Readings: San Pedro, T., & Kinloch, V. (2017). Toward projects in humanization:

Readings:
San Pedro, T., & Kinloch, V. (2017). Toward projects in humanization:

Readings:
San Pedro, T., & Kinloch, V. (2017). Toward projects in humanization: Research on co-creating and sustaining dialogic relationships. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1 Suppl), 373S–394S. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216671210
Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2014). Unbecoming claims: Pedagogies of refusal in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(6), 811–818. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800414530265
Bentley, S. (2022, December 16). Reflecting on our language: Stakeholder Links to an external site.. Michael & Susan Dell Center for Healthy Living. https://sph.uth.edu/research/centers/dell/blog/posting.htm?id=reflecting-on-our-language-stakeholder
Instructions: In this activity, you will connect with interested parties working in the field and get feedback on your POP systems model.
Connect with interested parties working in the field.
Show them your POP systems model and ask them the following questions:   
Do the groupings make sense?   
Are there other wholes/parts that are missing?   
Are there wholes that need to be broken down into parts?   
Are all of the relationships shown?   
Are all of the relationships’ parts shown?   
Are all appropriate interested party perspectives shown?   
Are there additional institutional and/or conceptual perspectives to consider?   
Have you considered seeing xyz (give a recommendation specific to the POP)?   
Revise your POP Systems Model based on interested party feedback.
Please dig deep into the research and support every claim with a citation and/or data to support how you know that your POP exists
My problem of practice is exploring the discipline of African American middle school students and its impact on mental health.
Use Google Scholar to support empirical research that you find in relation to this problem of practice.
Helpful tips: Note that we use interested parties instead of the traditional stakeholders term, which is consistently used in the literature. We have chosen to highlight the changing linguistic landscape and the need to be thoughtful about word choice by utilizing interested parties while acknowledging that stakeholder is now widely recognized as a problematic term. You may want to keep an eye out in your circles to see whether the acceptability of this term changes over your time in the program and beyond.
As you engage with interested parties to discuss your POP—particularly those parties who may be affected by the problem—consider their perspectives through the lenses of 1) what Tuck and Yang (2014) refer to as analytic practices of refusal to settler colonialism, and 2) what San Pedro and Kinloch (2017) refer to as Projects in Humanization. Specifically, consider how these lenses may shape how you can effectively and respectfully engage with interested parties while conducting research.
Please follow the guidelines of this assignment:
Criteria Exemplary Proficient Emergent
Conceptual modeling guides the POP narrative.
CLO1
8%
Conceptual modeling guided the POP narrative and student was able to clearly map the connections between the concepts and the POP. Conceptual modeling guided the POP narrative. Conceptual modeling did not guide the POP narrative.
Evaluate research perspective from a DSRP lens.
CLO2
8%
Able to evaluate and critique researchers’ perspective by applying the DSRP model and adhering to groupings that made sense to the content area. Able to evaluate researchers’ perspective by applying the DSRP model and adhering to groupings that made sense to the content area. Evaluation of researchers’ perspective from DSRP perspective was non-existent.
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExamine and apply how the parts are related.
CLO2
8%
Evaluate through a systems’ thinking approach how the parts are related and apply these concepts in their POP modeling and how they effectively complement the whole. Evaluate through a systems’ thinking approach how the parts are related and apply these concepts in their POP modeling. Was not able to apply a systems approach.
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalyze and apply how components are organized into part/whole groups.
CLO2
8%
Analyze how components are organized into part/whole groups and apply the results to their POP statement and able to show how the parts relate to the whole given a system’s perspective. Analyze how components are organized into part/whole groups and apply the results to their POP statement. Unable to analyze how components are organized into part/whole groups.
Examine if relationships have identifiable parts.
CLO2
8%
Able to examine if relationships have identifiable parts and critique how they are organized by effectively using a system’s thinking approach. Able to examine if relationships have identifiable parts. Unable to discern if relationships have identifiable parts.
All appropriate interested party perspectives shown.
CLO2
8%
Evident in the narrative that all appropriate interested party perspectives are shown and how these varying perspectives affect the whole. Evident in the narrative that all appropriate interested party perspectives are shown. NOT evident articulated in the narrative that all appropriate interested party perspectives are shown.
Contributing factors to POP are stated clearly.
CLO3
8%
The contributing factors to the POP are stated clearly and evidence is given through extensive review of the literature. The contributing factors to the POP are stated clearly. The contributing factors to the POP are NOT stated clearly.
Contributing factors are relevant to the context.
CLO3
8%
Contributing factors are relevant to the context and supported by the literature. Contributing factors are relevant to the context. Contributing factors are not relevant to the context.
Connected with appropriate interested parties to seek their perspectives on conceptual model.
CLO5
8%
Connected with appropriate interested parties to seek their perspectives on conceptual model and ensured to solicit varying perspectives. Connected with appropriate interested parties to seek their perspectives on conceptual model. Connected with a few or not relevant interested parties.
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntegrated appropriate interested parties’ feedback into the model.
CLO5
8%
Integrated appropriate interested parties’ feedback into the model and critiqued varied input from interested parties’ lens. Integrated appropriate interested parties’ feedback into the model. Did NOT integrated appropriate interested parties’ feedback into the model.
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStudent demonstrates skills for engaging with interested