EDLD 604
THE POLICYMAKING PROCESS 3 units 201 Hill Hall Instructor: Robert Donmoyer (275 F Hill Hall) Office Phone: 619.260.7445/Home Phone: 619. 299.9309/Cell Phone: 619.985.9309 Email address: donmoyer@sandiego.edu Office Hours: Wednesday, 1- 5, 8:20 -9:20 Appointments Recommended
Course Description Exercising leadership often requires making decisions, and the decisions that leaders make, more often than not, are about the establishment, modification, or elimination of policies. It should not be surprising, therefore, that one of the core courses of the Leadership Studies Program at the University of San Diego is—and has always been—about the policymaking process. Like the program, itself, this program component is interdisciplinary in nature; it draws upon insights and understanding developed by a variety of disciplines and fields of study including economics, anthropology, cognitive linguistics and organizational studies. Given the focus on policy, however, the discipline of political science is the primary source of course content. This course has a dual purpose: (1) to help students understand the policymaking process from a variety of perspectives and (2) to give participants a number of policy-oriented analytical tools. The tools, along with the more general understanding that the course provides, should help course participants become more adept players in a variety of policy arenas. They also should help course participants interested in careers in research and teaching more effectively study and teach about exercising leadership in policy contexts. To accomplish the purposes outlined above, the course is divided into three parts—general perspectives, policy analysis tools, and application. The first part of the course focuses on three quite different conceptual models of policy decision making. Historical accounts of decision making related to the Cuban missile crisis of the 1960s are used to illustrate how each model frames—and constrains—both perceptions of the “facts” and the policy decisions that eventually get made. The example also illustrates how a commitment to a particular a priori model can not only influence scholars’ policy analyses at the time decisions are being made but also their ex post facto accounts of particular policymaking processes. This section of the course also will focus on how issues get on the policy agenda and on a vision of policymaking often referred to as disjointed incrementalism. In the second part of the course, a variety of analytical tools (e.g., a Machiavelli-inspired political calculation process, cost-benefit analysis, game theory, metaphor analysis) will be introduced. The goal here is to help students develop a repertoire of analysis skills that can be used to make sense of—and act more thoughtfully and intelligently in—policymaking situations. These skills should be useful both for assessing the viability of different policy options and, also, for thoughtfully selecting the best option in a particular situation. In the final part of the course, the conceptual models and analytical tools introduced during the first and second parts of the course respectively will be applied to a variety of real-world policy issues. Application opportunities will take the form of problem-based learning scenarios in which class members will take on the policy analysis role.
Course Objectives Course participants will: 1. develop an in-depth understanding of three different conceptual models of the policy making process associated with three different disciplines/fields of study; 2. examine the roles of key public officials, interest groups, political parties, the media, and public opinion in policymaking in general and in the agenda-setting process in particular; 3. be able to articulate the meaning of disjointed incrementalism in the context of policymaking; 4. become acquainted with a number of strategies and tools for analyzing policy issues; 5. practice using a variety of policy analysis strategies and tools to analyze policy options and to report the results of the analysis orally and in writing. Textbooks/Readings • • • •
Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow, Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis George Lakoff, Moral Politics John Kingdon, Agendas: Alternatives, and Public Choices OR Charles Lindbloom and Edward Woodhouse, The Policy Making Process Additional Readings Passed out in Class
Written and Oral Presentation Assignments •
Written Assignment # 1 Mini-Case Study (5 Points, Due 2/4) Prepare and bring to class a two or three page mini- case about the policymaking process that is based on your personal experience and that describes (a) a policy proposal that was either adopted or defeated; (b) the key players in the policymaking process you are discussing; (c) the process itself; and (d) your analysis of why the policy proposal was either adopted or defeated. Also, post a copy of this assignment on the course website prior to coming to class.
•
Written Assignment # 2: Essence of Decision Memo to Supervisor (20 points. Due 3/4) For this assignment, think of someone with positional power in an organization in which you have worked or are currently working. Assume the person has heard about Allison and Zelikow’s, Essence of Decision and also has heard that it is being used for leadership education at places like Harvard’s Kennedy School and in the University of San Diego’s Leadership Studies doctoral program. Because the leader is busy, he or she has asked you to read the book, summarize the key ideas in it, and indicate whether these ideas are, in any way, applicable to the organization in which the leader works. Because your leader is busy and has little patience for reading lengthy memos or briefing papers, make sure your memo is concise and to-the-point. You know, for example, that
the memo should be no longer than 4 double-spaced manuscript pages. Even if you keep to that length, your reader may not read all of what you have written, so be sure you “frontload” your key ideas. Also, be sure you provide lots of concrete examples from the leader’s organization so what you are saying will be understandable to your reader. Post a copy of your review on the class website before coming to class on 3/18 and also bring a hard copy to the 3/18 class. •
Written Assignment # 3: Book Review Assignment ( 20 points Due 3/25) Assume that a well regarded academic journal in Leadership Studies is doing a series of book reviews of classic books from a variety of disciplines that either have had or could have had an impact on Leadership Studies. Assume also that the editor has asked you to prepare a brief review (no more than five doublespaced pages) of either John Kingdon’s book, Agenda, Alternatives, and Public Policy, or the book by Charles Lindbloom and Edward Woodhouse, The Policy Making Process. You have been asked to very briefly summarize the books contents and, then, to discuss the book’s significance—or lack of sgnificance— for exercising leadership not only in public policy contexts but also outside of the governmental sphere. Your major task, in other words, is to address the following question: What is the relevance of this book for Leadership Studies?
•
Written Assignment # 4: Critical Friend Critiques of Small Group Members’ Reviews of the Kingdon or Lindbloom/Woodhouse Book (Part of Participation Points (See Below) Due 4/1) Read all of the reviews of the book you did not read and review and post critical friend comments to the author of each of them. Post your comments as a reply to each reviewer’s posting of her or his work in the discussion section of the website. You can make your comments part of your message or include them in an After reading all the posted reviews of the book, prepare a critical-friend critique of the reviews written by members of your small group. Post a copy of your each of your commentaries as replies to the original message prior to the 4/1 class and bring five hard copies of your critique, along with a five hard copies of your own review of the Kingdon book, to class.
•
Written Assignment # 5: One-page reaction paper (Part of Participation Points (See Below) Due 4/18, 11:59 pm) In lieu of a class session, you are being asked to attend at least one session of American Educational Research Association Meeting being held, this year, in San Diego. Post a one page reaction to the experience on the designated part of the ASSIGNMENT section of the course website by the deadline listed above. The points that will eventually be recorded reflect all of the 15 attendance/ participation points you have earned for the entire course.
•
Written Assignment # 6 Individual Briefing Paper ( 25 Points Due 5/14) For this assignment, use the tools discussed in the second section of the course to individually analyze the policy issue and options that are a part of the problem based learning scenario you and your group are working on.
•
Oral Presentation Assignment A: Group Presentation About Either the Kingdon or the Lindbloom Book (7.5 Points Due 4/1) After completing an individual review of either the Kingdon or the Lindbloom book, you will be part of a group presentation about the book that reviews and critiques the book’s key ideas.
•
Oral Presentation Assignment B: Group Presentation About Policy Analysis Results (7.5 Points Due 5/6) After completing an individual briefing paper related to a problem based learning scenario, you will use the paper as input to a group planning a group presentation about the issues in the scenario.
•
Additional Grading Criteria: Attendance and Participation (15 Points)
Criteria for Assessing Written and Oral Assignments 1. The IDEAS presented reflect course content, use course content appropriately, and reflect sophisticated attempts to apply course content to practice. 2. There is adequate SUPPORT for the arguments that are made in the written work and/or presentation. Support can include empirical evidence, citations of scholarship, and detailed logical arguments. 3. The ORGANIZATION of the paper/presentation is clear and easy to follow. The paper/presentation is organized logically and, when appropriate, the author/presenter uses advance organizer, transition and summary paragraphs, as well as headings and subheadings (or appropriate analogs in oral presentations) that provide a “cognitive roadmap” for readers or listeners and keep readers/listeners on track with the author’s/presenter’s line of argument. 4. (Written work only.) The paper is free of TECHNICAL errors. The writing is grammatically correct and is consistent with guidelines contained in the APA style manual.
Course Outline
1/28
Course Introduction/Syllabus Review/What is Policy/What is the Policymaking Process?/What is Policy Analysis? What is the Relationship Between Policy Analysis and Program Evaluation?
2/4
Frames, Claims, and the Policymaking Process: An Introduction to Three Models for Making Policy Assignments for this Session: 9 Read the Introduction (pp. 1-12) in Essence of Decision 9 Prepare and bring to class a 500 to 750 word mini- case about the policymaking process that is based on your personal experience and that describes (a) a policy proposal that was either adopted or defeated; (b) the key players in the policymaking process you are discussing; (c) the process itself; and (d) your analysis of why the policy proposal was either adopted or defeated. (Note: This is Written Assignment # 1 described above.) Post a copy of your paper on WebCT before coming to class.
I. PERSPECTIVES
2/11
Perspectives of the Policy-Making Process: The Rational Actor Model Assignment for this Session: 9 Read Chapters 1 and 2 (pp.13-142) in Essence of Decision
2/18
Perspectives of the Policy-Making Process: The Organizational Behavior Model Assignment for this Session: 9 Read Chapters 3 and 4 (pp.143-254 ) in Essence of Decision
2/25
Perspectives of the Policy-Making Process: The Governmental Politics Model Assignment for this Session: 9 Read Chapters 4, 5, and 6 (pp. 255-407 ) in Essence of Decision
3/4
Applying the Lessons from Essence of Decision to Different Contexts Assignment for this Session: 9 Complete Essence of Decision Memo to Supervisor Assignment. (Note: This is Written Assignment # 2 described above.) Post the memo on WebCT Before Class, and bring a hard copy to class.)
3/11
SRING BREAK窶年O CLASS MEETING
3/18
The Cuban Missile Crisis One More Time (but in a Different Medium): A Screening of Thirteen Days
Assignment for this Session: 9 No Written Assignment for This Session. Make sure, however, that you are reading the book that you will review for 3/25
3/25
NO FORMAL CLASS MEETING THIS WEEK—MEET (EITHER DURING CLASS TIME OR AT SOME OTHER MUTUALLY AGREED UPON TIME) WITH ALL OTHERS WHO HAVE REVIEWED THE SAME BOOK THAT YOU REVIEWED TO PLAN YOUR GROUP’S PRESENTATION ABOUT THE BOOK’S CONTENTS FOR NEXT WEEK’S CLASS. Assignments for this Week: 9 By 3/25 at 5:30 pm, post your review of either Kingdon’s or Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policy Lindbloom/Woodhouse’s The Policy Making Process. (Note: This is Written Assignment # 3 described above.) POST THIS ASSIGNMENT IN BOTH THE ASSIGNMENT AND THE DISCUSSION SECTION OF THE WEBSITE.
4/1
Presentations About Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policy and The The Policy Making Process. Assignments for this Session: 9 Before class, post your critical friend comments about each review that was written about the book that you did not review. (Note: This is Written Assignment # 4 described above.) Post your comments as a reply to the original posting IN THE DISCUSSION SECTION OF THE SITE. Your reply can either be in the form of a message or in the form of an attachment to the message you post. 9 Group class presentations about the two books that were reviewed. (Note: this is Oral Presentation Assignment A described above.)
II. POLICY ANALYSIS TOOLS/STRATEGIES
4/8
Policymaking Tools, Part I: The Prince System from Political Science/ Community Advocacy Strategies Assignment for this Session: 9 Read Chapters 9 and 18 from Coplin and O’Leary’s Public Policy Skills ).
4/15
SPECIAL OPPORTUNITY: NO CLASS MEETING THIS WEEK. INSTEAD, ATTEND AT LEAST ONE SESSION AT THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION BEING HELD THIS WEEK IN SAN DIEGO’S CONVENTION CENTER AND DOWNTOWN HOTELS. FOR SESSION OPTIONS, CONSULT THE ONLINE MEETING PROGRAM THAT CAN BE FOUND AT www.aera.net SEVERAL WEEKS PRIOR TO THE OPENING MEETING. Assignments for this Session: 9 By 11:59 pm on 4/18, post a one page response to your meeting experience in the ASSIGNMENT SECTION of the discussion section of the course website. (Note: This is Written Assignment # 5 described above.)
4/22
Policymaking Tools, Part II: Cost-Benefit Analysis and Game Theory Analysis from Economics/Literary Analysis Techniques from Cognitive Linguistics Assignments for this Session: 9 Read Material on Game Theory 9 Read George Lakoff’s Moral Politics
III. Application
4/29
Problem Based Learning Group Activities Assignment for this Session 9 Post Individual Briefing Papers (Note: This is Written Assignment # 6 described above.) 9 Bring to Class Any Other Potentially Relevant Materials for the oral briefing your group will present next week.
5/6
Problem Based Learning Briefing Sessions Assignment for this Session: 9 Participate in Group Briefing Session (Note: this is Oral Presentation Assignment A described above.)
Appendix A
PLAGIARISM MATTERS _______________________________________________________________________ NOTE: PLAGIARISM WILL RESULT IN BEING GIVEN A FAILING GRADE IN THIS COURSE. THE UNIVERSITY MAY IMPOSE OTHER NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES, AS WELL. FOR A DETAILED DISCUSSION OF WHAT CONSTITUTES PLAGIARISM, SEE THE DISCUSSION BELOW. IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT CONSTITUTES PLAGIARISM AFTER READING THE MATERIAL BELOW, SPEAK WITH THE COURSE INSTRUCTOR.
What is plagiarism? Peter Moore (Religious Studies, University of Kent) Plagiarism occurs where one person presents the words or ideas of another as his own, or where others are allowed or encouraged to form this impression. Plagiarism typically but not necessarily takes a written form. Plagiarism is a form of deception or cheating. At its worst it amounts to intellectual property theft. One who plagiarizes is living, immorally, off the intellectual earnings of others. There are, however, significantly different 'grades' of plagiarism, as identified below. Even so, while clear enough in respect of the intentions of the plagiarizer, the different grades of plagiarism are not necessarily easy to distinguish objectively, from the reader's or examiner's point of view. Faced with a case of plagiarism, an institution may not find it easy, or consider itself obliged, to differentiate between one grade of plagiarism and another when penalizing students. Three grades of plagiarism Grade A plagiarism occurs where an individual makes a premeditated and systematic attempt to pass off the work of one or more others as his own, the plagiarizer taking care to disguise the fact by suppressing all revealing references, by changing words here and there in order to deflect suspicion, and so on. Paradoxically, this worst form of plagiarism can prove the most difficult to detect. Grade B plagiarism occurs where an individual in the course of writing an essay or dissertation knowingly refrains from making clear, through the erratic or inconsistent use of recognized conventions, the normal distinctions between such elements as paraphrase, quotation, reference and commentary. This kind of plagiarism tends to be naive, clumsy and transparent, with the plagiarized elements often coming from the same sources which are in the same essay properly referenced or quoted from, all of which makes it relatively easy for the plagiarism to be identified. Whereas the Grade A plagiarizer is trying deviously to get ahead, the Grade B plagiarizer is usually just hoping naively to get by. Grade C plagiarism is plagiarism that is unintended or accidental. It occurs where through laziness, disorganization or indifference an individual neglects to acknowledge the source of an idea or quotation; or sticks too closely to the original wording when paraphrasing a source; or
innocently reproduces, as his own material, ideas or quotations which have been noted down or copied out without their sources being recorded. One variation on this form of plagiarism occurs where an individual makes excessive or exclusive use of ideas or words from one particular source, even while fully acknowledging this source in the notes and bibliography. Technically, journalism frequently involves elements of grade B or grade C plagiarism, in so far as reporters and feature writers regularly copy or summarize ideas and documents without bothering to make due acknowledgment.
Plagiarism and unpublished work Plagiarism does not cease to be plagiarism if the words or ideas plagiarized are not actually in published or permanent form; nor does the gravity of plagiarism vary with the quality of the work plagiarized. Thus copying someone else's essay is still plagiarism, and it is still plagiarism even if the essay is a bad essay. Getting someone else to write an essay which one then presents as one's own is also plagiarism. Plagiarism and permission Nor is plagiarism mitigated by the fact that a person may for some reason give you permission to reproduce or quote from his work (e.g. an essay) without acknowledgment, since the intention remains that of passing off someone else's work as your own. It is even possible to plagiarize oneself, for example by presenting as a fresh piece of work (whether or not under a new title) the whole or part of a piece of work already submitted to and marked by another teacher. Penalties for plagiarism Theoretically one might propose that different grades of plagiarism deserve different grades of penalty. Thus Grade A plagiarism should presumably be deemed serious enough (at least in the case of pieces of written work constituting examinations) to warrant instant dismissal or disqualification. Grade B plagiarism would require the disqualification or heavy penalizing of the particular piece or pieces of work in question, perhaps with the threat of a tougher penalty for any further plagiarism. Grade C plagiarism should probably remain a 'domestic' matter, with individual teachers or tutors counseling students about their studying and writing techniques. It must be remembered, however, that an educational institution is perfectly within its rights to treat plagiarism as an either/or phenomenon. The onus therefore must be on students making sure that they avoid all grades of plagiarism, by keeping a proper record of their sources for notes and quotations, and by acknowledging either within the text or in footnotes the authorship of the ideas, quotations and paraphrasing used in the essay or dissertation itself. The key factor here is acknowledgment. Acknowledge your sources and you have nothing to fear.
Copyrighted by Peter Moore 2000 This document may be freely quoted from, reproduced and distributed, in either printed or electronic format, provided due attribution of authorship is clearly visible on all copies.