Introduction
Scholarly articles must follow specific criteria to be considered credible sources. Such papers should represent original research and meet certain requirements to have high academic value. This paper provides the general analysis of the provided articles and the detailed evaluation of the academic quality of the selected material.
Analysis
There are several peer-review elements that let the reader suppose that authors of the provided articles are knowledgeable and the papers represent proper original research (“Distinguishing scholarly from non-scholarly periodicals,” 2018). The first article, “Oyster feuds: Conflicting discourses and outcomes in Point Reyes, California” by Leslie-Bole and Perramond (2017), has a reference page, where all the used sources are cited, there are many in-text citations that are properly cited too. The abstract is provided in three languages. Moreover, there is much data presented in figures and graphs. The second article, “Toward an analytical framework for the study of race and police violence” by Mario A. Rivera and James D. Ward (2017), also provides a bibliography, the affiliations of the authors are listed and the fields of their interest, as well as their degrees, are stated. The article has a serious, structured look. The third article, “The “Open Government Reform” movement: The case of the open government partnership and US transparency policies” by Suzanne J. Piotrowski (2017), uses many tables as well, the reference page and information about the scientific background of the author is also provided. It is notable how different experiences of the authors affect the creation of the articles. For example, Leslie-Bole and Perramond (2017) choose to use pictures instead of tables, as their background is related to environmental science. The experience of the audience is significant too since many articles use specific terms or do not present a full context of the topic they are investigating. However, it is common that scholarly papers suggest certain background knowledge of a reader.
In my opinion, the most professional and well-written paper is the article by Piotrowski (2017). The quality of evidence is high; the data is objective, is it supported by the literature the author has used. The language of the article assumes some professional background of the reader; the content is appropriate for the target audience, political scientists, and students studying public affairs. The report does not reveal the author’s biases, as Piotrowski (2017) present only statistic data without mentioning her personal opinion on the Open Government Reform. The article meets professional standards of scholarly writing. It provides data in tables, which outlines the essential facts and provides a detailed comparison of the numbers to the reader. The content is well-structured, the sentences are relatively short, but do not carry unnecessary information. The paragraphs are correctly named and organized. The doer of the actions is definite, and the second-person pronouns are not used.
As mentioned above, the article may not be suitable for the audience without any knowledge in politics. Moreover, as the research is targeted on the Open Government Reform and provides much data on this new initiative, some readers may assume that the author’s intention is to promote this reform. However, Piotrowski (2017) mentions that this movement should be studied critically, as the existing New Public Management method.
To make the article more appropriate for an international audience, it would be helpful to add an abstract translated into foreign languages. For example, in the paper by Leslie-Bole and Perramond (2017) the abstract is presented in English, French and Spanish languages.
Scholarly articles should follow the standards of academic writing to influence their target audience. The research should be original, and all the sources must be appropriately cited. Only scholarly papers are appropriate for academic research and investigation.
Plagiarism and Paraphrasing
One person taking someone’s work and presenting it as their own is a case of plagiarism (DiMaria, 2009). The article used for assignment is “Responsible leader behavior in health sectors” by Beaufort Longest.
The article discusses the concept of responsible leader behavior and how it can be applied to health sectors. Longest (2017) investigates the role of the leaders and their responsibilities and the attributes of their responsible behavior. The author explores the potential impact of such actions of the leaders and gives a community development as an example. He suggests that different levels of responsible leader behavior result in different decisions in terms of favoring stakeholders and actions affecting them. The researcher also notes that community development performance may differ according to the way the leadership is performed. Longest (2010) points out that responsible leader behavior should be based on ethical principles, which is likely to receive a positive response from stakeholders.
The author mentions that responsible leader behavior has gained much interest among researchers. Longest (2017) explains two perspectives on the topic. According to the first one, the possible benefits of stakeholders need to be taken into consideration. The second one suggests that a leader’s responsibility is to minimize the harm stakeholders may face and maximize doing good for them. The author points out that the confluence of these approaches defines a leader’s responsible behavior. Longest (2017) concludes that responsible leader behavior is a worthy goal, especially for health organizations willing to improve their positions in society.
References
DiMaria, D. L. (2009). Plagiarism from a cross-cultural perspective. Web.
Distinguishing scholarly from non-scholarly periodicals: A checklist of criteria. (2018). Web.
Leslie-Bole, H., & Perramond, E. P. (2017). Oyster feuds: Conflicting discourses and outcomes in Point Reyes, California. Journal of Political Ecology, 24. Web.
Longest, B. (2017). Responsible leader behavior in health sectors. Leadership in Health Services, 30(1), 8-15.
Piotrowski, S. J. (2017). The “Open Government Reform” movement: The case of the open government partnership and US transparency policies. The American Review of Public Administration, 47(2), 155-171.
Rivera, M. A., & Ward, J. D. (2017). Toward an analytical framework for the study of race and police violence. Public Administration Review, 77(2), 242-250.