Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
What it Entails Submission 2
THREE SECTIONS • Introduction to social problem • Background/history/ current policy • In-depth presentation of the sides
Section I Introduction
INTRODUCTION(approximately 3-4 pages) • Introduction • Social problem • Significance • Statistics • Targets • Definitions (as needed) • Brief overview of the controversy • Conclude with normative question
Significance of the Social Problem • The social problem that underlies your controversy (the broad macro problem) • Statistics for the problem, describing the scope • Demonstrate that this is a problem • Targets- who is hurt by the social problem • Why it is important that the problem is solved Watch out for bias
Brief Overview of the Controversy • Identify the actors involved (parties to the controversy) • Identify the issues that shape the debate • Identify the values central to each side
Definitions • The Current controversial policy • Important words in topic sentence (e.g. DOMA) • Relevant law(s), guidelines, etc.
The Solution • Conclude the introduction with your normative question • The normative question that is also the title of your paper
INTRODUCTION (Sec 1) • After Reading your introduction, the reader should: • Understand why this is an important controversy • Understand who is affected by this problem • Understand why this problem needs to be solved • Understand the major actors and what they want • Understand the controversial solution to solve the problem
Your introduction should scare the reader by convincing him/her that the fate of the world depends on solving this problem
Section 2 Background and History
BACKGROUND/HISTORY(Approximately 5 pages) • Goal: historical context to understand current controversy • Starting place: it should be far back enough to describe the modern dilemma • Ending point: Most recent events
Finish With The Current Policy • What is it (be specific) • How does it work • What are the problems
For Each Key Event • Why was it controversial • Which side passed it • Who opposed it
Sources • Vary your Sources • Do not simply cut and paste from CQ Researcher • Reliance on a single source is transcribing!
Things to avoid • Going Back too far in time • Wikipedia (of course) • Missing out on important events
Avoid Rabbit Holes • Stick to the relevant historical events • Avoid getting off-track • Just because you find it interesting doesn’t mean it is important
BACKGROUND/HISTORY • At the End of this section, the reader should: • Know the policy attempts at solving the social policy • Know the deficiencies with the current policy • Know the current policy: As of Spring 2013, what is the current policy.
Section 3 Presentation of Each Side
What it Contains (4-5 Pages for Each Side) • Stakeholders • Arguments • Issues • Plans
Who are the Stakeholders? • Identify the General Stakeholders • Identify the Specific Stakeholders • Tell me why the group matters • Tell me what they value • Conclude by identifying their major arguments on the solution
Issues and Arguments. • Introduce the issues in a paragraph listing the issues • You must have 3 for each side
For Each Issue • Identify the Issue • Provide the argument why they want it • Provide the evidence to support their argument • Plans for solving the problem
At the End of this Section • The Reader will know • The Parties to the Controversy • The issues surrounding the controversial solution • The Arguments for and against the controversial solution • The evidence supporting each argument • How each side is trying to enact the solution
MECHANICS • Approximately 14-16 pages long (Minimum of 12) • Works Cited • Correct MLA form throughout • Style • In accordance with Capstone guidelines • Polished, proofed • DUE: In Class 3/8/2013
The Death of Socrates • He is dead, do not use his method • Do not ask a question, and then answer it. • Just write the answer
For Submission 2 • Present arguments that make sense • Present arguments from actors that are politically relevant • Present arguments that are directly related to the issues.
For Submission 2 • Keep writing 1 page a day or finding 1 good source a day • Spend at least 1 hour a day in a place where you are most comfortable for studying • Don’t
Identifying Arguments • What Cannot be argued • Discrete Facts without interpretation- Obama won the 2008 election • Impossibilities (who would win the bear or the lion) • Preferences (Mr. Pibb is better than Dr. Pepper) • Beliefs beyond Human experience (invoking God)
Analyzing Arguments and Evidence • Valid arguments have: • An Argument (what the proponent/opponent wants) • A well justified reason and Evidence (why they want it) • Accurate and logical • A Policy conclusion • The policy based on this conclusion
An example of an Argument • Argument: We need to insure the 30+ Million Americans do not have health care • Reason: Persons without health care drive up the cost of insurance for all Americans • Evidence- Without insurance, it will cost us 1 trillion dollars • Conclusion: We should implement a single-payer plan proposed by Congress
How to Analyze the Argument • Is the argument non-normative? • Does the argument present any supporting data? • What is the source of the data? Is it trustworthy?
What Qualifies as evidence • Research studies and Surveys • Method • Phone, in person, mail • Sample size • Larger is better if collected properly • Sponsor • Many research studies are very dated
What qualifies as Evidence • Case Studies • An application of the policy solution to a smaller group • State level • Municipal. • Be Careful • May not be generalizable • Apples to oranges • Remember that the United States is unique
What Qualifies as Evidence • Expert Testimony • http://www.kvue.com/news/politics/Professor-Hutchison-campaign-on-death-watch-after-poll-83486467.html • Can be misleading • Not every expert is really an expert • Precedents • Previous attempts at policy • Examine the similarities and dissimilarities • E.g. 1994 vs. 2010 Health Care Bill
The Lowest Form • “Remember when is the lowest form of conversation” • Personal experience is the weakest form of evidence • Stories • Hypothetical Examples
Interest Groups as Stakeholders What is Important What is not Pure Grassroots Unconventional tactics Everything that is not on the left hand side. • Money • www.opensecrets.org • Size/Cohesiveness • Access
When Looking at Politicians Who Matters Who Does Not Old elected officials (George W. Bush) Candidates and parties who do not have a chance Lower-level bureaucrats • Must be elected, or well known candidates • The more senior the better • The more members of their party in the legislature, the better
Fallacies • A way of making a persuasive argument, via a mistake in reasoning • Faulty Logic
Ecological Fallacy • Using Aggregate Data to infer individual opinions. (taking means or grouped data and using it to explain the actions of individuals) • Also called the fallacy of division- if the whole possesses a quality, but the parts might not
An Example • On Mr. Burns Wanting to bowl: "Call this an unfair generalization if you must, but old people are no good at everything." Moe the Bartender from the Simpsons
Exception Fallacy • Taking individual behavior and applying to a group. • Stereotyping • Applying the preferences of one actor to a class of political actors • Using one extreme “story” to justify macro-level policy