Category Archives: Annotated Bibliography

Annotated Bibliographies 9 & 10

“Vision and Mission.” Diversity & Inclusion | The George Washington University, The                                    George Washington University, diversity.gwu.edu/vision-and-mission. Accessed 1 May 2017.

As many colleges and universities currently have, the George Washington University has an office dedicated to racial and cultural diversity and inclusion. This office, effectively titled “the Office for Diversity, Equality, and Community Engagement”, has a website completely dedicated to their presence and operations at GW. This website goes over the mission of the office, as well as how they are attempting to achieve that mission in practice. One of the first pages you can visit on their website is their “Vision and Mission” page. This page explains the overall position which the office holds, and what they hope to accomplish. They also explain briefly why office exists, saying that they agree with the idea that an atmosphere of inclusion is mutually beneficial for both the establishment and those working/ studying there. After this explanation, they explain their vision, and then their mission statement. The entire web page is maybe a few hundred words, so not very long. They concisely get to the point, with little room for confusion or personal (possibly incorrect) interpretation.

Previously, although I acknowledged the presence of GW University on the hospital, I don’t feel that I gave it as much effort as I should have. As I mentioned in my first essay, the George Washington University is an essential aspect of the hospital, so the economic and political background of the students, faculty, and staff of the school should be heavily considered. However, what I neglected to pay attention to was the cultural and social background of these groups of people. The more I learn about the cultural history of DC, the more I begin to realize the GW Hospital and University may not be very representative of the city as a whole. This is argumentatively neither good nor bad, but it does bring many questions to the surface. If GW Hospital stands apart from the majority of the city, then perhaps what has previously been viewed as socially stunted is actually socially progressive. Understanding exactly where the hospital, and by default the school, is coming from may help put generate some answers for these questions. 

“25th And I St. NW.” Digital DC, The George Washington                                                                                 University, exhibits.library.gwu.edu/exhibits/show/digitaldc/foggy-bottom/25th-and-i-street-       nw. Accessed 1 May 2017.

“25th And I St. NW” is digital document which explains the effect of gentrification in the Foggy Bottom neighborhood of DC. Foggy Bottom, which is located in DC’s northwest quadrant, is home to GWU and GW Hospital. What was originally a lower class black community, has lately changed to a mostly middle and upper class white neighborhood. Like much of DC, Foggy Bottom has experienced substantial gentrification within the past 100 years. The point of “25th And I St. NW” is to help document these changes. Interestingly published by a subsidiary of GW University themselves, the piece discusses how the area has changed over the years. The piece also contains numerous pictures, building permits, maps, and newspaper articles pertaining to the changing landscape. The piece focuses on the changes which occurred in the 1950s and 60s, and makes little reference to the university or hospital nearby. However, it provides significant information about the changes to the area, which helped shape it into the foggy bottom of today.

I have been looking for a piece like this for awhile, so I’m glad I finally found one. Although the ultimate goal would be to find an article which talks directly about how GW has changed the area, this piece is still extremely useful. An added bonus of the piece would be the selection of pictures and external documents which help shed a light to the changing demographics of the area. It may just be coincidence, but it is interesting to me that there is little reference to the George Washington Hospital or University nearby, since the piece was published by the university. There is also limited reasoning provided as to why exactly the area began changing. It explains that newer residents of a higher socioeconomic status began moving to the area, but it does not give a reason as to why they began moving there. All that being said, I’m still incredibly thankful I found this piece. Information on Foggy Bottom specifically has been slightly challenging to find, and so this helps out alot. I previously read that DC was a predominantly black city, but I also read about how the GW Hospital was not hospital which tended to help clients of color or lower class. I was confused to as if Foggy Bottom had always been a whiter area, or if gentrification changed that. Thanks to this piece, I now have a clear answer to that question.

Annotated Bibs 7 & 8

Jayanthi, Akanksha. “The New Look of Diversity in Healthcare: Where We Are and Where We’re        Headed.” Becker’s Hospital Review, 8 Mar. 2016, www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-            management-administration/the-new-look-of-diversity-in-healthcare-where-we-are-and-              where-we-re-headed.html. Accessed 11 Apr. 2017.

In the article The New Look of Diversity in Healthcare, Akanksha Jayanthi takes a stance on the current structure of diversity within the healthcare system, arguing that current healthcare leadership doesn’t actively reflect those they serve. She explains that while “42% of millennials identify with a race or ethnicity other than non-Hispanic white”, these number aren’t represented when it comes to healthcare. She goes on to explain that the ratio of minority patients to minority board members is extremely disproportional. However, Ms. Jayanthi does show instances where this inequality is changing. Catholic Health Initiatives (CHI) has numerous black Americans in leadership positions. What’s most interesting, however, is why companies like CHI are consciously making a shift. According to Jayanthi, millennials are viewing diversity in the workplace as a means to a business outcome, while older generations view diversity as morality. This means that certain health care providers, such as CHI, are pushing diversity not because it’s the “right thing to do”, but because they feel it will genuinely help their business. Another instance of this would be the creation and growing appeal of a Chief Diversity Officer (CDO) in the healthcare field. According to Jayanthi, many medical schools and academic medical centers are hiring CDOs, including Yale School of Medicine. The goal of all of this is to create an atmosphere where the patients themselves can better relate to their care providers, which in turn will hopefully facilitate and ease these patients healing process- whatever it may be.

Since my previous sources have covered the topics of diversity and healthcare separately, I wanted a chance to examine these two factors together. Annotated bibliographies 5 & 6 examined the role of diversity in the workplace in general, but did not examine how diversity was represented or interpreted for healthcare. To completely understand George Washington University Hospital’s marketing technique, one must first understand the discourse community within healthcare. Akanksha Jayanthi’s article is a great first step in that direction. She reiterates what I was already starting to gather an understanding of, but it’s good to see this in writing from someone in the healthcare field. Akanksha explains that diversity is lacking, but there are attempts to change this. This stance could be easily extended to encompass GWH’s own website, as well as their YouTube video. What Akanksha does bring to the table, is a new view as to why this slow bridge of the diversity gap is taking place. Previously, when examining the rhetorical situation of GWH and the surrounding area, I didn’t give much thought to the generation(s) which resides and is treated there. As Ms. Jayanthi explains, millennials are now an increasing percentage of those who both work in healthcare, and those who are being treated. This change in generational presence effects the overall mentality of both environments drastically. Now, the mindset and background of this new generation must be taken seriously to accurately meet the needs of both parties (those working and those being treated). Instead of looking at these two groups separately, Akanksha Jayanthi helps shed light on the idea of examining these two together, in order to come up with a more complete and balanced understanding.

King, Meredith. “The Importance of Cultural Diversity in Healthcare | Brainwaves.”                              UVM Continuing and Distance Education, 25 Sept. 2014, learn.uvm.edu/blog-health/cultural-            diversity-in-healthcare. Accessed 11 Apr. 2017.

Mededith King’s piece entitled The Importance of Cultural Diversity in Healthcare discusses the importance of including diversity in the healthcare system. Unlike Ms. Jayanthi’s piece, King’s article is not soley based on the importance of diversity in leadership roles. Instead, King looks at diversity in every aspect of healthcare: nursing, speech pathology, physical therapy, radiation therapy, etcetera. According to King, numerous nursing, health, and medical schools are now looking to recruit and hire more people who are part of social/ cultural minorities. The main example which King uses to display this idea of increased diversity is nursing. Traditionally, nurses were middle-aged white woman. Now, however, there is a shift happening. The average age of nurses has increased, yet younger people are increasing joining the nursing profession as well. The amount of racial diversity is increasing, as well as the number of male nurses. Furthermore, the term “cultural competency”, referring to the ability of individuals to assist those of diverse and differing backgrounds. This concept is being taught more and more at academic institutions. But why is any of this important? King’s reason is to reduce health disparities. To her, and her numerous sources, it makes a difference when someone receives health care from an individual that represents them or their experiences.

Although these two sources of mine are extremely similar, they focus on two different aspects of diversity in healthcare. Jayanthi’s article is centered around heathcare’s leadership team, while King’s piece is more centered around the nurses. This is almost a blue collar, white collar comparison, yet it’s easily found that diversity matters on both sides of the spectrum. What I like about King’s piece, and why I ultimately decided to include it, is because I feel that looking at healthcare from a nurse’s standpoint is much more accessible. By this, I mean that although diversity in leadership roles is extremely important, nurses are the ones who have much more direct contact with the patients. The nurses have quite possibly the most face-to-ace contact with the patients, so their representation almost means more to me than the hospital’s leadership. This is not a view I really took prior to reading this article. If I apply this logic to GWU’s website and YouTube video, then GWU actually paints a much more positive picture of diversity. Both the website and video show minorities in nursing roles, which I mentioned, but seemed to overlook the significance of, before. King’s article sheds light to how important and evident that growing diversity is.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gqF3FZAkIgFMdRSYiiIRjF48I7ktqLcZJUGnzz0qTZY/edit?usp=sharing

Annotated Bibliographies 5 & 6

Ingram, David. “Advantages and Disadvantages of Diversity in Workplace.” Chron.comHearst,          2017, smallbusiness.chron.com/advantages-disadvantages-diversity-workplace-3041.html.          Accessed 10 Apr. 2017.

In Advantages and Disadvantages of Diversity in the Workplace, David Ingram explains that there are two main positives and two main negatives of having a culturally diverse workforce. In order to understand what these advantages and disadvantages are, Mr. Ingram begins by explaining that diversity in the workplace references employees with different “national origin, primary language, religion, social status and age”. According to Mr. Ingram, the two advantages of having a diverse workforce would be diverse experience and learning & growth. For David Ingram, a diverse experience benefits companies with the ability to pool together the diverse knowledge and skills of various workers. This collection of knowledge, in turn, strengthens workers’ productivity and responsiveness to changing social and economic conditions. The benefit of learning and growth coincides directly with experience, especially with the understanding that exposing people with different backgrounds to one another enables them to learn from each other’s experiences. However, this exposure also leads to the negative aspects of workplace diversity- namely the inability to embrace or accept others’ differences. David Ingram refers to these negatives as communication and integration issues. He says that although these differing backgrounds can lead to a larger base of knowledge for problem-solving, it can also polarize and segregate people is they are unwilling or unable to expand their knowledge base.

For the two sources used for annotated bibliographies 5&6, I wanted to expand on the primary argument of my initial essay- which was diversification on George Washington University Hospital’s website. Therefore, these two sources don’t directly reference GWU Hospital, but rather the issues that I’m using the Hospital’s website to address. In order for this to work, diversification must be examined on a cultural and economic level. Basically, I’m saying that for the answer of “4” to matter, we must examine “2+2”. In this instance, one of those 2’s is diversification in the workplace, or diversification on the economic level. GW Hospital showing a diverse staff working at their health-care facility is only of importance if it is deemed by the discourse community that diversity matters. That’s where David Ingram’s short article comes in. Here, David is explaining both the positives and negatives associated to workplace diversification. However, the very fact that he wrote this article means that there is a mutual societal interest in the topic, aka diversification matters one way or another. I wanted an article that talked about both the good and bad repercussions of diversification, because I don’t want this argument to seem one-sided or uneducated. It cannot be completely ruled out that GW Hospital might willing choose not to show diversification with good reason.  

Vinjamuri, David. “Diversity In Advertising Is Good Marketing.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 11 Dec.      2015, www.forbes.com/sites/davidvinjamuri/2015/12/11/diversityinadsisgoodmarketing/.            Accessed 10 Apr. 2017.

David Vinjamuri wrote an article for Forbes magazine about how diversity in marketing is beneficial to both the company and consumer. This article, conveniently entitled Diversity In Advertising Is Good Marketing, has a very basic premise behind it: we are more likely to identify with someone that looks like us. David Vinjamuri explains that human beings are more attracted to people who look similar to them, and this similarity encompasses physical appearance, attitudes, and subtle cues. The entire premise behind an ad is to get someone to want to buy the product, and Mr. Vinjamuri says this is most easily done when the consumer can see themselves using that product. It goes almost without saying that the best way for a random individual to see themselves using a product, would be if the represented consumer looked and/ or acted as they do. Diversification in advertisements and marketing helps reach a wider range of consumers, since everyone looks and acts differently. However, according to Vinjamuri, diverse marketing still has a long way to go to be truly encompassing of America’s population.

Since the conversation of diversity in the workplace has already been addressed, the flip side of that coin, or the presence/ importance of diversity in marketing, must also be brought to light. As discussed above, for my argument of GW Hospital’s inclusion (or exclusion) of diversity to matter on their website, I must first prove that diversity matters both on the producer and the consumer sides of the spectrum. Since the presence of diversity in the workplaces encompasses the economic side of the argument, what is left is the social side. Unlike for source #5 however, I did not choose an article that discussed both the positives and negatives of diversity in advertising. In this circumstance, I felt that was unnecessary. Instead, I wanted to focus on what exactly could be gained by using diversity in marketing, since the alternative would be to simply continue on with the status quo. My argument, brought down to its core, is centered around the idea that GW is not being as diverse as they could be, and that is bad. In order for their lack of diversity to be “bad”, the consumer must come a viewpoint that they want to see diversity in marketing (otherwise there would be no foundation to build an argument on). Mr. Vinjamuri’s article is filled with fairly elementary information, yet it’s important to understand. He’s saying that an individual wants to see diversification because it is easier to empathise and relate to, and relating to an ad is the basis behind successfully selling a product or service.

 

Annotated Bibliography 3 & 4

Charron, David. “Five Walkable, High-Density D.C. Neighborhoods That Are Also Quiet.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 13 Mar. 2017, www.washingtonpost.com/news/where-we-live/wp/2017/03/13/five-walkable-high-density-d-c-neighborhoods-that-are-also-quiet/?utm_term=.c65e913fea36. Accessed 25 Mar. 2017.

In David Charron’s article, “Five Walkable, High-Density D.C. Neighborhoods That Are Also Quiet”, the author insists that the location close to the George Washington University is one of Washington DC’s most livable neighborhoods. The article, written for the Washington Post, feels that DC residents are currently seeking areas to live in that are close to urban centers and have city amenities, without having a complete city atmosphere. According to David Charron, the area where Foggy Bottom meets Georgetown, aka George Washington University Hospital’s location, is this perfect mix of quiet and urban living. This is no longer an area reserved for students of the university, or patients visiting the hospital. Instead, this area now has a Whole Foods and numerous upscale restaurants that offer a level of sophistication to anyone wishing to reside there. David Charron also uses the nearby hospital as a selling point, saying that having a major hospital walking distance away from your residence helps create a home which one can truly age in. Without having to worry about transportation to and from one’s healthcare, residents are able to have much more “peace of mind” about where they live. Although specific neighborhoods within this area are not listed, Mr. Charron also mentions that there are numerous “vibrant” neighborhood options which make this area so appealing for current DC homebuyers. The article continues to also talk about 14th street and the Southwest Waterfront/ Naval Yard as desirable places to live for people now living in DC.

For my previous two sources, I focused much more on the background and basic information surrounding the George Washington University Hospital itself, such as when it was built, what its used for, who owns it, etc. Now, however, I want to focus more on the area around it. I feel that this information can tell more of a story about the hospital than simple statistical information. Currently I know very little about the surrounding neighborhood, or the hospital’s past (other than renovations). This first article I’ve chosen paints the hospital, and surrounding areas, in a very positive light. It almost puts a smile on gentrification and seems to support it in this context. The author directly states that the addition of Whole Foods and upscale restaurants is a positive addition to this area, one which makes moving here more enticing. Of course, the people moving here are not the same type of socioeconomic people who were living in these neighborhoods before. But this begins to shine a light on the discourse about the gentrification of the area surrounding the hospital. For a Whole Foods and upscale restaurants to come into an area to make it more enticing, must mean that there were not such “luxuries” existing there before. Was that simply because this area was specifically for students and patients, like the author made it sound? Or is there another demographic which the author overlooked during writing. If there is a “third demographic”, were they left out of this article on purpose or by accident? Clearly this source doesn’t necessarily contain lots of answers, but it does help to open up an interesting and important topic to be researched further to better understand this built environment.

 

Iweala, Uzodinma. “The Gentrification of Washington DC: How My City Changed Its Colours.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 12 Sept. 2016, www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/sep/12/gentrification-washington-dc-how-my-city-changed-colours. Accessed 25 Mar. 2017.

 

In “The Gentrification of Washington DC: How My City Changed Its Colours”, Uzodinma Iweala’s argues that Washington DC is losing its cultural authenticity as white gentrification changes the city. Although the argument around the negative sides of gentrification is nothing new, Uzodinma Iweala does bring a somewhat new stance to this train of thought. For him, DC was, and somewhat still is, a black city- even though it is rarely seen or projected as such. It should be noted that this article is not specifically about the George Washington University Hospital (though it is explicitly mentioned once), but rather about DC as a whole. According to Iweala, who is originally from Nigeria, DC was once over 60% black. When he grew up in DC, the city was not anything close to what it is today, or even how the people around him perceived it back then. Iweala himself was lucky to grow up in an affluent household, so even he (and his classmates) were not exposed to the city’s “true”, colored population. However, he was still able to see it, thanks to his father and other black friends. Aside from the Northwest corner of DC, the majority of the city was predominantly black. Areas such as Adams Morgan, H Street, and 14th Street were working class or immigrant based communities, which are now seen as trendier, whiter neighborhoods. Iweala is afraid, and it seems that many people he has talked to share his same opinion, that DC used to have a close-knit feel to it, which it now lacks almost completely.

The only time GW Hopsital is explicitly mentioned is when Iweala’s father talks about how he worked at Providence Hospital, which treated many middle-class black residents of DC until about the late 90s. At that time, the city hit some financial hardship, and hospitals which treated lower class citizens of DC were closed. After the closing of those hospitals, other health care facilities (such as Providence) saw an increase of lower class patients with problems such as gunshots, alcoholism, and drug overdose. Some hospitals though, such as the George Washington University Hospital, actually acted illegally and turned these patients away saying that they could not help them. This is an extremely interesting point. Iweala is quoted numerous times stating that the area of Northwest DC is the most affluent, yet GW is not located in this area. Still, this hospital was in an economic situation where they felt it necessary to turn away these lower-class citizens. This black history of DC, in particular the area surrounding GW Hospital, was not one which I ever previously thought to consider. As mentioned above, this article does not exclusively talk about GW Hospital, but I still feel that it is still extremely important to help better understand my built environment. The social history of DC in general must be taken into account in order to understand my specific section, and I look forward to using this article as a solid racial/ social piece of background. The first paper I wrote discusses how GW Hospital is stuck behind traditional racial and sexual constructs in their representation on their website. This article definitely helps to shed some light on to why exactly that might be.

 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-I_N8NZw8avTlUaow9KM9PEqwqCp5LUoXw359bA80gE/edit?usp=sharing

Annotated Bibliography

“About George Washington University Hospital.” The George Washington University Hospital, 11 Mar. 2016, https://www.gwhospital.com/about.

 

This is a short article posted on the George Washington University Hospital’s own webpage, in order to provide a brief bio on the building. The article begins by explaining the technological advances the hospital has to offer, as well as the elite clientele which they serve. The remaining paragraphs are broken down into subcategories including Clinical Expertise, Hospital Management, Mission, Vision, and Accreditation. The purpose of this webpage being to quickly yet effectively inform any possible patients or friends/family of patients that GWU (George Washington University) Hospital is not only very capable of successfully caring for their patients, but also goes above and beyond expectations in terms of technology and facility.

 

I plan to use this article as more of a foundation than anything else. In order to successful write about any person or object, one of the most important pieces of information one can gather is that places/individual’s own account of their background. The way this webpage is set up, the fact that the webpage exists at all, and what is contained on the page, all tell specific information about GWU Hospital. For example, the fact that GWU feels that it is necessary to have this information on their website shows that they are catering to a demographic that clearly does research into the care of their friends/family, and that their clientele clearly expect a very high level of health care. Although there isn’t much actual information on this page, it does help build a picture surrounding GWU Hospital.

 

“The George Washington University Hospital WASHINGTON, DC.” HCD Magazine, 31 Aug. 2005, http://www.healthcaredesignmagazine.com/architecture/george-washington-university-hospital-washington-dc/.

 

This is another short article about GWU Hospital, however this one is much more concerned with the building’s $96 million renovation which it received in 2002. The original hospital, according to this article, was built in 1948 and was the most technologically modern hospital of its age in DC. GWU Hospital is trying to continue with that level of technological expertise today, by rebuilding the 458,278 sqft 371-bed hospital. As GWU’s own website does, this article highlights the importance of the clientele which GWU Hospital serves, including the president and members of congress. Unlike the first article, however, this website explores the relationship between the hospital’s architecture and the surrounding neighborhood. It’s clear that the designers of the updated GWU Hospital put considerable effort into making sure the redesign matched aesthetically with the surrounding part of DC.

 

Although there are a few stats provided by this article that may prove to be helpful later on, the main use for this piece will be more about the importance of the build world and its interaction with people who live/ work around it. Its interesting to me that this article makes it sound like the hospital was built to match the surrounding area, yet I always thought that the surrounding area was build up to match the hospital. Clearly there’s a lot about DC, and this area in particular, that I am unaware of- even though I did grow up relatively close by. This article helped highlight something I was very unaware of, and provides good insight to an aspect that definitely requires greater research.