A brief summary statement (no more than 250 words) presenting the primary argument being advanced in your assigned reading. This statement needs to be succinct, i.e., to the point. Long wandering paragraphs, filled with long wandering sentences, do not accomplish this goal. Your aim here is to inform your reader of what this reading was designed to “say” in five or fewer sentences.
Three to five major bullet points being made by the author(s) of the reading. Analyze each major point, informing your audience of what it means and how it fits into the larger perspective advanced by the reading. Provide examples of policy issues that reflect the point being made, if possible, by connecting each point to your own seminar research topic. (It may help you make your point if you divide the major bullet points into several secondary bullet points).
Assess the reading from within its larger policy analysis context. Where does it fit in the class material covered to date? If the reading is a chapter from Deborah Stone’s book, how do her arguments relate to American political culture or to the policy model presented by James Anderson or to any other seminar material covered thus far. If you are reporting on an outside reading, analyze how it relates to American political cultural norms, Deborah Stone’s distinctions between the market and the polis, Anderson’s policy model, or to any other seminar material covered thus far.
A critique reviewing how the reading fits in with the overall effort of public policy analysis. In other words, what value does this reading have for analysts seeking to understand public policy matters in general. Like the summary statement, this critique should be succinct and it should include several external source references who either address the author’s arguments directly or who at least have alternative perspectives on the topic addressed in the reading.
Sources:
https://kupdf.net/download/01vs3policyparadoxtheartofpoliticaldecisionmaking3rdedition_59769c12dc0d608137043370_pdf
