child development researchers. It is slightly old,

but it still has relevant information. The fact that the article is centered around reforming

an organization to reduce poverty offers a unique perspective for my research.

Schorr, Lisbeth. Common Purpose: Strengthening Families and Neighborhoods to Rebuild

America. Doubleday, 1997. Lisbeth Schorr’s novel Common Purpose explores how

small-scale programs can be adapted to fit a larger mass and transform disadvantaged

communities consequently reducing persistent poverty and reshaping America. A

common theme throughout Schorr’s book is to provide lists of different attributes she

discovered in her research. For example, Schorr states that the seven attributes of highly

effective programs are: being comprehensive, flexible, responsive, and preserving, see

children in the context of their families, deal with families as parts of communities,

having a long-term, flexible, and clear mission, are well managed, trained and supportive

staff, and encourage the building of strong relationships. Although Schorr’s book is quite

outdated I find her to still be a credible source because of the plethora of information she

gathered and the foundation she laid for other ways of dealing with poverty. Common

Purpose will be beneficial in providing a stable foundation for me to build my research

off of and will help me filter acceptable solutions.

E

4

Shobe, Marcia. “The Future in Anti-Poverty Strategies.” Journal of Children and Poverty, vol. 8,

no. 1, 2 August 2010, pp. 35-49. Business Source Complete, doi:

10.1080/10796120220120377. The article “The Future in Anti-Poverty Strategies” in the

Journal of Children and Poverty by Marcia Shobe suggests the solution of Individual

Development Accounts for children and parents as a way to prevent intergenerational

poverty. Shobe states that “vulnerable families are unable to get ahead financially and, as

a result, experience increasing rates of intergenerational poverty” (36). A method of

assistance for those vulnerable families is giving them IDAs so they can build their assets

and accumulate wealth. Shobe testifies that IDAs and asset accumulation will be able to

“provide a foundation for a solid future for the entire family” (48). If a family can acquire

assets and develop their wealth, they will be able to give proceeding generations more

opportunities and impede the poverty persisting in their family. Shobe’s credentials are

what mainly help her assert her credibility as she is an Associate Director and Professor

in the school of social work at the University of Arkansas. Although one of my articles

already discusses a similar solution, Shobe’s includes children which makes hers distinct

and offers different information.

Tierney, William. “Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Role of the Intellectual in Eliminating

Poverty.” Educational Researcher, vol. 42, no. 6, 1 August 2013, pp. 295-303. Google

Scholar, doi: 10.3102/0013189X13502772. William Tierney’s article “Beyond the Ivory

Tower: The Role of the Intellectual in Eliminating Poverty” published in Educational

Researcher argues that researchers must shift their focus beyond the ivory tower to

reduce to poverty. The ivory tower refers to a state of privilege and dissociation from the

practicalities of real life. Tierney offers five recommendations for assisting

E

5

underprivileged kids receive an effective higher education: making sure students

understand what constitutes a college-ready curriculum by ninth grade, utilizing

assessment measurements throughout high school, surrounding the students with a

supportive network, engaging and assisting students in completing steps for college entry,

and helping students apply for financial aid. Tierney relies on the assumption that “a way

out of poverty and into the middle class [is] education” (297) and that through his

recommendations more children will be able to escape their cycle of poverty. I find

Tierney’s article to be reliable because he even went back and corrected and clarified

certain parts which is admirable. This article will be particularly useful for my paper

because it focuses on the role of the intellectual which none of my other sources really

do.

E

1

C. E.

Maurice Irvin

CO150-038

31 March 2017

Stakeholder Analysis

The American Dream of being able to rise from rags to riches has been deeply embedded

within American culture since The Industrial Revolution. Unfortunately for many people this

dream of economic mobility is unattainable, and they find themselves trapped in a cycle of

poverty. According to the United States Census Bureau, in 2013 14.5% or 45 million people

were living at or below the national poverty line. This cycle of poverty persisting through

generations of a family is known as intergenerational poverty. Due to unfortunate circumstances

and numerous other factors, “vulnerable families are unable to get ahead financially and, as a

result, experience increasing rates of intergenerational poverty” (Shobe 36). So, what should be

done to address intergenerational poverty? When answering this question, the four main

stakeholders that must be considered are children, minorities, the rural poor, and American

taxpayers.

Generally speaking, children have a lot at stake when it comes to the detrimental issue of

persistent poverty. According to Marcia Shobe, “Approximately 17%, or 5.3 million youth, were

living in impoverished households in 1999,” (38) a number which has only continue to increase

since. Children are the most vulnerable and impressionable group affected, because they are in

the midst of their development and are extremely dependent on others for their well-being.

Although their own values and beliefs are not fully established yet, their common desire is to be

loved and nurtured. World-renowned child development researchers Craig and Sharon Ramey

E

2

assert that “when children do not receive essential early learning experiences—that is, when their

care is neglectful, inadequately stimulating, overly harsh or punitive, or unpredictable and

inconsistent, they can be harmed in permanent ways” (61). The permanent harm many

impoverished children face can destroy their chances of rising up the economic ladder and

escaping poverty. If underprivileged communities could enact highly effective programs that

were “comprehensive, flexible, responsive, and persevering,” and managed by “competent and

committed individuals with clearly identifiable skills,” (Schorr 5-9) then these children would

have a legitimate opportunity to better their lives and end their families’ cycle of poverty. If no

changes are made, then these children will be underdeveloped, illiterate, and unprepared for

adulthood. Out of all the stakeholders, children are the most defenseless, but they also have the

most potential to benefit from systematic change.

Another stakeholder group that is disproportionately affected by intergenerational

poverty is minorities. In our modern society we would like to believe we have come a long way

from the racism and segregation of our ancestors. Believing this to be true creates a post-racial

rhetoric “that our society has transcended the racial divide and that the remaining racial

disparities are due primarily to self-sabotaging attitudes and behaviors on the part of blacks

themselves” (Darity and Hamilton 80). The harsh reality is that racial inequalities and economic

disparities are still extremely prevalent in society today. One example economists Darity and

Hamilton point out is that, “black males earn only 74% of what white males earn” (80) with the

same education. This example of inequality demonstrates one of the main reasons why minorities

are unable to climb the economic ladder and escape poverty. Just like the majority of society,

minorities believe that they should be able to provide for their families and leave their children

better off than they were. Being unable to do so because they have a different skin color or

E

3

culture is an injustice to society. If racial inequality could be diminished through “a federal job

guarantee” and a “substantial child development account” (Darity and Hamilton 79) then society

as a whole would be better off and minorities would be able to adequately support their families.

If nothing is done, then minorities will continue to live in an unjust cycle of poverty and

proceeding generations will be disadvantaged because they are “different.” In comparison to

other stakeholders most people are aware of but choose to ignore the racial disparities in society,

because acknowledging it means accepting the fact that our nation is not as progressive as we

would like to think.

One stakeholder group often ignored but still deeply affected by intergenerational poverty

are those who are poor in rural communities. Although rapid urbanization has benefitted many

people economically, it has left rural communities neglected and disadvantaged. These rural

communities value locally owned businesses, locally produced goods, and sustainable use of

land. These values conflict with the way the majority of society lives, (i.e. shopping at Wal-Mart

and buying factory farmed goods) in turn leaving little room for rural communities to expand

their market. Rural sociologist Conner Bailey offers the solution of “reorient[ing] our economy

to a more human scale” by “organizing economic exchanges that utilize local resources, talents,

and knowledge” (412). By shifting the focus of the economy to meet each community’s local

needs, rural communities will be able to generate wealth consequently ending their cycle of

poverty. Unlike other stakeholders this group has the resources to support its economy but does

not have the demand or financial stability to do so. For example, there is an abundance of land in

rural communities which, if utilized properly, could be extremely beneficial. Bailey gives the

solution of using “small-diameter woods from thinnings” for “direct conversion to thermal

energy” (421) for not only residential properties but also all buildings in the community. If

E

4

communities were able to depended on wood or other forms of biomass for their energy, then a

profitable market would emerge and the local economy could be stimulated. The potential for

generating wealth is there, it just has to be acknowledged. Like some of the other stakeholders

much of what needs to be done to end their suffering is out of their control and will take national

reform to enact change.

The last group that has stake in intergenerational poverty is the American taxpayer who

funds much of the efforts towards fighting the problem. This stakeholder group is extremely

<