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. 8
th 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.
