APPENDIX B:
Annotated Bibliography Exercise #1
(Expanded Description)
*You may submit this assignment thru the Turnitin Link at any point in the semester. Once submitted it will be graded. This means you decide when to complete the assignment during the semester, just make sure it is completed properly and submitted in Turnitin before due date!
Topic: Find four (4) academic journal articles that all discuss (and are interrelated) one of the following topic areas:
• Public Administration & IT
• E-Democracy
• E-Governance
• E-Participation
• Human Resources Information Systems
• Information Privacy & Security
• Leadership, Organizations, & IT.
Description: This is a two-part assignment:
- Select your four (4) scholarly, peer reviewed, journal articles and complete annotated bibliographies for each one based on one of the topics above. Said differently, if you want to learn more about E-Democracy you choose 4 articles that all discuss E-Democracy.
A peer reviewed scholarly journal article is found through electronic journal databases, google scholar, or journals in the library. DO NOT USE NEWS ARTICLES, BLOGS, MAGAZINES, OR OTHER MATERIALS that are not peer-reviewed journal articles- if you choose to do so expect a severe penalty.
For each article you will write an annotated bibliography. Each of the annotated bibliographies should be properly cited in APA format and contain a paragraph or two (250-300 words per article) that provides a description and evaluation of the article and informs the reader of the article’s relevance and contribution. Be sure that for each article you also tie in ideas from the appropriate chapter in your course textbook IT (Reddick, 2012).
- After completing the annotateds for four (4) separate but interrelated articles, in one paragraph (4-5 sentences minimum), provide an exegesis, or summary, of how these articles all connect and link together, noting similarities, differences, and original contributions. This means that you will need to find articles that all have something in common that allows you to connect them all. *See Appendix C for an example/template of both parts one and two and see resources below for additional guidance on APA citations/annotateds.
Grading & Submission
Your grade for this assignment will be out of 100 points and determined based on the following criteria:
- Did the student choose peer reviewed scholarly journal articles?
- Are the articles applicable and pertinent to one of topics provided above and class topic?
- Is each article properly cited, formatted, and grammatically correct according to APA standards?
- Is the assignment free of all major writing errors?
- How well did the student summarize and describe important ideas, concepts and themes from each article?
- Is the annotated paraphrased properly and does the student successfully discuss the article in her/his own words? *You must include in-text citation (p.#) if you quote directly or paraphrase. However, do not include a bunch of long direct quotations as “space fillers” or you will be penalized.
- Did the student make sure to tie in the Reddick (2012) (IT) textbook to each of the articles and the exegesis?
- How well did the student summarize the 4 articles and successfully link them together coherently and concisely by noting differences, similarities, and highlights of the articles individually and as a whole body of literature?
Annotated Bibliography Resources:
Writing annotated bibliographies:https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/614/03/
APA Citations & Formatting: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01
Appendix C:
Annotated Bibliography Template
Student Name
Course #
Date
Exploring the Centralization Debate in Public Administration
(Title)
Article #1 (properly cited APA, nice summary noting important points)
Kaufman, H. (1969). Administrative decentralization and political power. Public Administration Review, 29(1), 3-15.
Kaufman argues the administrative state (gov. agencies) and traditional modes of representation no longer satisfy demands and needs of the citizenry due to the sizeable and impersonal organizations and pluralistic politics. Democracy is being sacrificed as a result of the outgrowth of a large and formidable, yet complex and generalized, Administrative State. This state is by and large irresponsive to citizens’ needs/demands, fails in representativeness, and only occasions incremental changes. Simply put, administrative state possesses too much political power. To remedy such issues Kaufman argues we must enlarge and strengthen executive-office staff and decentralize administration (organize by area, not function, and more local clientele influence/regional representatives), thus curtailing the power of the Administrative State from both above and below.
Article #2
Kaufman, H. (1956). Emerging conflicts in the doctrines of Public Administration. The American Political Science Review, 50(4), 1057-1073.
American governance and administrative history may be conceptualized as a succession of shifts emphasizing three central normative values: representativeness, politically neutral competence, and executive leadership. All three remain present (to varying degrees) through U.S. administrative history, yet none are ever fully realized. Herein lies a fundamental conflict and contradictions in our administrative institutions. Early on extensive power was vested in the legislature, reflecting the value of representativeness. However, this extensive legislature power failed (think spoils system & long ballot) and, in fact, had the opposite consequence, thus giving way to an emphasis on neutral competence (late 19th Century, the dichotomy). However, the wide discretion, mechanistic and rational means/modes, emphasis on purely objective standards, and secure tenure resulted in conflicts and failures in attaining the last value, executive leadership. The first two values occasioned too much fragmentation of government and “islands of decision-making” (p.1062). Fragmentation led to chaos, costliness, conflict, and irresponsibility.1 Kaufman argues that too much emphasis on neutral competence led to too much administrative power and bureaucratic discretion, thus sacrificing the power of the citizens and the executive, representative of the other two core administrative values.
Article #3:
Long, N.E. (1949). Power and administration. Public Administration Review, 9(4), 257-264.
“The lifeblood of administration is power,” argues Long (p.257). Moreover, all administrational values or institutions are embedded with politics. Whether implicitly or explicitly stated, law (legislative) and authority (administrative state/bureaucracy) also represent forms of power. Consequently, depictions of the Executive as a “reservoir of authority” are a distorted representation of the administrative system. Power is not exclusively derived from hierarchical chains of command, instead permeating the organization from all angles. The bureaucracy has a significant role in promotion of public policy and organizing a political basis for the survival and growth of the American political system. The bureaucracy also is recognized as a major source of representation. Bureaus and agencies also strive to maintain, accrue, and construct political support. Thus, administration is inherently political and entrenched in power (socio-political) struggles and it is inaccurate to assume that any of the systems generates enough power at any point of leadership to separate politics and administration. Administrative theory must examine the problem of identifying the sources and adequacy of power within each administrative institution along with the purposes of the polity.
Exegesis: (How do the articles all tie together? What are the commonalities? Differences? Overall connections? Use Reddick (IT) text? )
These three articles may be viewed as reflective of the federalist/anti-federalists debates. Do we need a large, centralized federal government, administrative bureaucracy (neutral competence) and expansive executive power or do we need a smaller, decentralized administrative state with more local participation (representativeness)? As Kaufman (1956; 1969) incisively notes, at least one of the three administrative institutions will always be sacrificed in pursuit of adequately achieving one (or more) of the others. Inherent contradictions and paradoxes, therefore, rest at the foundations of our governance system and public administration/politics.2
Continuing, Long (1949) suggests that all three administrative institutions depend upon power and all three are entrenched in politics. Power and politics, therefore, rest at the heart of public administration and are the driving force behind democratic values and administrative institutions. There seems to be an oscillating power dance between the three administrative institutions (Kaufman), with “degrees of power” being the generative force (Long) behind such dances. Administrative behavior must be viewed in the context of the extant political system and examine the power dynamics at play.
Sample Solution