First, I would like for you to look at the sample briefs provided in the course material as this will be extremely helpful. This shows you what the final product should look like, and what material goes into it. You MUST submit your brief in this format!!!
Next, you want to select a piece of legislation related to the topic area we are discussing.
Next, you will analyze your piece of legislations (i.e. policy).
Defining the problem: What problem existed that caused the need for this piece of legislation? Policies are usually created in response to something. Once you find your policy, this information should be included. What is the name of the policy? What is it supposed to do or fix? Who presented it?
Then you will Apply the MAY – CAN & SHOULD Analysis.
May –
Biblical guidelines: Is there anything in the bible related to this policy? What biblical guidelines did Jesus provide regarding the topic? If you find something, quote the text, cite it, and explain why you think it is related.
Constitutional Guidelines: What does the constitution say about this policy? Is it covered? If so, state it here. Be clear. Include the Article number and tell me what it is.
Can-
Political Feasibility: Where does it stand politically? Has it passed? Is it being decided? Do you think it would pass? Why or why not?
Financial Feasibility: How much does it cost? Does the cost make sense? It is worth it? Why or Why not?
Practical Feasibility – Considering why it was set up, do you think it is a practical way to solve the problem? If so why or why not?
Should –
Given the information your presented above, should this policy pass? How do you feel about it? If you support it, state why or why not. Support your position. You want to be detailed when presenting your case. Pretend you are at the round table and you want to support (or reject) this policy. You want to convince your fellow politicians to support you. Make it good. This section does not have to be long. It should be clear, concise, and effective. Does it pass the MAY Can Should Analysis?
MOST IMPORTANTLY! Read the course material and use it to help you analyze your policy. Using the course material is a requirement.
Below are some presentations for each facet of the May-Can-Should analysis. They are all relatively short presentations which you can review individually as needed:
Policy Briefs Instructions
For Modules/Weeks 3–7, you are expected to submit a 1 1/2–2-page paper (not including the title page, abstract, and reference page) in current APA format in which the May-Can-Should model is applied in the context of the policy focus in the assigned module/week. Be certain to emphasize a focused analysis of a particular issue chosen from the broader policy concentration for the assigned module/week. You must include citations from:
Students often struggle with keeping the analysis needed for these policy briefs to just 2 pages of content at most (not counting the title page and references), and it can be hard to see past one’s choice of wording to discover that there are indeed many ways to say the same thing with less words. Attached are “before and after” samples of the same policy brief; the first was too long and includes edits of how to shorten it, and the second shows the finished product at 2 pages. Review these before writing your first policy brief.
NOTE: the sample briefs are not perfect in every respect in terms of following the “May-Can-Should” analysis. It is mean to show you how to be more concise in communicating ideas.
Submit the appropriate assignment by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday of the assigned module/week.
PADM 550 – Policy AnalysisGraduate Rubric
Criteria | Levels of Achievement | |||||
Content
(70%) |
Advanced
92-100% |
Proficient
84-91% |
Developing
1-83% |
Not Present | Total | |
Problem ID and solution | 8 to 8.5 points:
Context of problem, issue, or challenge is succinctly described with one, and only one, piece of legislation is introduced for further discussion. Explains in detail how the bill attempts to solve root causes of the problem. Work demonstrates a detailed understanding of ideas from required sources. |
7 to 7.5 points:
Context of problem, issue, or challenge is generally described with one, and only one, piece of legislation is introduced for further discussion. Generally explains how the bill attempts to solve root causes of the problem. Work demonstrates a general understanding of ideas from required sources. |
1 to 6.5 points:
Context of problem, issue, or challenge is not clearly described with one, and only one, piece of legislation is introduced for further discussion. Does not explain how the bill attempts to solve root causes of the problem. Work demonstrates an inadequate understanding of ideas from required sources. |
0 points
Not present |
||
May:
Biblical |
7.5 to 8 points:
Thorough discussion of how inalienable rights, natural law, institutional separation of Church and State, Sin/Crime distinction and sphere sovereignty help determine if government is the appropriate sphere to address the issue, using Biblical examples. Work demonstrates a detailed understanding of ideas from required sources. |
6.5 to 7 points:
General discussion of how inalienable rights, natural law, institutional separation of Church and State, Sin/Crime distinction and sphere sovereignty help determine if government is the appropriate sphere to address the issue, using some Biblical examples. Work demonstrates a general understanding of ideas from required sources. |
1 to 6 points:
Lacks a discussion of how inalienable rights, natural law, institutional separation of Church and State, Sin/Crime distinction and sphere sovereignty help determine if government is the appropriate sphere to address the issue, using no Biblical examples. Work demonstrates an inadequate understanding of ideas from required sources. |
0 points
Not present |
||
May:
Constitutional |
7.5 to 8 points:
References the specific enumerated powers and avoids use of the vague “General Welfare” references. References relevant Supreme Court cases as needed. Work demonstrates a detailed understanding of ideas from required sources. |
6.5 to 7 points:
References the specific enumerated powers but references the vague “General Welfare” clause. Reference to relevant Supreme Court cases as needed. Work demonstrates a general understanding of ideas from required sources. |
1 to 6 points:
References the specific enumerated powers and relies solely on the “General Welfare” clause. Reference to relevant Supreme Court is not present. Work demonstrates an inadequate understanding of ideas from required sources. |
0 points
Not present |
||
Can:
Political
|
5.5 to 6 points:
Use of relevant surveys, polls, etc. Articulation of key political leaders, parties, etc. who are for and/or against the policy issue. Discussion of whether or not the bill is likely to pass the House and Senate, and be signed by the President. Work demonstrates a detailed understanding of ideas from required sources. |
4.5 to 5 points:
Articulation of key political leaders, parties, etc. who are for and/or against the policy issue is present, use of surveys, polls, etc., is not present or absence is not explained. Discussion of whether or not the bill is likely to pass the House and Senate, and be signed by the President. Work demonstrates a general understanding of ideas from required sources. |
1 to 4 points:
Articulation of key political leaders, parties, etc. who are for and/or against the policy issue is not present, use of surveys, polls, etc., is not present or absence is not explained. Discussion of whether or not the bill is likely to pass the House and Senate, and be signed by the President is not present. Work demonstrates an inadequate understanding of ideas from required sources. |
0 points
Not present |
||
Can:
Financial |
5.5 to 6 points:
Detailed discussion of budgetary constraints, impact on national debt, and costs of implementation. Work demonstrates a detailed understanding of ideas from required sources. |
4.5 to 5 points:
General discussion of budgetary constraints, impact on national debt, and costs of implementation Work demonstrates a general understanding of ideas from required sources. |
1 to 4 points:
Little analysis in the discussion of budgetary constraints, impact on national debt, and costs of implementation. Work demonstrates an inadequate understanding of ideas from required sources. |
0 points
Not present |
||
Can:
Practical |
5.5 to 6 points:
Detailed discussion of physical resources, manpower, etc. needed to implement policy as well as practical challenges associated with implementing the bill, to include timing and logistics. Detailed discussion of necessary, practical steps needed to implement policy. Work demonstrates a detailed understanding of ideas from required sources. |
4.5 to 5 points:
General discussion of physical resources, manpower, etc. needed to implement policy as well as practical challenges associated with implementing the bill, to include timing and logistics. Mentions necessary, practical steps needed to implement policy. Work demonstrates a general understanding of ideas from required sources. |
1 to 4 points:
Does not discuss physical resources, manpower, etc. needed to implement policy as well as practical challenges associated with implementing the bill, to include timing and logistics. Does not discuss necessary, practical steps needed to implement policy. Work demonstrates an inadequate understanding of ideas from required sources. |
0 points
Not present |
||
Should | 9.5 to 10 points:
Persuasive summary of the key issues supporting your decision to support or reject the legislation. Is based upon the May and Can portions of your analysis. Makes the case in light of what is going on politically and whether other political actors should support the legislation in light of competing political agendas. Work demonstrates a detailed understanding of ideas from required sources. |
8.5 to 9 points:
Articulated but not persuasive summary of the key issues supporting your decision to support or reject the legislation. Isgenerally based upon the May and Can portions of your analysis. Generally makes the case in light of what is going on politically and whether other political actors should support the legislation in light of competing political agendas. Work demonstrates a general understanding of ideas from required sources. |
1 to 8 points:
General summary of the key issues supporting your decision to support or reject the legislation. Not related to the May and Can portions of your analysis. Does not make the case in light of what is going on politically and whether other political actors should support the legislation in light of competing political agendas. Work demonstrates an inadequate understanding of ideas from required sources.
|
0 points
Not present |
||
Structure
(30%) |
Advanced
92-100% |
Proficient
84-91% |
Developing
1-83% |
Not Present | Total | |
Sources
|
9.5 to 10 points:
All required sources fromModules/Weeks 1–2 (must include the “Biblical Principles of Government” article), Scripture, and the required readings and presentations from the assigned module/week are cited. |
8.5 to 9 points:
Most of the required sources fromModules/Weeks 1–2 (must include the “Biblical Principles of Government” article), Scripture, and the required readings and presentations from the assigned module/week are cited. |
1 to 8 points:
Few of the required sources fromModules/Weeks 1–2 (must include the “Biblical Principles of Government” article), Scripture, and the required readings and presentations from the assigned module/week are cited. |
0 points
Not present |
||
APA format (citations and references)
|
7 to 7.5 points:
Sources are cited and listed in current APA format. |
6 to 6.5 points:
Sources are generally cited and listed in current APA format. |
1 to 5.5 points:
Numerous deficiencies with respect to proper APA. |
0 points
Not present |
||
Page Length
|
4.5 to 5 points:
Length no less than 1.5 pages; not including title and reference pages. |
3.5 to 4 points:
Length less than 1.5 pages but more than 1; not including title and reference pages |
1 to 3 points:
Length less than 1 page. |
0 points
Not present |
||
Professor Comments: | Total: | /75 |