Category: Sociology

equired Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:
Textbook: Chapter 9
Lesson
Link (website): Pew Research Center census timeline.Links to an external site.
Review the two columns comparing the 1790 Census categories with the 2020 Census categories.
Instructions
This week you learned about the U.S. Census Bureau’s most recent racial and ethnic categories. For this assignment, we will analyze the concepts of race, ethnicity, and gender as social constructs, just as sociologists do. We will examine racial and ethnic categories used in the 2020 Census with the four racial, ethnic, and gender categories used in the 1790 Census: Free white males, free white females, all other free persons, slaves (Pew Research Center, 2020).
*This assignment is adapted from Glaser (2018).
In 2–3 pages, write an essay that uses these headings and provides this information:
Section 1: Case Study Subject
In this section, identify one person to focus on in your case study (this person can be you, someone you know, or a public figure).
Section 2: Analysis
In this section, explain how this person might have been categorized by the 1790 Census and explain how this person would have been categorized by the 2020 Census.
Compare and contrast how this person’s two potential categorizations on the 1790 and 2020. How does this demonstrate that the concepts of race, ethnicity, and even gender change over time as social constructs?
Section 3: Reflection
In this section, suggest changes to ethnic, racial, and/or gender categories in a future U.S. census. What changes or new categories would most accurately show the diversity of the U.S. population, improve education about inequalities, and promote social justice? Explain your recommendations.
Writing Requirements (APA Format)
Length: 2-3 pages total
1-inch margins
Double spaced
12-point Times New Roman font
Page number in the upper right of all pages
Parenthetical in-text citations included and formatted in APA style

Select one secular and one religiously motivated terrorist organization. Compare and contrast them by answering the following questions and using evidence from the readings and any outside sources: Which ideologies are at the root of their belief systems? How do they disseminate utopian political narratives, what are those narratives, and what is the appeal/impact of their selected approach? What methods do they use to divide people into believers/members and enemies? What contradictions can you identify between their actions and their ideology or religion? Follow the basic requirements for this assignment: Write 2 to 4 pages (500 to 1000 words). Answer all of the parts of each question/requirement. Include at least four scholarly sources. Provide in-text citations and references in APA format.

Part 1: Social Stratification
Instructions
Consider this week’s discussion on Social Stratification and how your place in the social strata determines the opportunities you are afforded. After viewing the video link below, compose a response answering the following questions:
You have be given the task of selecting 3 people from the list below to receive a heart transplant. Who will you choose, why?
Directions: First, you are to select 3 people from the list below that you would award a heart transplant. Secondly, rank from 1 to 3 who will be awarded the transplant with 1 being most important, 2 being less important, and 3 being least important. Third, provide a simple rationale as to why you selected each person. Fourth, post your ranking and rationale on the course’s discussion board under Week 5 content. Lastly, you should comment on at least 3 of your classmates rankings.
65 year old, 1st generation Asian-American, male, minister
40 year old, Anglo, female, homemaker
30 year old, Anglo, male, gay, physicist
35 year old, Anglo, Marxist, professor
16 year old, African-American, female
60 year old, Latin, female, physician
55 years old, male, Governor of a State
20 year old, disabled, son of wealthy parents
12 year old, Amish male
68 year old, your grandmother, retired
23 year old, non-verbal male with autism
Review the link as needed in order to:
Answer the questions using at least 150 words
Include 3 quotes (at least 5 words) from the videos bellow and 1 from the textbook. (I will provide the one from the textbook)
Support your position with the concepts found in the textbook and cite the page number where your supporting evidence can be found
Note: You must have 4 citations in all (3 from from the videos and one from the textbook)
quote: “Social stratification is a system in which groups of people are divided into layers according to their relative property, power, and prestige” page 184
Link:
No Cash, No Heart!
Who Gets a Heart Transplant? (Copy and paste the link in a different browser if it does not open in Chrome: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oXLx1GPL9s)
Part 2: Obedience to Authority
Instructions
Watch the link below that are related to Obedience to Authority. After viewing them, compose a response answering the following questions:
After viewing the link below, consider Stanley Milgram’s experiment on obedience to authority figures and discuss how, sociologically, the McDonald strip search became possible.
What social factors contributed to this incident? Why did all of the individuals behave the way they did? Why did some comply with the caller’s orders while others did not? (You are encouraged to use your critical thinking skills here.)
Why did it take the employees so long to realize they were the victims of a hoax?
Why did some comply with the voice on the phone while others did not?
Did anyone use “common sense” in this situation? If so, who? If not, why not?
Make sure that you reference the “Groups Within Society-Group Dynamics” link in your answer(s).
Review the links as needed in order to:
Answer the questions using at least 150 words
Include 3 quotes (at least 5 words) from the videos
Support your position with the concepts found in the textbook and cite the page number where your supporting evidence can be found
Note: You must have 4 citations in all (3 from from the videos and one from the textbook)
Quote: “Marx did not consider these groups social classes, however, for they lack class consciousness—a shared identity based on their position in the means of production”. Page 190
Link:
McDonald’s Strip Search
Groups Within Society – Group Dynamics

Part 1: Social Stratification
Instructions
Consider this week’s discussion on Social Stratification and how your place in the social strata determines the opportunities you are afforded. After viewing the video link below, compose a response answering the following questions:
You have be given the task of selecting 3 people from the list below to receive a heart transplant. Who will you choose, why?
Directions: First, you are to select 3 people from the list below that you would award a heart transplant. Secondly, rank from 1 to 3 who will be awarded the transplant with 1 being most important, 2 being less important, and 3 being least important. Third, provide a simple rationale as to why you selected each person. Fourth, post your ranking and rationale on the course’s discussion board under Week 5 content. Lastly, you should comment on at least 3 of your classmates rankings.
65 year old, 1st generation Asian-American, male, minister
40 year old, Anglo, female, homemaker
30 year old, Anglo, male, gay, physicist
35 year old, Anglo, Marxist, professor
16 year old, African-American, female
60 year old, Latin, female, physician
55 years old, male, Governor of a State
20 year old, disabled, son of wealthy parents
12 year old, Amish male
68 year old, your grandmother, retired
23 year old, non-verbal male with autism
Review the link as needed in order to:
Answer the questions using at least 150 words
Include 3 quotes (at least 5 words) from the videos bellow and 1 from the textbook. (I will provide the one from the textbook)
Support your position with the concepts found in the textbook and cite the page number where your supporting evidence can be found
Note: You must have 4 citations in all (3 from from the videos and one from the textbook)
quote: “Social stratification is a system in which groups of people are divided into layers according to their relative property, power, and prestige” page 184
Link:
No Cash, No Heart!
Who Gets a Heart Transplant? (Copy and paste the link in a different browser if it does not open in Chrome: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oXLx1GPL9s)
Part 2: Obedience to Authority
Instructions
Watch the link below that are related to Obedience to Authority. After viewing them, compose a response answering the following questions:
After viewing the link below, consider Stanley Milgram’s experiment on obedience to authority figures and discuss how, sociologically, the McDonald strip search became possible.
What social factors contributed to this incident? Why did all of the individuals behave the way they did? Why did some comply with the caller’s orders while others did not? (You are encouraged to use your critical thinking skills here.)
Why did it take the employees so long to realize they were the victims of a hoax?
Why did some comply with the voice on the phone while others did not?
Did anyone use “common sense” in this situation? If so, who? If not, why not?
Make sure that you reference the “Groups Within Society-Group Dynamics” link in your answer(s).
Review the links as needed in order to:
Answer the questions using at least 150 words
Include 3 quotes (at least 5 words) from the videos
Support your position with the concepts found in the textbook and cite the page number where your supporting evidence can be found
Note: You must have 4 citations in all (3 from from the videos and one from the textbook)
Quote: “Marx did not consider these groups social classes, however, for they lack class consciousness—a shared identity based on their position in the means of production”. Page 190
Link:
McDonald’s Strip Search
Groups Within Society – Group Dynamics

Resources You Need to Complete this Assignment:
Chapter 2 on Sociological Research from Lesson 1
Chapter 6 on Groups and Organization from Lesson 3
Groups, Group Dynamics, and Leadership from Lesson 3
Formal Organizations from Lesson 3
Purpose of the Assignment:
The purpose of this assignment is to have you evaluate sociological research design. You will do this by identifying flaws and proposing solutions to those flaws in validity, reliability, and generalizability found in the research methodology of the provided research scenario. You will also demonstrate your sociological understanding of groups and leadership.
Through this assignment, you will practice skills necessary to evaluate research you could possibly come across in real-world situations (in the news, social media, in current/future jobs, etc…).
Research Scenario:
Here are the results of a rather poorly designed sociology study that investigated group leadership dynamics. The study suffered from significant methodological flaws, limiting the reliability and generalizability of the findings. The researcher chose a small convenience sample from personal friends. The sample had 8 women and 3 men. Participants were given a brief questionnaire with open-ended questions and no survey. None of the participants was a group leader themselves. Each participant defined “group” and “leadership” according to their own personal understanding of the terms. Despite these limitations, the study reported some preliminary observations, which should be interpreted with caution.
Group Leadership Styles
The study explored different leadership styles observed within groups. Based on self-report questionnaires, participants reported a mix of authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire leadership styles in their groups. No definitions of these leadership styles were provided to participants.
Communication Patterns
Participants provided anecdotal evidence of various communication patterns within their groups. Some groups reported open and effective communication, fostering collaboration and decision-making. Conversely, others mentioned challenges with communication, such as dominance of certain members or lack of participation. (Anecdotal
evidence is personal stories that are collected because they seem interesting and related to the topic.)
Group Cohesion
The study assessed group cohesion by asking participants to describe their
perceived sense of unity and cooperation within their groups. The results indicated a range of
experiences, with some groups reporting high levels of cohesion and others reporting low levels.
Impact of Leadership on Group Performance
Participants were asked about the perceived impact of leadership on group performance. While some participants believed that effective leadership positively influenced group outcomes, others reported no significant relationship
between leadership and performance. There was no standardized measurement of performance.
Gender and Leadership
The study explored the potential influence of gender on leadership dynamics within the groups. participants provided subjective accounts of gender-related experiences in the workplace, including stereotypes and biases they think might impact leadership roles.
Results of this Study
The study only provides preliminary and insufficient insights into group leadership dynamics. Future research with improved research methods is necessary to deepen our understanding of group leadership and its impact on various outcomes.

What to do to Complete this Assignment:
This assignment should be at least 1000 words. You must use the resources listed below to address all the following questions in essay format.
Chapter 2 on Sociological Research from Lesson 1
Chapter 6 on Groups and Organization from Lesson 3
Groups, Group Dynamics, and Leadership from Lesson 3
Formal Organizations from Lesson 3
You MUST include properly formatted in-text citations and end-of-paper references/bibliography to connect to the required resources used for support. As a reminder, this is a graded part of the paper. Failure to include these elements in your paper will result in a loss of points.
For more information on how to properly format in-text and end-of-paper references/bibliography, please refer to the Citations section found in the course resources tab.
Formatting your Writing Assignment:
Introduction (Paragraph 1): Identify 3 flaws in the research design that might impact the validity, reliability, and generalizability of the research outcomes. Explain why they are flaws. Define all terms and concepts (use your materials and in-text citations).
Flaw 1 (Paragraph 2): describe how the research design could be improved to address and eliminate flaw 1 (use your materials and in-text citations).
Flaw 2 (Paragraph 3): describe how the research design could be improved to address and eliminate flaw 2 (use your materials and in-text citations).
Flaw 3 (Paragraph 4): describe how the research design could be improved to address and eliminate flaw 3 (use your materials and in-text citations).
Conclusion (Paragraph 5): Answer the following questions.
What do you think would be a good way to study group leadership dynamics?
What aspects of groups and leadership do you think are the most important to study?
What specific research methodologies would you choose?

Overview: This dissertation proposal focuses on creating scorecards to assess and improve housing equity for people with disabilities. The scorecards will address three primary dimensions of housing disparities: affordability, accessibility, and integration. Using Participatory Action Research (PAR), the study aims to collaborate with disability advocates to co-create practical tools that measure and promote equitable housing outcomes. The proposal is grounded in Social Ecological Theory (SET) and Praxis, which provide the theoretical frameworks to understand and address the multi-level factors influencing housing disparities.
Current Status: I have already drafted sections of the literature review, conceptual framework, and methods chapters. However, the proposal still requires significant development in the following areas:
Main Introduction (not started yet)
Completion and expansion of the literature review
Methods (further details on the implementation of PAR and data collection processes, particularly regarding composite indicators)
Significance section (not yet started)
The attached PDF includes:
A partially written literature review, focusing on affordability, accessibility, and integration in housing disparities.
A conceptual framework based on SET and Praxis, which outlines how these theories will be used to analyze housing equity.
A methods section that details the use of Participatory Action Research (PAR), focus groups, and Delphi processes to co-create housing equity scorecards with disability advocates.
What I Need You to Do:
Main Introduction (New Section)
Develop a compelling introduction that provides an overview of housing disparities for people with disabilities.
Emphasize the key dimensions (affordability, accessibility, and integration) and the impact these disparities have on people with disabilities.
Introduce Social Ecological Theory (SET) and Praxis as the guiding frameworks and explain how they will be used to understand and address these issues.
Include a brief mention of the scorecards being developed as a practical tool to assess housing equity.
Conclude the introduction with a roadmap of the chapters (literature review, conceptual framework, methods, and significance).
Literature Review (Expand and Complete)
Expand on the existing draft, particularly the sections on the three dimensions (affordability, accessibility, and integration).
Add further references and examples of studies that address housing equity for people with disabilities.
Critically assess current policies and research gaps related to these dimensions, and include specific examples (e.g., case studies on zoning restrictions or community opposition to integrated housing).
Conclude with a summary of key findings from the literature and their relevance to the creation of scorecards for housing equity.
Conceptual Framework (Polish)
Review and polish the conceptual framework based on Social Ecological Theory (SET) and Praxis.
Ensure that the explanation of these frameworks is clear and shows how they will be used to guide the creation of housing equity scorecards.
Lightly revise for flow, coherence, and clarity. This section is largely complete but may benefit from minor revisions.
Methods (Expand and Detail)
Expand the methods section by adding more detail on how the Participatory Action Research (PAR) process will be implemented, specifically focusing on collaboration with disability advocates to co-create data scorecards.
Focus Group: Begin with a focus group to identify and discuss the ideal components of the housing equity scorecards. These components should be based on the lived experiences and priorities of disability advocates.
Delphi Technique (Round 1): After the focus group, use the Delphi process to build consensus on the ideal components for the scorecards.
Composite Indicators (CI): Create the scorecards using composite indicators (CI), including the use of R for unit weighting and data standardization.
Delphi Technique (Round 2): A second Delphi process will then be used to refine and finalize the scorecards, gathering feedback on their usability, relevance, and effectiveness.
Knowledge Translation (KT): In a separate Knowledge Translation (KT) activity, the finalized scorecards will be presented to a broader audience, gathering feedback and discussing potential applications through a virtual event like a town hall.
Significance (New Section)
Draft a new section that discusses the significance of this research.
Explain how the study will contribute to advancing knowledge on housing equity for people with disabilities.
Highlight the practical implications of the scorecards, including how they can be used by policymakers, housing providers, and disability advocates to improve housing outcomes.
Discuss the potential for future research and how this study fills gaps in current housing equity literature.
Explanation of the Provided File:
Literature Review (Partially Written): The existing draft covers affordability, accessibility, and integration in housing equity but needs further expansion, additional references, and critical analysis.
Conceptual Framework: This section is well-developed and explains the use of Social Ecological Theory (SET) and Praxis to understand housing equity. It may need minor revisions for clarity but is mostly complete.
Methods (In Progress): The methods section includes details on using Participatory Action Research (PAR), focus groups, and Delphi processes. The process involves working with disability advocates to identify ideal components through a focus group, using a Delphi technique to decide on these components, and then creating composite indicators (CIs) with R to build the scorecards. A second Delphi process will finalize the scorecards, followed by a separate Knowledge Translation (KT) activity to present the scorecards to the broader community.
Please ensure that the writing style remains cohesive with the existing sections and follows an academic tone suitable for a dissertation proposal. Write in 1st person. Use APA citation style for any new references added.
Thank you for your help in developing and completing this dissertation proposal.

Resources You Need to Complete this Assignment:
Chapter 2 on Sociological Research from Lesson 1
Chapter 6 on Groups and Organization from Lesson 3
Groups, Group Dynamics, and Leadership from Lesson 3
Formal Organizations from Lesson 3
Purpose of the Assignment:
The purpose of this assignment is to have you evaluate sociological research design. You will do this by identifying flaws and proposing solutions to those flaws in validity, reliability, and generalizability found in the research methodology of the provided research scenario. You will also demonstrate your sociological understanding of groups and leadership.
Through this assignment, you will practice skills necessary to evaluate research you could possibly come across in real-world situations (in the news, social media, in current/future jobs, etc…).
Research Scenario:
Here are the results of a rather poorly designed sociology study that investigated group leadership dynamics. The study suffered from significant methodological flaws, limiting the reliability and generalizability of the findings. The researcher chose a small convenience sample from personal friends. The sample had 8 women and 3 men. Participants were given a brief questionnaire with open-ended questions and no survey. None of the participants was a group leader themselves. Each participant defined “group” and “leadership” according to their own personal understanding of the terms. Despite these limitations, the study reported some preliminary observations, which should be interpreted with caution.
Group Leadership Styles
The study explored different leadership styles observed within groups. Based on self-report questionnaires, participants reported a mix of authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire leadership styles in their groups. No definitions of these leadership styles were provided to participants.
Communication Patterns
Participants provided anecdotal evidence of various communication patterns within their groups. Some groups reported open and effective communication, fostering collaboration and decision-making. Conversely, others mentioned challenges with communication, such as dominance of certain members or lack of participation. (Anecdotal
evidence is personal stories that are collected because they seem interesting and related to the topic.)
Group Cohesion
The study assessed group cohesion by asking participants to describe their
perceived sense of unity and cooperation within their groups. The results indicated a range of
experiences, with some groups reporting high levels of cohesion and others reporting low levels.
Impact of Leadership on Group Performance
Participants were asked about the perceived impact of leadership on group performance. While some participants believed that effective leadership positively influenced group outcomes, others reported no significant relationship
between leadership and performance. There was no standardized measurement of performance.
Gender and Leadership
The study explored the potential influence of gender on leadership dynamics within the groups. participants provided subjective accounts of gender-related experiences in the workplace, including stereotypes and biases they think might impact leadership roles.
Results of this Study
The study only provides preliminary and insufficient insights into group leadership dynamics. Future research with improved research methods is necessary to deepen our understanding of group leadership and its impact on various outcomes.

What to do to Complete this Assignment:
This assignment should be at least 1000 words. You must use the resources listed below to address all the following questions in essay format.
Chapter 2 on Sociological Research from Lesson 1
Chapter 6 on Groups and Organization from Lesson 3
Groups, Group Dynamics, and Leadership from Lesson 3
Formal Organizations from Lesson 3
You MUST include properly formatted in-text citations and end-of-paper references/bibliography to connect to the required resources used for support. As a reminder, this is a graded part of the paper. Failure to include these elements in your paper will result in a loss of points.
For more information on how to properly format in-text and end-of-paper references/bibliography, please refer to the Citations section found in the course resources tab.
Formatting your Writing Assignment:
Introduction (Paragraph 1): Identify 3 flaws in the research design that might impact the validity, reliability, and generalizability of the research outcomes. Explain why they are flaws. Define all terms and concepts (use your materials and in-text citations).
Flaw 1 (Paragraph 2): describe how the research design could be improved to address and eliminate flaw 1 (use your materials and in-text citations).
Flaw 2 (Paragraph 3): describe how the research design could be improved to address and eliminate flaw 2 (use your materials and in-text citations).
Flaw 3 (Paragraph 4): describe how the research design could be improved to address and eliminate flaw 3 (use your materials and in-text citations).
Conclusion (Paragraph 5): Answer the following questions.
What do you think would be a good way to study group leadership dynamics?
What aspects of groups and leadership do you think are the most important to study?
What specific research methodologies would you choose?

Overview: This dissertation proposal focuses on creating scorecards to assess and improve housing equity for people with disabilities. The scorecards will address three primary dimensions of housing disparities: affordability, accessibility, and integration. Using Participatory Action Research (PAR), the study aims to collaborate with disability advocates to co-create practical tools that measure and promote equitable housing outcomes. The proposal is grounded in Social Ecological Theory (SET) and Praxis, which provide the theoretical frameworks to understand and address the multi-level factors influencing housing disparities.
Current Status: I have already drafted sections of the literature review, conceptual framework, and methods chapters. However, the proposal still requires significant development in the following areas:
Main Introduction (not started yet)
Completion and expansion of the literature review
Methods (further details on the implementation of PAR and data collection processes, particularly regarding composite indicators)
Significance section (not yet started)
The attached PDF includes:
A partially written literature review, focusing on affordability, accessibility, and integration in housing disparities.
A conceptual framework based on SET and Praxis, which outlines how these theories will be used to analyze housing equity.
A methods section that details the use of Participatory Action Research (PAR), focus groups, and Delphi processes to co-create housing equity scorecards with disability advocates.
What I Need You to Do:
Main Introduction (New Section)
Develop a compelling introduction that provides an overview of housing disparities for people with disabilities.
Emphasize the key dimensions (affordability, accessibility, and integration) and the impact these disparities have on people with disabilities.
Introduce Social Ecological Theory (SET) and Praxis as the guiding frameworks and explain how they will be used to understand and address these issues.
Include a brief mention of the scorecards being developed as a practical tool to assess housing equity.
Conclude the introduction with a roadmap of the chapters (literature review, conceptual framework, methods, and significance).
Literature Review (Expand and Complete)
Expand on the existing draft, particularly the sections on the three dimensions (affordability, accessibility, and integration).
Add further references and examples of studies that address housing equity for people with disabilities.
Critically assess current policies and research gaps related to these dimensions, and include specific examples (e.g., case studies on zoning restrictions or community opposition to integrated housing).
Conclude with a summary of key findings from the literature and their relevance to the creation of scorecards for housing equity.
Conceptual Framework (Polish)
Review and polish the conceptual framework based on Social Ecological Theory (SET) and Praxis.
Ensure that the explanation of these frameworks is clear and shows how they will be used to guide the creation of housing equity scorecards.
Lightly revise for flow, coherence, and clarity. This section is largely complete but may benefit from minor revisions.
Methods (Expand and Detail)
Expand the methods section by adding more detail on how the Participatory Action Research (PAR) process will be implemented, specifically focusing on collaboration with disability advocates to co-create data scorecards.
Focus Group: Begin with a focus group to identify and discuss the ideal components of the housing equity scorecards. These components should be based on the lived experiences and priorities of disability advocates.
Delphi Technique (Round 1): After the focus group, use the Delphi process to build consensus on the ideal components for the scorecards.
Composite Indicators (CI): Create the scorecards using composite indicators (CI), including the use of R for unit weighting and data standardization.
Delphi Technique (Round 2): A second Delphi process will then be used to refine and finalize the scorecards, gathering feedback on their usability, relevance, and effectiveness.
Knowledge Translation (KT): In a separate Knowledge Translation (KT) activity, the finalized scorecards will be presented to a broader audience, gathering feedback and discussing potential applications through a virtual event like a town hall.
Significance (New Section)
Draft a new section that discusses the significance of this research.
Explain how the study will contribute to advancing knowledge on housing equity for people with disabilities.
Highlight the practical implications of the scorecards, including how they can be used by policymakers, housing providers, and disability advocates to improve housing outcomes.
Discuss the potential for future research and how this study fills gaps in current housing equity literature.
Explanation of the Provided File:
Literature Review (Partially Written): The existing draft covers affordability, accessibility, and integration in housing equity but needs further expansion, additional references, and critical analysis.
Conceptual Framework: This section is well-developed and explains the use of Social Ecological Theory (SET) and Praxis to understand housing equity. It may need minor revisions for clarity but is mostly complete.
Methods (In Progress): The methods section includes details on using Participatory Action Research (PAR), focus groups, and Delphi processes. The process involves working with disability advocates to identify ideal components through a focus group, using a Delphi technique to decide on these components, and then creating composite indicators (CIs) with R to build the scorecards. A second Delphi process will finalize the scorecards, followed by a separate Knowledge Translation (KT) activity to present the scorecards to the broader community.
Please ensure that the writing style remains cohesive with the existing sections and follows an academic tone suitable for a dissertation proposal. Write in 1st person. Use APA citation style for any new references added.
Thank you for your help in developing and completing this dissertation proposal.

Resources You Need to Complete this Assignment:
Chapter 2 on Sociological Research from Lesson 1
Chapter 6 on Groups and Organization from Lesson 3
Groups, Group Dynamics, and Leadership from Lesson 3
Formal Organizations from Lesson 3
Purpose of the Assignment:
The purpose of this assignment is to have you evaluate sociological research design. You will do this by identifying flaws and proposing solutions to those flaws in validity, reliability, and generalizability found in the research methodology of the provided research scenario. You will also demonstrate your sociological understanding of groups and leadership.
Through this assignment, you will practice skills necessary to evaluate research you could possibly come across in real-world situations (in the news, social media, in current/future jobs, etc…).
Research Scenario:
Here are the results of a rather poorly designed sociology study that investigated group leadership dynamics. The study suffered from significant methodological flaws, limiting the reliability and generalizability of the findings. The researcher chose a small convenience sample from personal friends. The sample had 8 women and 3 men. Participants were given a brief questionnaire with open-ended questions and no survey. None of the participants was a group leader themselves. Each participant defined “group” and “leadership” according to their own personal understanding of the terms. Despite these limitations, the study reported some preliminary observations, which should be interpreted with caution.
Group Leadership Styles
The study explored different leadership styles observed within groups. Based on self-report questionnaires, participants reported a mix of authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire leadership styles in their groups. No definitions of these leadership styles were provided to participants.
Communication Patterns
Participants provided anecdotal evidence of various communication patterns within their groups. Some groups reported open and effective communication, fostering collaboration and decision-making. Conversely, others mentioned challenges with communication, such as dominance of certain members or lack of participation. (Anecdotal
evidence is personal stories that are collected because they seem interesting and related to the topic.)
Group Cohesion
The study assessed group cohesion by asking participants to describe their
perceived sense of unity and cooperation within their groups. The results indicated a range of
experiences, with some groups reporting high levels of cohesion and others reporting low levels.
Impact of Leadership on Group Performance
Participants were asked about the perceived impact of leadership on group performance. While some participants believed that effective leadership positively influenced group outcomes, others reported no significant relationship
between leadership and performance. There was no standardized measurement of performance.
Gender and Leadership
The study explored the potential influence of gender on leadership dynamics within the groups. participants provided subjective accounts of gender-related experiences in the workplace, including stereotypes and biases they think might impact leadership roles.
Results of this Study
The study only provides preliminary and insufficient insights into group leadership dynamics. Future research with improved research methods is necessary to deepen our understanding of group leadership and its impact on various outcomes.

What to do to Complete this Assignment:
This assignment should be at least 1000 words. You must use the resources listed below to address all the following questions in essay format.
Chapter 2 on Sociological Research from Lesson 1
Chapter 6 on Groups and Organization from Lesson 3
Groups, Group Dynamics, and Leadership from Lesson 3
Formal Organizations from Lesson 3
You MUST include properly formatted in-text citations and end-of-paper references/bibliography to connect to the required resources used for support. As a reminder, this is a graded part of the paper. Failure to include these elements in your paper will result in a loss of points.
For more information on how to properly format in-text and end-of-paper references/bibliography, please refer to the Citations section found in the course resources tab.
Formatting your Writing Assignment:
Introduction (Paragraph 1): Identify 3 flaws in the research design that might impact the validity, reliability, and generalizability of the research outcomes. Explain why they are flaws. Define all terms and concepts (use your materials and in-text citations).
Flaw 1 (Paragraph 2): describe how the research design could be improved to address and eliminate flaw 1 (use your materials and in-text citations).
Flaw 2 (Paragraph 3): describe how the research design could be improved to address and eliminate flaw 2 (use your materials and in-text citations).
Flaw 3 (Paragraph 4): describe how the research design could be improved to address and eliminate flaw 3 (use your materials and in-text citations).
Conclusion (Paragraph 5): Answer the following questions.
What do you think would be a good way to study group leadership dynamics?
What aspects of groups and leadership do you think are the most important to study?
What specific research methodologies would you choose?

Overview: This dissertation proposal focuses on creating scorecards to assess and improve housing equity for people with disabilities. The scorecards will address three primary dimensions of housing disparities: affordability, accessibility, and integration. Using Participatory Action Research (PAR), the study aims to collaborate with disability advocates to co-create practical tools that measure and promote equitable housing outcomes. The proposal is grounded in Social Ecological Theory (SET) and Praxis, which provide the theoretical frameworks to understand and address the multi-level factors influencing housing disparities.
Current Status: I have already drafted sections of the literature review, conceptual framework, and methods chapters. However, the proposal still requires significant development in the following areas:
Main Introduction (not started yet)
Completion and expansion of the literature review
Methods (further details on the implementation of PAR and data collection processes, particularly regarding composite indicators)
Significance section (not yet started)
The attached PDF includes:
A partially written literature review, focusing on affordability, accessibility, and integration in housing disparities.
A conceptual framework based on SET and Praxis, which outlines how these theories will be used to analyze housing equity.
A methods section that details the use of Participatory Action Research (PAR), focus groups, and Delphi processes to co-create housing equity scorecards with disability advocates.
What I Need You to Do:
Main Introduction (New Section)
Develop a compelling introduction that provides an overview of housing disparities for people with disabilities.
Emphasize the key dimensions (affordability, accessibility, and integration) and the impact these disparities have on people with disabilities.
Introduce Social Ecological Theory (SET) and Praxis as the guiding frameworks and explain how they will be used to understand and address these issues.
Include a brief mention of the scorecards being developed as a practical tool to assess housing equity.
Conclude the introduction with a roadmap of the chapters (literature review, conceptual framework, methods, and significance).
Literature Review (Expand and Complete)
Expand on the existing draft, particularly the sections on the three dimensions (affordability, accessibility, and integration).
Add further references and examples of studies that address housing equity for people with disabilities.
Critically assess current policies and research gaps related to these dimensions, and include specific examples (e.g., case studies on zoning restrictions or community opposition to integrated housing).
Conclude with a summary of key findings from the literature and their relevance to the creation of scorecards for housing equity.
Conceptual Framework (Polish)
Review and polish the conceptual framework based on Social Ecological Theory (SET) and Praxis.
Ensure that the explanation of these frameworks is clear and shows how they will be used to guide the creation of housing equity scorecards.
Lightly revise for flow, coherence, and clarity. This section is largely complete but may benefit from minor revisions.
Methods (Expand and Detail)
Expand the methods section by adding more detail on how the Participatory Action Research (PAR) process will be implemented, specifically focusing on collaboration with disability advocates to co-create data scorecards.
Focus Group: Begin with a focus group to identify and discuss the ideal components of the housing equity scorecards. These components should be based on the lived experiences and priorities of disability advocates.
Delphi Technique (Round 1): After the focus group, use the Delphi process to build consensus on the ideal components for the scorecards.
Composite Indicators (CI): Create the scorecards using composite indicators (CI), including the use of R for unit weighting and data standardization.
Delphi Technique (Round 2): A second Delphi process will then be used to refine and finalize the scorecards, gathering feedback on their usability, relevance, and effectiveness.
Knowledge Translation (KT): In a separate Knowledge Translation (KT) activity, the finalized scorecards will be presented to a broader audience, gathering feedback and discussing potential applications through a virtual event like a town hall.
Significance (New Section)
Draft a new section that discusses the significance of this research.
Explain how the study will contribute to advancing knowledge on housing equity for people with disabilities.
Highlight the practical implications of the scorecards, including how they can be used by policymakers, housing providers, and disability advocates to improve housing outcomes.
Discuss the potential for future research and how this study fills gaps in current housing equity literature.
Explanation of the Provided File:
Literature Review (Partially Written): The existing draft covers affordability, accessibility, and integration in housing equity but needs further expansion, additional references, and critical analysis.
Conceptual Framework: This section is well-developed and explains the use of Social Ecological Theory (SET) and Praxis to understand housing equity. It may need minor revisions for clarity but is mostly complete.
Methods (In Progress): The methods section includes details on using Participatory Action Research (PAR), focus groups, and Delphi processes. The process involves working with disability advocates to identify ideal components through a focus group, using a Delphi technique to decide on these components, and then creating composite indicators (CIs) with R to build the scorecards. A second Delphi process will finalize the scorecards, followed by a separate Knowledge Translation (KT) activity to present the scorecards to the broader community.
Please ensure that the writing style remains cohesive with the existing sections and follows an academic tone suitable for a dissertation proposal. Write in 1st person. Use APA citation style for any new references added.
Thank you for your help in developing and completing this dissertation proposal.