Transcript should - Cornell College

Policy Paper Success
Chapter #1
Formulate a Research Question &
Prepare a Bibliography
Topic v. Research Question
 Topics
 Endangered species
 Environmental
protection
 National Park Policy
 Yellowstone
National Park
 Federal wolf
management
 Ranchers’ rights
 Threats to livestock
 Research Question
 Whether the
Yellowstone wolves
should be protected
by the Endangered
Species Act when
they leave the Park.
Research Questions Are Complete
Sentences not Merely Labels
 Should the Yellowstone Wolves be protected by the
Endangered Species Act when they leave the park?
 Should American combat forces be withdrawn from
Iraq?
 Should the ANWR be open to oil and gas
development?
 Should the president comply with Congressional
subpoenas for all documents related to firing the 8 US
attorneys?
 Should acceptable progress in the No Child Left
Behind law be measured by the percentage of
students making one year’s academic progress in one
year rather by the percentage who are proficient at
specific grade levels?
A Research Question Is Way Better
than a Topic
 A research question focuses the mind.
 A research question tends to assure
conceptual simplicity.
 A research question tells you what
information is relevant and what is not.
 If you can state the research question, you
should be able to articulate an answer, and
 The answer you reach, as a result of your
research, is your policy proposal.
The Answer You Reach, as a Result of Your
Research, Is Your Policy Proposal
 The Yellowstone Wolves should be protected by the
Endangered Species Act when they leave the park.
 American combat forces should not be withdrawn
from Iraq.
 ANWR should be opened to oil and gas development.
 The president should not comply with Congressional
subpoenas for all documents related to firing the 8 US
attorneys.
 Acceptable progress in the No Child Left Behind law
should be measured by the percentage of students
making one year’s academic progress in one year
rather by the percentage who are proficient at specific
grade levels.
Prepare a Bibliography
 Use an approved style:




APSA
APA
Chicago / Turabian
MLA
 Consult your Course Syllabus for links
to on-line style guides.
Chapter #2
Policy Proposal & Contentions
Example & Review
Random Good Example: What & Why
WHAT = Policy Proposal (Recommendation):
• The Federal Death Penalty Abolition Act of 2005 should be
reintroduced and passed in Congress.
WHY = Contentions and Sub-contentions (Supporting Arguments):
• The federal government has constitutional authority to abolish the
death penalty.
• Many groups are opposed to capital punishment.
– Capital punishment has been banned in other countries.
– There is an alternative in life imprisonment.
– Support for the death penalty has dropped in recent years.
• Capital punishment is inefficient and unnecessary
• Capital punishment does not deter criminals or reduce crime.
• Capital punishment is cruel
– Many states have outdated machinery.
• Many innocents have been put to death, and many more may be.
– Capital punishment is far more frequent in some states than in others.
– Not all states require DNA evidence.
Keep policy proposals conceptually simple and specific.
Bad
•Congress should provide greater incentives for states to preserve lands
from development.
•Welfare reform should emphasize child care.
•Campaign spending should be restricted.
•An educational initiative should be conducted.
Good
•Congress should prohibit any taxation by states of Indian casinos on
reservation lands.
•Congress should abolish the death penalty for federal crimes.
•The United States should pay the back dues it owes the United Nations.
Keep your language direct and concise.
Bad
• Congress should enact legislation to make it a crime
against federal law to discriminate on account of race in who
you rent hotel and motel rooms to.
Good
•Congress should prohibit racial discrimination in the rental
of hotel and motel rooms.
Make sure your contentions are contentions.
•Is each a complete sentence?
•Does each assert that something is true?
•Does the truth asserted strengthen the case for your policy
recommendation?
Good
•The plan would reduce the rate of illegitimate births.
•The policy would be easily enforced.
•My policy is consistent with the First Amendment.
•The polar bears will all die anyway.
•There is no record of wolves eating children in the United States.
•43% of the benefits will go to the wealthiest 1% of the population.
•Opponents are wrong to argue that the benefits of Head Start can't be
measured past second grade.
•Convert your list of contentions into a hierarchical outline.
•Group your contentions into logical categories. For example:
•economic efficiency — the economic benefits of my policy outweigh the
economic costs;
•social efficiency — the social benefits of my policy outweigh the social
costs;
•equity or justice — my policy treats people equally; my policy gives
people what they've got coming; my policy is fair to all concerned;
•legality — my policy is consistent with the constitution and laws of the
United States;
•political culture — my policy is consistent with values which are widely
shared in the United States;
•my critics – their arguments are incorrect, unpersuasive, or outweighed
by my own.
• Convert your list of contentions into a hierarchical outline.
• Group your contentions into logical categories.
• Among the logical categories that should be considered in an
environmental policy paper are the five “E”s:
• Ecology/environment
• Economy/efficiency
• Equity/equality
• Ethics
• [A]esthetics
Remember. . .
A contention is a statement of fact for or against a proposal. Your
contentions are statements of fact for (on behalf of) your policy
recommendation.
Since a sentence is the smallest grammatical unit that is capable of
making a statement, it follows that your contentions must be
sentences.
Without supporting evidence your contention is just an
assertion.
• The passion with which you believe something to be true is
not evidence for its truth.
• Show me the evidence, and document the source!
Chapter #3
Kinds of Evidence:
Empirical & Expert
Recommendation / Contention / Evidence
• RECOMMENDATION = “The Eastern Gray Wolf should remain
on the Endangered Species List.”
– CONTENTION supporting the recommendation =
“Population size is critical to survival.”
• EVIDENCE supporting the contention = Empirical
study: a nice scientific experiment or analysis that
makes the point beyond question
• EVIDENCE supporting the contention = Expert
testimony: the opinion of someone whose opinion ought
to carry weight
Make Evidence Work for You
• Demonstrate Its Connection to Your
Contention.
• Demonstrate Its Credibility.
– How you do it depends to a degree on
whether you are using empirical studies
or expert testimony.
– Demonstration of credibility is doubly
important with respect to expert
testimony because there are likely to be
differences of opinion among experts.
Empirical Study: a primary source
• Contention: “Population size is critical to
survival.”
• Evidence from an empirical study: “The
small and isolated population of wolves on
Isle Royale suffers from diseases associated
with inbreeding.”
– How is this particular evidence relevant to your
contention? [on point, but only one case]
– What gives this source credibility?
•
•
•
•
Who are the researchers?
What evidence was collected?
How was it analyzed?
Explaining these things gives your argument credibility.
Expert Testimony: a secondary source
• Contention: “Population size is critical to
survival.”
• Evidence from expert testimony: “A population
of 50 or more is adequate for the short term only,
and one of 500 is needed to keep the species
alive and healthy into the distant future.”
– How is this particular evidence relevant to your
contention? [on point and not case specific]
– What gives this source credibility?
• The expertise of the “expert.”
Expert Testimony
• “A population of 50 or more is
adequate for the short term only,
and one of 500 is needed to keep
the species alive and healthy into
the distant future.” – E. O. Wilson
• Is this a credible expert?
Expert Testimony
• “A population of 50 or more is adequate for the short
term only, and one of 500 is needed to keep the
species alive and healthy into the distant future.” – E.
O. Wilson
• Ph.D. in biology from Harvard (1955)
• Author (with R.H. MacArthur), The Theory of Island
Biogeography, (1967), which makes him a world-class
expert on this very subject.
• Honorary Curator in Entomology of the Museum of
Comparative Zoology and Pellegrino University Research
Professor Emeritus, Department of Organismic and
Evolutionary Biology at Harvard.
• Internationally regarded as the “dean of biodiversity.”
• Author of two Pulitzer Prize winning books.
Having difficulty? Consult your instructor.