Child Poverty Dynamics in Seven Nations | Paper Analysis

Child Poverty kinetics in seven whatever Nations constitution AnalysisTask to approximate the query design, casts of selective information allurement and abbreviation, and some(prenominal) former(a) ethical or philosophical issues that arise in the stipulate investigate paper.IntroductionThis assignment allow focus on the clearing paper entitled Child Poverty self-propelleds in Seven Nations (Bradbury et al, 2000). It ordain identify and analyse the research design, ruleology, info collection and analysis contained within the paper. There go forth also be an prizement of philosophical and ethical issues as hale as a comparison with other documents of a similar reputation. The paper is a comparative orbit examining how clawren break in and out(a) of pauperism. look DesignThe reasons of this paper argon touch on with child poverty and how children in different countries move in and out of poverty. They maintain that state welfargon provision ope ram bles more than effectively to push down child poverty when it has prior research friendship of what ca exercises children to move in and out of poverty The research uses standard relative poverty comments and examines the mobility rate of the poorest fifth of children from, Britain, the USA, Germ either, Ireland, Spain, Hungary and Russia. It is usual at the design stage of a communicate to decide what barbel 1 is going to take to the research. This is because different epistemic and philosophical assumptions be an inherent part of any(prenominal) approach to research ( Bryman, 2004). At a general level the tuition is an inter-societal comparison of the dynamics of poverty. Inter-societal comparisons look at the similarities and differences which countries display. Numbers of more(prenominal) studies let been underinterpreted, a vigorous know recent one and only(a) of these is Esping-Andersons (1990) research into the welfare regimes of different countries. Comparati ve studies strike a long history in sociology, e.g. webers work on religion (1930, 1965) and Durkheims work on suicide (1952). Comparative studies are a big part of research into poverty, whether this is the traditional nonion of poverty as a lack of usable income, or whether it is the more contemporary concept of social exclusion (Berghman, 1995). Bradbury et al (2000) acknowledge that they have interpreted a or else broad clangour approach in their study and that in that respect are some problems with this, allowd they maintain that charting the flow in and out of poverty cross nationally is useful for policy making that aims to reduce the figure of children who are poor. The researchers call up that studying poverty from the vantage point of children expects little or no justification because children represent a grounds future. It great power be argued however, that is a rather Eurocentric view and may not necessarily be held in all the countries in the study. The researchers that take hold their pickax of method in the following wayComparisons crosswise countries allow a reference point for assessing the guides for any single country, for example whether a particular statistic is vauntingly or small. Cross-national analysis also raises provocative questions slightly(predicate)(predicate) whether differences in outcomes are due to, learn, differences in policy regimes or differences in population characteristics. Of course the usefulness of crossnational analysis relies on having good selective information, and making entropy comparable may require compromises in the depth of analysis which would not be necessitate in a single country study. (The trade-off depends on the number of countries considered.) Our paper illustrates the various enduringnesss and weaknesses of taking a cross-national perspective (Bradbury et al, 2000, p.7-8).The originators thus express a generally held view that comparative research does have integ ral strengths and weaknesses, the following analysis hopes to acquaint whether or not the strengths of this research project outweigh any weaknesses it may have..Methods of info CollectionThe primary data source for this study is panel data drawn from the seven nations involved. This data is largely household survey data and is so the income levels are those retortn by heads of households. The researchers maintain that at that place study is complementary to one undertaken by Dun wad et al (1993). The studies differ in that Dun pile et als work concentrates on the family as the unit of analysis whereas Bradbury et al (2000) concentrate on the child. The units of analysis are children under the age of 18. The data sets refer to the early 1990s1 with the most recent year exisdecadece 1996. The researchers want to use the data to compare poverty dynamics mingled with one year and the next, so they looked at data from two old age across the seven nations. The data sets differ, with four countries, Germany, Hungary, Britain and the US providing data spanning five years and data from Germany and the US spanning ten years. This means that some countries receive a deeper analysis than others because they collect more data. The income figures bidd by households are use as the income of the child with relevant adjustments for household needs. Table 1 below gives a summary description of each of the data sets used.Bradbury et al, 2000 pps 10-11This sidestep gives an overview of the data that the researchers used in their comparative study. The researchers chose the following features from which to compare the data for different countriesthe graphic symbol of longitudinal survey, the period to which incomes refer, the definition(s) of income forthcoming, and two statistics summarising sample size (Bradbury et al, 2000, p.11).The chief exponent of whether a child is living in poverty and how a child moves in and out of poverty are the income cards that are procurable. The researchers point out however that there are differences amongst countries on how this is assessed i.e. whether income recorded is ahead or after(prenominal) any deductions for tax etc. They acknowledge that such(prenominal) differences have clear implications for differences in poverty dynamics scarce they do not elucidate what this is.2 This lessens any faith that one mightiness have in their methods of data collection because there is no explanation of how this considers poverty dynamics. Income is recorded as net except in the result of Ireland and the US. The researchers consecrate that net income for Britain apprisenot be recorded in all cases and this causes a reducing in sample size, with possible resulting implications of difference (?).Only two countries, Spain and Russia, provide evidence of household disbursal in addendum to household income and arguably this is a weakness in the data set as levels of intake may differ widely from country to c ountry and is a great indication of the distinction between absolute and relative poverty (Giddens, 2001).3 again this might evidence greater discrepancies across nations if more of such data were available and this go out raise questions as to the dependableness of the findings of the study.The study flesh outly uses disposable income as a measurement of poverty, In a finger this is a step back in basis of theoretical training as Berghman (1995) has said the focus has shifted from barely if financial poverty to whether a person butt end fully participate in the society to which they belong. This is not referred to in Bradshaw et als study and as such might be said to evidence a weakness in their choice of conceptual indicators. While the measure did work for the variables that the researchers were interested in it is however a narrow way of measuring child poverty. This is especially the case when one considers the researchers acknowledgement that they have no single c omparable method of measuring income across the seven nations and this raises questions active the native validity of their methods. entropy Analysis TechniquesThe study uses quantitative data and the study is quite large utilise household panels from seven nations. The researchers argue that this not only provides them with a cross national comparison of how and why children enter and leave poverty exactly also allows for any serious discrepancies between nations to be set. The number of households selected for the analysis is between 1 and 2 thousand per country (see table one above). Statistical comparisons are made between child poverty rates, their relative income levels and income inequality. The statistics are similar to those found in an earlier chapter but no details of this are given. Arguably, one wonders why they mention any similarities here as they then go on to say thatthey are not fully comparable because there are differences in the definition of the income mea sure, the year referred to ,the sample, and in most cases even the survey (this is true in Britain, Ireland ,Spain, and the US) (Bradshaw et al, 2000, p.13).4The researchers say that they use the median income of children to measure material well being but because their data set and methodology are rather knobbed they have to explain what this is.5 Their use of goods and services of a median is questionable as they later say (p.15 ibid) that median income levels provide no guide to how incomes castrate among children. Their use of arithmetical averages is also questionable as this can sour the existence of genuinely high and actually low incomes, a particular which they also acknowledge.Their methods involve the use of a statistical technique known as the Gini coefficient6 The technique is named after the person who developed it, an Italian statistician called Corrado Gini.7 The use of the Gini coefficient does tend to show whether income inequality is increasing or change magnitude and so it is often used in comparisons between countries. merely, its capacity to measure inequality is also de marchesined by how disposable income is dealt with and this information is not available. It is arguable therefore whether the use of the Gini coefficient gives an accurate representation of the data.The use of the Gini coefficient tends to offer that income inequality for children is substantially different across the seven nations. Western atomic number 63 has lower inequality levels than do Russia and America, and there may be further discrepancies here because the Russian data also provides details of household expenditure and this is missing from the American data. Bradshaw et als (2000) findings show that with the Gini coefficient income inequality in Germany stands at 0.3 while in America and Russia it is 0.4 a rise of 10 percentage points which the formers say is larger than the overall income inequality of Britain and the United States through with( predicate)out the whole of the 1980s. However, further questions are raised as to the reli index of the data from the US because the US Census Bureau shows that the calculation of the index of the US was changed in 1992 this led to an upward shift of 0.02 in the coefficient making comparisons after that period misleading.8Bradshaw et al (2000) shoot that their major finding is a square (but not total) uniformity in patterns of income mobility and poverty dynamics across the seven countries. The key exception is Russia, where the economic transition has led to a much higher degree of mobility (Bradshaw et al, 2000, p.6).Having said this, the authors later go on to demonstrate that rather than there being significant uniformity, there are colossal differences between the seven countries. Their findings indicate that the US has the highest rate of income inequality which affects the income mobility but as has already been indicated American figures after 1992 may be misleading. anot her(prenominal) factor that makes their finding involved is that the data for all countries is only available for two years, for some five and for two countries it is available over ten years, as the authors admit longer time spans importantly affect the dynamics of poverty. Income mobility is greater in those countries where the most data is available it is therefore arguably the case the only significant comparison of income mobility is that between America and Germany. The ways in which the data is analysed, is, similar the rest of this paper, rather complex. It is not always easy to decide when they are talking about method and when they switch to data analysis techniques as the information tends to be rather mixed together. The complexity of this paper makes it difficult to assess what the authors may have missed in their analysis, while the authors claim a number of findings from the research there is also evidence to show that they could have found the contrary.Conclusion Analysing this research paper has been a problematic task. The authors continually refer back to other papers/chapters in the collection of which this paper is a part but because they do not give sufficient information on what they are referring to it might be argued that it is pointless referring back to work that is not available for comparison. The structure of this paper is enigmatic it does not give clear indications as to when it goes from research design, to data collection, to analysis. banter of the issues is ongoing and at times repetitive. There are significant weaknesses in this paper, there is little discussion of ethics as they use vicarious data analysis but by their own admission there are significant differences and discrepancies in the data and this leads to the view that the both the reliability and validity of the methodology and findings are questionable. On the positivistic side the researchers do recognise that there are weaknesses in the data set and tha t this may affect the findings. There are points where the researchers (arguably at least) make claims for their data that are difficult to substantiate e.g. that there are significant similarities between patterns of income mobility across the seven countries. This claim does not existently hold up in view of their further analysis of the data which lists the differences between countries. In extension to this much of the data relating to the US could, agree to the US Census Bureau, be misleading. Finally the constant referring back to other papers without elucidating the issues does not second the researchers to make their case and their use of income as a major conceptual indicator does not really tell the reader how poverty affects the lives and well being of the children who are meant to be the focus of the research.BibliographyBerghman, J. 1995 Social Exclusion in Europe Policy, context and analytical framework inRoom, R. ed beyond the Threshold The Measurement and Analysi s of Social Exclusion University of Bristol, Policy weight-liftBradbury, Bruce, Stephen P. Jenkins and John Micklewright (2000), Child Poverty dynamics in Seven Nations. Innocenti kit and boodle Paper, No. 78 Florence UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre.Bryman, A 2nd ed. 2004 Social Research Methods Oxford, Oxford University PressDuncan, G.J., Gustafsson, B., Hauser, R., Schmauss, G., Messinger, H., Muffels,R., Nolan, B., and Ray, J.-C. (1993). Poverty Dynamics in EightCountries. Journal of universe of discourse Economics, 6 29534.Durkheim, E. 1952 Suicide London, RoutledgeEsping-Anderson 1990 The Three Worlds of Welfare capitalism Cambridge, PolityGiddens, A 4th ed 2001 Sociology Cambridge, PolityWeber, M. 1930 The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism London, George Allen and UnwinWeber, M., 1965 The Sociology of Religion London, Methuenhttp//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient accessed 28/4/06http//www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/ie6.htmlhttp//hampshire.edu/apmNS/d esign/RESOURCES accessed 28/4/061Footnotes1 This is the terminology used by the researchers see page 10 of the study2 This working paper apparently forms part of a collection of such papers on child poverty. The researchers continually refer back to issues mentioned in other papers without elucidating what these issues are.3 Again the paper refers back to issues covered in other papers without indicating what these issues are.4 For example, the UK figures in BJM Chapter 3 (the UK is outlined as Britain and FederalIreland) are based on the Family Expenditure Survey while the results for Britain in this paper arebased on the British Household grace Survey.5 By median income for children we mean the median of the dispersal of children, ranked bythe evaluate of equivalised income of their household (p, 15 ibid).6 This is a measure of inequality of distribution which is often used in the measurement of income levels. It is a measure between 0 and 1 where 0 corresponds to complete equ ality and 1 to complete inequality7 http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient accessed 28/4/068 http//www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/ie6.htmlTen Critical Traits of multitude Dynamics condition AnalysisTen Critical Traits of gathering Dynamics article AnalysisWith the industrial revolution and latest globalisation effects, competitive nature of businesses has summationd more than ever. In regularize to survive in this new-made competitive world, businesses must find solution to their problems faster and also it is more important to do their work more effectively. With that companies have identify that collaboration or in other words, meeting or ag classify works will find more creative solutions for the problems that they are face up as modern day businesses. thusly more and more companies nowadays use ag conclaves as a part of their organisational strategies.On the other hand as the Article has mentioned in its introduction, the issue is, putting some sight toge ther and expecting them to work effectively as a pigeonholing would rarely work. Therefore understanding the term Group Dynamics and Group Processes and effectively oversee them in bases is becoming more important.The oblige Ten Critical Traits of Group Dynamics which was indite by Helene F. Uhlfelder who is a PhD holder in educational psychology has acknowledged the splendour of identifying and improving the Dynamics of groups and teams in organisations in rank to remediate their effectiveness and carrying out. Further the author has introduced 10 searing distinctions that can be used to categorize group dynamics. Finally the article has mentioned the richness of assessing groups regularly in order to find issues that are facing groups and how those traits can be used to advance group dynamics in order to build effective teams.Main objective of this assignment is to add the given article giving my opinion on the main debate of the article. For that task various source s will be researched including text books, online journal articles and some other web sites. And the complete article will be summarized in a full of life manner giving my views on necessary points using the research findings and my own experiences on the subject matter.The Main Argument of the ArticleThis article mainly discusses the importance of 10 traits that have been identified by the author, which can be used to categorize dynamics of groups. check to the author these traits can be used to identify any areas that groups need to cleanse and areas that they are good at. The author argues that by doing so groups or teams will be able to work together more effectively and increase their effect levels.When analysing the article it can be seen that the author has successfully explained her rail line more clearly with providing examples and covering many supplementary topics which are required to further clarify and make it easy to understand the main descent for the audience .Helene Uhlfelder has covered many technological basis like Group Dynamics, Group Process, and has defined the difference between Group and Team before explaining about the 10 critical traits.Although the article has explained group dynamics and group forge before explaining what is group and team, as I believe in order the article to be more logical the author could have explained terms like Group and Team first. If the author has assumed that the readers having the knowledge about those terms then she could not have covered them later. Anyhow to make with explaining the term group and team would be separate.Group and TeamThe term group is defined in the article as situations where two or more people coming together in order to give a common purpose. Further it is mentioned that in a group people should interact each other, depend on each other and they should have a task to realize. harmonise to the article the team also a group, that is in a work environment. The author has mentioned various characteristics that are feature by teams.It is and intact social system with boundaries. Therefore who is in the team and outside the team can be clearly identifiable. There is mutualness among members.Members are collectively responsible for the tasks to be performed.Operates in an organisational context and therefore members have relationship with other members of the organisation.It is obvious that the author has comprehensively explained the terms group and team using various sources and in different contexts like systems terms. only if she has overlooked the theory of group formation, which could have added great value addition to the article. As the author has mentioned various stages during some parts of the article, it would be a necessary part to be explained.Group FormationAccording to (Luthans, 2008) there are five stages that are generally recognized as stages of group formation.Forming this stage is characterized by uncertainty and confusion. Membe rs are testing the appropriate behaviour for the team.Storming in this stage leadership will be determined. home(a) conflicts are common.Norming Members settle down into conformity and cooperation.Performing The group will perform the task that they were grouped.Adjourning after(prenominal) the task is completed group will disband.Group Dynamics and ProcessAccording to the author either positive or negative, group dynamics exists in every group and then teams. Although authors definition about group dynamics and processes a bit confusing at the end of that particular section she has given a plain explanation to identify those terms distinctly.According to that group processes are simply referred to as specific processes used by group members and leaders whereas group dynamic is defined as forces and dynamics of the group as a whole.It is found in literature research that the term Group Dynamic has been defined in many different ways. According to (Forsyth, 2010) it was firs t defined by Kurt Lewin, as the processes of the ways groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. According (Luthans, 2008) another view on group dynamic identifies it from the viewpoint of the internal nature of groups like how they are formed, structure and processes, how groups function and affect its membersAfter explaining basic definitions and concepts the author moves her discussion into the main content of this article, the 10 critical traits.Ten Critical TraitsAccording to the author, using 10 critical traits approach it is possible to characterize group dynamics and identify issues that are face up by groups. Those 10 critical traits include, safety, inclusion, free-interaction, appropriate level of interdependence, cheapness, trust, conflict resolution, influence, accomplishment, and growth. Helen Uhlfelder has explained them comprehensively using examples to make them easy to understand by the readers.Safety according to this trait team members ne ed to feel safe within their teams and members of the team should be safe from any disruptive behaviour of other team members.Inclusion all members should be allowed to participate with equal opportunities. Everyone should be taken as members of the group and efforts should be taken in order to include new and quiet members.Free interaction there should not be any restrictions on which members interact with which members and every member should be allowed to interact with others. According to the author teams can become less effective when only few members are allowed to interact with the leader.Appropriate level of interdependence there should be an appropriate balance between individual needs and group needs. It is mentioned there the important of sense of belonging and affiliation that comes from being interdependence as well as maintaining individual identity.Cohesiveness members should feel as they are a part of a team. Without the attraction of cohesiveness a group can fal l apart. Therefore it is very important that members having a bond or affiliation among them.Trust team members should trust each other and they should trust the leader. There should be consistency between what they say and do.Conflict resolution as any team could face conflicts at any stage there should be a way to interrupt those conflicts in order to continue the team work.Influence there should be ability for team members to influence other members. They should be able to inspire each other. If there is no method to influence members through usage of reward and punishment productivity could be minimized.As the author has mentioned it is very important to make sure that influence will not be confused as control because controlling can lead to group problems.Accomplishment team should be able to complete its tasks. They should possess skills, knowledge to do their tasks. If they cannot perform their duties frustration would lead to conflict.Growth As in any situations group members should have opportunities to grow. Also as a team they should be able to learn and growth. Otherwise boredom can result in failure in the group.When looking at those traits it is obvious that those traits in nature would help teams to achieve its goals by eliminating group issues. But one weakness of this finding is that the author has not ranked the order of importance of these traits. Perhaps one could argue that these all could be equally important. But according to my point of view some traits are certainly pukka or more important than others. For example cohesiveness, conflict resolution, etc. could be more important than growth or influence, because first, the group must work together and achieve their goals. Other things like growth, etc. comes next to that.However it can be clearly said that these 10 traits would (although few traits could be more important than others) help groups or teams to achieve their goals and improve performances.Benefits of 10 Critical Tra itsAccording to the author these 10 traits can help teams or groups in great ways by helping them to identify weaknesses and strength of their group dynamics.Therefore she suggests that organisations can use a form that includes those 10 critical traits in order to evaluate teams. According to the article teams can be assessed in 5 scores continuum. Also it is important to assess teams on regular basis in order to keep and improve their performance levels.As the author explains, this evaluation can be make by any person who is not in the team, given that he has required evaluation skills. Further it is noted there that this tool can be used to evaluate a team in any development stage and find out their dynamics and processes in order to improve them.There are several steps that need to be taken after evaluation is done,The assessor should meet team members and provide reason for the score that they have got for each criterion.Appropriate actions should be taken for traits that are scored below 3. Action plans can be implemented to break up issues.Team should celebrate scores over 3 and reinforce them in order to retain and improve performance.Last step is to follow this single-valued function regularly again and again after agreed time period.As I understand this is the most important part of this article, because this can be really used by any team in real world to improve their performances. Instructions are clearly given using examples. Therefore no dust would find any difficulties in implementing this.Ultimately through this procedure teams will be able to improve group dynamics and group processes and will be able to build powerful teams and improve their performance level.But there are some drawbacks in this method itself as it has not addressed all issues that could affect the performance of groups or teams.Shortcomings of the 10 Traits MethodWhen analysing the article in depth it is clear that the author has failed to identify some of the important aspects of group and team management that are identified by other researchers and authors. Those aspects could directly affect the outcome of the group in terms of performance and effectiveness.For an example phenomenon like groupthink and groupshift that could hinder the ability of the group to come into quality decisions by evaluating alternatives objectively. According to (Robbins, Millett, Waters-Marsh, 2004) groupthink is related to the group norms. It describes that with the pressure from group to conformity group may eliminate unusual, nonage or unpopular views from evaluating when making decision. Groupshift is a situation where when group arriving at a decision they could go for more risky decision as members initial positions are exaggerated toward more extreme positions.Further (Robbins, Millett, Waters-Marsh, 2004) has identified many factors that could affect group performances than the group dynamics that have been identified by the author of the article through her 10 critical traits. size of the group, availability of resources for a group to perform, effects of social loafing, etc. could affect the outcome of groups greatly.From the shortcomings mentioned earlier it is clear that the phenomenon of groupthink could clearly contradict with cohesiveness trait that she has mentioned in the article. She has mentioned that cohesiveness as an important dynamic in performance. Without cohesiveness a group can fall apart. But she has failed to mention the margin of cohesiveness because as mentioned earlier, extreme cohesiveness can cause groupthink and at last affect the effective decision making in the group.Conclusion putting some people together and expecting them to work effectively as a group would rarely work. Therefore understanding the term Group Dynamics and effectively manage them in groups is important.The author of the article has mainly discussed the importance of her 10 traits method in categorizing group dynamics in order to identif y and manage any areas that a group/team need to improve or they are good at. The author argues that by doing so groups or teams will be able to work together more effectively and increase their performance levels.The article has organized its tilts in a logical manner and has introduced many theories and concepts that need to understand the main argument of the article. Apart from few adjustments that I suggested in the analysis part of this assignment, it can be concluded that the author has succeeded in those aspects. Further the article has written in simple English that is a good point because readers will be able to understand the content of this article easily. In addition to that the author has provided lot of examples to make readers understand complex theories and concepts more clearly.When critically evaluating the article, it is found that those 10 critical traits are actually important and very practical in evaluating and managing group performances except for few draw backs that were discussed in the body of this assignment. Those drawbacks include the failure to mention some of the important aspects that could affect the performance of groups, like groupthink, the size of the group, effects of social loafing, etc.Finally it can be concluded that if any organisation follows the method that the author has suggested to evaluate group/team dynamics and manage them with taking care of the additive points that I have mentioned earlier, organisations will be able to increase performance and effectiveness of their groups/teams.