Posted: September 13th, 2017

Politic and Public Policy

Paper, Order, or Assignment Requirements

 
Final Exam

The answers will be due in class by Dec. 14. Late exams will be subject to not being accepted or to being substantially penalized. The electronic copy must be sent to me by the next day at the latest.

Answer two of the questions below. One must be chosen from the odd week list and one from the even week list. For each question, write a maximum of two single spaced pages each (in 12 point Times New Roman type with 1″ margins on all sides). For each question, write a maximum of two single spaced pages in Times New Roman 12 point type (100% scale and normal spacing) with 1″ margins on all sides. Start each answer on a new page, so that I can easily separate the answer to one question from that to another. Any exams that don’t fit these formatting requirements are subject to penalties.

I will randomly pick one of your answers to grade. If the grade is a B+ or less, I will read the second answer and average the two grades.

Be sure to answer the questions completely (read them very carefully) and in the exact form they are laid out. Do not combine answers to different subsections, because this may lead you to not cover a certain point or cause me to miss the fact that you have discussed it. If you find yourself stating the same points in different parts of a question, this may well indicate that you have misunderstood the question.

Make sure to put in the section numbers as you go along so that I know precisely what part of the question you are answering. Be sure to number the pages of your answer. Begin each question on a new page (with your name included) so that I can separate them if needed.

The questions are designed to have you synthesize the readings, lectures, and class discussion. As a result, the best answers on the commentary are not good enough. If a question pertains to a certain set of readings, make sure you have read all of them carefully and completely and that you address them in your answer. Don’t just rely on notes from class, a partial reading of the material, and your personal opinions. Make sure your answer makes clear that you have done the reading. Cite the appropriate reading and page in parentheses where appropriate e.g. (Freeman, 197). However, do not use quotations. Instead paraphrase a point in your own words (showing you have mastered the essential idea) and then cite the reading and page from which the point came from e.g. (McLendon, 494). There is no need to append a bibliography.

Remember that your answers must be more complete than and somewhat different from what was written for the weekly commentaries. First, you have two pages rather than one to work with. Second, you need to bring in what was learned in class from lecture and discussion. Third, you are asked to draw on and cite a wider set of readings than you did for the commentary. When asked to do bring in additional readings beyond the ones used for a commentary, be sure to do so. I will be specifically looking for use of those additional readings. Fourth, I am limiting how much you can bring in from the best commentaries. While you can draw on them, at least part of your answer cannot be based on the best commentaries and in any case you cannot reproduce them largely word for word, even if you wrote the best answer. Even when you do draw on the best commentaries, you should draw on them for ideas but not wording. You must state those ideas in your own words.

Work with others in your discussion group to prepare your answers. However, you clearly do not want to be giving us essentially the same points (much less the same wording) as another student in class. We want group study but individual writing. You should not exchange written answers with others in class and you should not make the same points and use the same wording. It is expected that your answers are yours alone.

 

EVEN WEEKS [choose one]

 

1. Critical Theories of Power:
2. Describe the second dimension of power. Lay out Lukes’ and Gaventa’s definition of this dimension of power and describe and give examples of nondecisions and of material constraint or inducement, drawing on all the readings including Dougherty and Lindblom & Woodhouse.
3. Describe the third dimension of power. Lay out Lukes’ and Gaventa’s definition of this dimension of power and describe and give examples of the concept of ideological constraint, drawing on Dougherty and Lindblom & Woodhouse.
4. Describe two key features of the critical view on how power is distributed and explain critical theorists’ reasons for these features.
5. Critique [do one]:
6. Drawing on Dahl and Lukes, give 2 criticisms pluralists would make of the critical theory view of the nature and forms of power (as you lay it out in 1a and 1b)? (Don’t repeat the pluralist view of power. State its disagreement with the critical view. Make sure your answer is different from 1e). OR
7. Drawing on Dahl and Lukes, give 2 criticisms pluralists would make of the critical theory view of how power is distributed (as you laid it out in 1c)? (Don’t repeat the pluralist view. State its disagreement with the critical view.)

 

2. Advocacy Coalition
3. Discuss these 4 central tenets or claims of the advocacy coalition framework: policy subsystems; advocacy coalitions and their beliefs; policy learning; and external shocks (explain how they affect policymaking). Be sure to explicitly draw on all the readings, citing the relevant pages. You can use initials for the authors’ last names e.g. S & J-S [for Sabatier & Jenkins-Smith], p. 195.
4. What are 3 ways in which the ACF differs most from other theories of policy adoption? Be sure to lay these points out carefully, citing the relevant pages.
5. Lay out 3 main criticisms that can be made of the advocacy coalition framework. Make clear what tenet of ACF you are criticizing and cite the appropriate pages. On at least one of these criticisms, make sure to bring in Lukes and Gaventa on three dimensions of power.
6. Describe 2 ways in which the Mawhinney case described does fit with Advocacy Coalition Framework and 1 way in which it may not. In each case, explain your reasoning and cite the relevant pages in Mawhinney and in Sabatier and colleagues.

 

3. Policy Diffusion Theory
4. Drawing on all the readings, lay out 3 main policy diffusion models (ignore internal determinants) and explain how they differ from each other.
5. Drawing on all the readings, discuss 3 reasons they give for why states adopt innovations.
6. Lay out 3 main criticisms that can be made of the policy diffusion models. Make clear what tenet of diffusion theory you are criticizing and cite the appropriate pages.   On at least one of these criticisms, make sure to bring in Lukes and Gaventa on three dimensions of power.
7. Describe 2 ways in which the McLendon et al. analysis does fit with Berry & Berry and Sponsler readings and 1 way in which it may not. In each case, explain your reasoning and cite the relevant pages in McLendon et al. and in the Berry & Berry and Sponsler pieces.

.

ODD WEEKS [choose one]

 

4. Multiple Streams
5. Synthesizing across Kingdon and McLendon, discuss these 4 central tenets or claims of multiple streams (MS) theory: the 3 streams and their nature; factors affecting which policy alternatives get serious attention in the policy stream; policy entrepreneurs and their nature; and coupling and policy windows. Be sure to explicitly draw on all the readings, citing the relevant pages. You can use initials for the authors’ last names e.g. M [for McLendon], p. 485.
6. Drawing on Mintrom & Norman, lay out 1 key way in which their policy entrepreneurship (PE) theory resembles Kingdon’s multiple streams (MS) theory and 2 ways in which their policy entrepreneurship (PE) theory differs from Kingdon’s multiple streams (MS) theory. Be sure to lay these points out carefully, citing the relevant pages.
7. Lay out 3 main criticisms that can be made of MS/PE theory. Make clear what tenet of MS/PE theory you are criticizing and cite the appropriate pages.   On at least one of these criticisms, make sure to bring in Lukes and Gaventa on three dimensions of power..
8. Describe 2 ways in which the McLendon reading does fit with the multiple streams or policy entrepreneurship perspectives and 1 way it may not. In each case, explain your reasoning and cite the relevant pages in McLendon and in the MS/PE pieces.

.

5. Punctuated Equilibrium Theory
6. a. Lay out these 4 central tenets or claims of punctuated equilibrium theory (PET): parallel and serial processing; policy monopolies; policy images; and moving issues to new venues. Be sure to explicitly draw on all the readings, citing the relevant pages. You can use initials for the authors’ last names e.g. B & J [Baumgartner & Jones], p. 18.
7. What are 2 key way in which punctuated equilibrium theory resembles multiple streams/policy entrepreneurship (MS/PE) theory and 1 key way in which it differs? Be sure to lay these points out carefully, citing the relevant pages.
8. Lay out 3 main criticisms that can be made of punctuated equilibrium theory. On at least one of these criticisms, make sure to bring in Lukes and Gaventa on three dimensions of power.
9. Describe 2 ways in which the Wood study does fit punctuated equilibrium theory and 1 way in which it may not. In each case, explain your reasoning and cite the relevant pages in Wood and in the other PET pieces.

 

6. Application to term paper readings: Answer the three questions below. Preliminary wording:
7. Origins of NCLB: Based on the assigned readings, apply one of the four theories of policy origins (ACF, MS/Policy Entrepreneurship, punctuated equilibrium, diffusion) to explain the case.
8. Origins of teacher evaluation policy in Colorado: Same as 6a but use a different theory.
9. Implementation of charter school choice in New York City: Based on the assigned readings, examine what aspects of the implementation of charter school placement fit the top-down perspective on implementation and which aspects fit the bottom-up perspective.