Analysis paper

10-12 page policy analysis paper

1-2 pages

1-2 pages

1-2 pages

1-2 pages

1-2 pages

1-2 pages

Capstone Paper Introduction	Students will select a specific problem or policy discussed in the Alexander book and discuss the ramifications of the problem/policy within the criminal justice system. The paper should take the form of a problem/policy analysis and should indicate whether the problem is theoretical or practical (applied). Furthermore, students should include, at minimum, answers to the problem including, but not limited to, who, what, when, where, why, and how the problem originated within the criminal justice system as well as how it continues to be a problem.							1-2 pages Save Time On Research and Writing Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper. Get My Paper
Literature Review	Students are expected to read and review historical and current research on their specific problem; this includes prior studies on the problem selected.	3-4 pages
Criminological Theory	Students should review criminological theory and ascertain how the problem/policy is rooted in a particular theory. Students should consult the text from Nature and Causes of Crime/Criminological Theory as a starting place.
Cases	Students should review case law to determine the extent to which the problem/policy has been reviewed by the courts and provide a thorough background of the case(s) and the judicial opinion. If the problem/policy has not yet been reviewed by the courts, students should research case precedents that are closely aligned to the problem.
Position	Students must clearly articulate their opinion on the problem/policy and how it should be addressed. A plan of action to support your position is expected.
Alternative Positions	Provide a critique of logical alternatives to dealing with the problem.
Critical Reflection	Using critical thinking and reflection skills, explain how the problem/policy, your position (and alternatives) affect police, courts, and corrections.
Conclusion	Finally, provide a final description of the problem, theory, literature review, position and alternative positions.
References	A detailed References section including a minimum of 15 resources is required. Resources may include professional trade journals, books, peer reviewed publications, and government publications. Wikipedia is not permitted. Internet resources will be limited to EBSCO, NCJRS, BJA, BJS, DOJ, OJJDP, and FirstGov. APA format must be used. Papers with incorrect APA format will be returned with no grade for revision.

1

INSTRUCTIONS FOR WRITING

POLICY POSITION PAPERS

A Guide for the

Fledgling Analyst

Nolan J. Argyle
Valdosta State University

 1991

All Rights Reserved

2

INSTRUCTIONS FOR WRITING POLICY
POSITION PAPERS

A policy position paper should structure a problem facing a decision-maker or decision-makers. It should
present the basic, relevant information known about the problem, and should conclude with a recommendation. A
position paper should be based upon a clear understanding of the goals decision-makers want to attain–something
that is easier said than done.
Any policy problem, from a decision to use or not use nuclear weapons in a regional conflict to the type of
solid waste disposal plan to adopt in Hahira, Ga. may be addresses in a policy position paper. The nature of the
problem to be addressed and the needs of the decision maker(s) should determine the format of the position paper.
Variations of position papers are staff reports, option papers, etc.; each prepared with the needs of the decision-
maker in mind. No matter what the name of the paper, each should contain certain elements. The basic format of a
position paper is presented below.

Position Paper Format

I. Cover Material
A. Letter of Transmittal
B. Executive Summary

II. Problem History
A. Background of the Problem
B. Current Status of the Problem
C. Importance of the Problem

III. Problem Definition
A. Statement of the Problem
B. Statement of Methodology Used in Analysis
C. Identification of Actors Involved
D. Impact of the Problem

IV. Alternative Solutions/Policies
A. Listing of Alternatives Considered
B. Comparison of Alternatives
C. Constraints, Including Political

V. Recommendations
A. Description of Policy Recommendation(s)
B. Rationale for Recommendations
C. Plan for Implementation
D. Provisions for Monitoring/Evaluation

VI. End Material
A. References
B. Appendices

Each element of a policy position paper may be evaluated through a series of questions. The author should
always ask “is it”–is it clear, is it thorough, etc. Some of the key questions that should be asked for each element
are indicated below.

3

Position Paper Checklist

I. Cover Material
A. Letter of Transmittal

Is the letter addressed to all the relevant decision makers? Does it indicate who is to take action, and
when? Does it list all the attached materials?

B. Executive Summary

Does the executive summary describe all the elements of the position paper? Does it describe those
elements in a way that will be understood by all it is addressed to? (Do not assume that everyone knows what an
AWACS is–avoid jargon as much as possible.) Is the summary concise? Is (are) your recommendation(s) clearly
spelled out?

II. Problem History
A. Background of the Problem

Is the problem adequately explained in terms of where it came from and what led to the problem to place it
in context for the decision maker? Are prior efforts to resolve the problem listed and evaluated? Is the significance
of the problem pointed out?

B. Current Status of the Problem

This element relies heavily upon the proper completion of element II A. If that element has been properly
developed, you should now be asking the following types of questions. Is the current status of the problem clearly
indicated? Have the people currently dealing with the problem–and those that should be currently dealing with the
problem–been properly identified?

C. Importance of the Problem

What will happen if the problem is left alone? Why is it important for policy makers to consider the
problem?

III. Problem Definition
A. Statement of the Problem

Is the problem clearly defined, using relevant data? (For example, if the problem is the inability of a
university to play competitive football because of the number of players ruled ineligible under Proposition 48, have
you stated the number of players involved?) Are the cultural or political aspects of the problem included in the
definition?

B. Statement of Methodology Used in Analysis

Are the methodologies used in the analysis clearly identified, along with the rational for selecting those?
(For example: “Input-output analysis was utilized to account for the resources that would be required for a given
alternative.”)

C. Identification of Actors Involved

Are the major stakeholders involved in the problem clearly identified, along with their values and
priorities? Are potential players identified, and their possible impact included in the analysis?

4

D. Impact of the Problem

Is the influence of the problem on current, related policy areas explained? Are the potential consequences
of the problem developed?

IV. Alternative Solutions/Policies

A. Listing of the Alternatives Considered

Is the list of alternatives complete? Is there an explanation as to why some alternatives were chosen for
further analysis while others were not?

B. Comparison of Alternatives

Are possible alternatives compared in terms of their benefits and costs? Are spillover effects identified and
factored into the analysis? Are qualitative elements included with quantitative elements?

C. Constraints, Including Political

Are all relevant constraints in terms of technical (state-of-the-art, cost, etc.) taken into account? Has
political feasibility and impact been considered?

V. Recommendations
A. Description of Policy Recommendation(s)

Are all relevant criteria for selecting among alternatives identified? Is the preferred alternative presented
clearly?

B. Rationale for Recommendation(s)

Is adequate justification provided for the selection being made? Does that justification include political, as
well as technical aspects?

C. Plan for Implementation

Are responsibility centers identified? Is the implementation strategy clearly presented? (A Plan Activity
Diagram [PAD] or something similar may be useful here.)

D. Provisions for Monitoring/Evaluation

Does the implementation plan include provisions for monitoring program implementation and for process
and impact evaluation? Are unintended consequences provided for?

VI. End Material

A. References

References in a position paper should normally be brief, using the author-date (APA) format (for example:
Argyle, 1986, p. 12). A bibliography would normally include only those items actually cited in the text.

B. Appendices

Is relevant supporting material presented in a clear manner? Is the source of all material identified?

Name: Title:

CAPSTONE PAPER GRADING RUBRIC (100 POINTS)

FAILING UNACCEPTABLE ACCEPTABLE GOOD EXCEPTIONAL POINTS

1-F 2- D 3-C 4-B 5-A

Introduction Problem selected is not

well-defined– too narrow or

too broad

Problem area is vague or

confusing

Problem area is clearly

identified

Identified problem is

unique; exceeds minimum

level

Identified problem is complex;

original and multi-dimensional

Organization Fails to arrange paper

accordingly and does not

follow

format

Unclear, confusing- paper

does not provide direction

or follow suggested

format

Follows format and

provides description of

problem

Follows format, provides

description of problem,

presents information in an

understandable easy to

follow format

Organizational skills are excellent –

follows format, good chronology of

problem, superior information

presentation and documentation

within paper

Literature

Review

Fails to provide pertinent

information on problem

Literature review defines

problem yet lacks

supportive information on

problem

Literature review provides

basic background and

description of problem

Literature review provides

good depth and breadth

description of problem

Literature review provides excellent

breadth and depth of explanation of

problem.

Theory Fails to apply and explain

the problem

Improper theory

selection/application –

lacks depth

Acceptable standard of

theory

application

Theory selection based

upon sound reasoning –

Theory application goes

beyond minimum – good

Selection of theory shows excellent

ability to apply principles – Theory

application demonstrates depth and

originality

Position Fails to support position in

any manner through the use

of credible research and

uses inappropriate court

case.

Lacks supportive research

– personal opinions

interjected in paper along

with research results and

an unlinked

court case.

Position meets acceptable

level of competence- uses

research to support

position and appropriate

court case.

Position is supported by

good research materials,

extremely relevant court

case and student

explanation of materials.

Position has excellent depth and

quality – uses outstanding reasoning

and informs beyond research and

provides in depth explanation of

relevancy of court case.

Alternative

Positions

Alternative viewpoints are

non-existent or fail to

explain problem

Alternative viewpoints are

unclear or lack acceptable

application
Alternative viewpoints are

acceptable–clearly

explains other

perspectives

Alternative viewpoints are

carefully developed based

on research and

considerate thought

process

Multiple alternative viewpoints are

offered. Viewpoints are carefully

developed based on research, critical

thinking and reflective thought

process.

Critical

Reflection

Ffail to explain overall

content of paper and no

reflection is offered.

Critical reflection and

conclusions are unclear –

lack basis in reasoning and

fail to illuminate key

concepts of paper, while

reflection is minimal.

Acceptable – detailed

conclusions reached based

upon research, reasoning

and critical thinking

through informed

reflection.

Conclusions based upon

sound research and

reasoning while

complementing key facets

of paper through critical

thinking and reflection.

Depth and quality of conclusions

clearly and cogently provide a sound

factual basis for understanding paper

while providing a superior critical

thinking basis for reflection on

problem.

Grammar

Mechanics

Grammar, spelling and

punctuation fails to reflect

quality necessary for degree

seeking BS/BA student-

Student fails

Grammar, spelling and

punctuation is poor, 5-7

mistakes

Grammar, spelling and

punctuation acceptable, 3-

4 mistakes

Grammar, spelling and

punctuation good – 1-2

mistakes

Grammar, spelling and punctuation

exceptional – no mistakes

References Fails to follow APA format

in text and References

section

APA format has more than

5 mistakes

APA format has 3-4

Mistakes

APA format has 1-2

mistakes

Excellent APA format- mistake free

TOTAL

TOTAL X

5.5