WHAT ARE POLICY-ANALYSIS PROBLEMS?
Pick up any newspaper, and the pages will be filed with local, regional, national, and international policy-analysis problems. Local govern- ments and agencies address such problems as:
•
How do we provide affordable housing for people living near the poverty line?•
Should the city build a new high school and, if so, where, and with what facilities?•
How do we make up for lagging sales tax revenues in order to fund existing programs?•
Should we regulate housing permits and construction quality more closely?Most problems solved by state governments and agencies address policy issues, such as:
•
How do we stimulate greater job growth?•
How do we entice more companies to establish facilities in our state?•
How do we maintain or highways and crumbling bridges?•
What environmental standards should be imposed on manufactur- ing companies?•
Should we establish term limits for state legislators?•
What graduation requirements should be imposed on state high schools?121
•
How do we reduce the incidence of real-estate investment scams in our state?•
Do we provide sufficient services to children with emotional and behavioral difficulties?•
How do we address increasing levels of school violence?•
How do we address gaps in Medicare funding?Most problems solved by national governments and agencies constantly address policy issues, such as:
•
How should we deal with emerging rogue nations such as North Korea?•
How do we provide affordable heath care to the uninsured?•
How do we prepare for a flu pandemic?•
How do we pay for crumbling infrastructure in our country?•
Should we build a new high-speed train system?•
What is the fairest taxation policy?•
How do we stimulate the economy without creating high levels of inflation?Policy problems tend to be complex, ill-structured decision-making problems that normally are not time pressured. What makes policy problems so complex and ill structured? Policy problems usually involve a host of city planners, policy analysts, community managers, local, state, and national legislators, citizens, agency leaders, and many other stakeholders, most of whom assume fundamentally different positions that are supported by very different values and beliefs. So these different stakeholders are usually seeking different outcomes that cannot be equated. For example, a small western mountain town is currently try- ing to decide to limit permits to hunt elk in the area. The state Depart- ment of Wildlife is tasked with determining the policy, so they are soliciting information from interested parties. Their obvious role is to protect wildlife. However, other parties, such as the local cattle-breeders association, want elk herds thinned out because the elk are competing with the ranchers for grazing opportunities. The local retailers want no restrictions so more hunters will come into the community in the fall to hunt and spend money while in the community. The conservationists seek to protect the elk herds, because it is the right thing to do. And then there is the weather. The previous season, record cold temperatures and snowfall depleted a significant number of the elk herd. These various groups, like most groups, seek to further their own interests. However, there is no way to equate those interests. Although the bulk of policy problems have economic implications, there usually exist political, 122 • Problem-Specific Design Models
social, environmental, psychological, emotional, historical, and other important perspectives that are relevant to policy problems.
HOW ARE POLICY PROBLEMS SOLVED?
Numerous models for solving policy problems have been published.
These various models are conceptually coherent, differing somewhat in terms of specific steps. Among the better known models, Patton and Sawicki (1986) claim that solving policy problems requires the following six steps:
1. Verify, define, and detail the problem. This process involves clarifying what different parties regard as the nature of the prob- lem, because the objectives of different parties often vary considerably.
2. Establish evaluation criteria. Just as objectives vary, the criteria for evaluating the success of any solution will also vary. So, in order to compare alternatives, relevant evaluation criteria must be established. Criteria may include cost, effectiveness, accept- able risk, efficiency, equity, administrative ease, legality, and pol- itical acceptability. Needless to say, different parties will favor different criteria as they benefit more from some criteria than others.
3. Identify alternative policies. Because of the multiple objectives established in the first step, generating alternative policies can be tricky. However, the possible solutions will likely emerge from those objectives. After some solutions have been identified, com- bining or compromising some solutions may generate the best solution.
4. Evaluate alternative policies. In order to evaluate different pol- icies, it is necessary to evaluate how each possible alternative benefits the criteria previously established. Additional data may be needed in order to analyze those benefits, such as additional economic benefits, social implications, and so on. It is necessary to analyze each alternative using a variety of quantitative and qualitative means.
5. Display and distinguish among alternative policies. The results of the previous step explain the degree to which criteria are met in each of the alternatives. This may require the use of decision matrices or the construction of scenarios described in Chapter 3. Scenario construction will be explained later in this chapter.
Policy-Analysis Problems • 123
6. Monitoring the implemented policy. Once a policy has been implemented, it is important to monitor the effects of that policy and to determine the impact of the policy. Based on this evalu- ation, the policy may need to be rejected, modified, or at least reconsidered.
Another commonly referenced process for solving policy problems was provided by Bardach (2000):
1. Define the problem. Be clear about the nature of the problem (e.g., breakdown of system, low living standards, discrimination against minorities, failure of government to function). Don’t define the problem as a solution (e.g., new schools are being built too slowly).
2. Assemble evidence. In order to assess the nature and extent of the problem you are trying to define, you may want to assess policies that others have used.
3. Construct the alternatives. The alternatives may be modeled (described later in this chapter and also in Chapter 13), focusing on the causal relationships (see Chapter 17) and the incentives and constraints at work in the problem context.
4. Select and apply criteria. Apply evaluative criteria to alternative solutions (e.g., efficiency, equality, fairness, freedom, community needs, legality, acceptability).
5. Project the outcomes. Make predictions about the possible out- comes by constructing scenarios (described in Chapter 3 and later in this chapter).
6. Confront the trade-offs. Use a decision matrix to compare and contrast alternatives (see Chapter 3 for a description of decision matrices).
7. Make the decision.
8. Tell your story. Communicate your decisions and the rationale for the decision that you made.
Numerous other models of policy analysis have been published and applied in a variety of situations. All of those models follow steps similar to the two examples just presented. Policy-problem-solving models all appear to be phase models that describe a series of steps or phases that are applied to all policy problems in much the same way.
Unlike strategic performance problems (see Chapter 5) where decisions are made under time pressure involving possible life-and- death decisions, policy problems are usually solved in without such time pressures. That is, policy decisions often stretch out for weeks, 124 • Problem-Specific Design Models
months, or even years. Why? Despite a lack of psychological research and theories on policy analysis, I hope to uncover some of the cognitive processes that underlie those phases and suggest a variety of cases and processes that constitute effective policy-problem-solving learning environments.
Policy problems ultimately require decisions to be made about which policy will be implemented or what the components of an accept- able policy will be. In nearly every policy problem, there are multiple voices and perspectives related to the policy decision. Therefore, most policy problems must be socially negotiated and co-constructed based on the inputs from numerous people. There rarely, if ever, is a single perspective that represents the best solution to any policy problem.
Because of the stridence of opinions that are considered, compromise is often difficult. The decisions that accommodate the most perspectives will often result in the most desirable actions. Because of the social nature of the problem-solving process, policy problems can be quite difficult to represent and to solve.
Learning to solve policy problems requires that learners learn to accommodate the ambiguity implicit in any uncertain solution. Unfor- tunately, tolerance for ambiguity is low among teachers and learners.
Why? It has to do with their epistemic beliefs (see also Chapter 1), that is, what we believe that knowledge, truth, and learning means. Research in epistemological beliefs shows that people develop their beliefs from simple, black-and-white thinking, through an exploration of multiple perspectives, to complex, relativistic thinking (Perry, 1970). The epi- stemological foundation for most education is what Baxter-Magolda (1987) calls absolute knowing, where individuals believe that knowledge and truth are certain and should be obtained from authorities. Solving policy problems requires transitional knowing (knowledge is partially certain and requires understanding using logic, debate, research), independent knowing (knowledge is uncertain and requires inde- pendent thinking and open-mindedness), and contextual knowing (knowledge is based on evidence in context). Because learners are most commonly absolute thinkers, they will find policy problems very challenging, because there is no correct answer. However, if learners never face ill-structured, policy problems, they will probably never develop independent or contextual thinking skills. So exposure to the ambiguity implicit in policy problems represents a productive, if difficult, learning experience.
Policy-Analysis Problems • 125
WHAT ARE THE COMPONENTS OF A POLICY-PROBLEM LEARNING ENVIRONMENT?
Because policy-analysis problems are more ill structured and context dependent than other kinds of well-structured problems, it is necessary to develop a more authentic and situated task environment (Voss & Post, 1988). Policy-analysis thinking, to a substantial degree, is determined by the context in which it occurs, so it is important to understand the social, political, and organizational context surrounding the problem.
Therefore, when designing policy-analysis learning environments, an analysis of the context in which that policy problem emerges needs to be conducted. In what context does this policy analysis occur? Is it familial, local, regional, national, or international? Who are the stake- holders? What are their positions? What principles, themes, or theories do those positions represent? What are the political, organizational, social, economic, and historical constraints imposed by the context?
All of the important information will need to be represented in the establishing story and supported in the cases as alternative perspectives, both described later.
Figure 6.1 illustrates my model for designing policy-analysis learning environments. There is little if any psychological research on how policy analysis is best conducted, so my model is based on my analysis and some speculation. I next describe each of the components that such an environment may include.
HOW DO WE REPRESENT POLICY PROBLEMS?
Case-analysis problems are usually represented by stories (see Chapter 12 for a detailed rationale for using stories). Why? Stories are better understood, better remembered, and more empathic than didactic rep- resentations of problems. The following excerpt is taken from a policy- analysis learning environment that we developed on the sociology of welfare. This particular story introduces the problem in the welfare cycle (seeking assistance, support, welfare to work). The problem has to do with how to help people through the welfare-to-work cycle. Another major goal of the environment was to invoke empathic responses from culturally isolated students at a large state university.
Tuesday, February 2, 1999
My name’s Tiffany. I’m on my way to Lewistown with my daughter, Stephanie. Stephanie’s almost five now. I had her when I was eight- een. My home and friends are in Detroit. I can’t stay there no more.
126 • Problem-Specific Design Models
I got involved with a gang there, selling drugs and dealin’. It took me five years to realize that I didn’t want to live like that no more. I was stealin’ and doing things I never thought I would. I love my little girl.
I realized I would be harmin’ her if I stayed with them.
When you’ve done and seen what I have, there’s no point in wanting “out” unless you’re prepared to do it. So I’m leaving, with no cash, no help from no one. Just Steph and me. Yeah, this
Figure 6.1 Model for case/system analysis problem-solving environment.
Policy-Analysis Problems • 127
has been my “Happy Christmas.” I’m lookin’ for my natural mother.
I know she lived in Lewiston, Pennsylvania, when I was born.
Its a long shot, though. I have an address for her for 1992. I ain’t never met her. She don’t know I’m comin’. I have nowhere else to go—just can’t stay in Detroit: no way. I’m near eight months knocked up. I gotta get help, right away when I get there, for the sake of my babies.
Wednesday, February 3, 1999 (5:30 P.M.)
Stephanie ain’t never traveled on no greyhound bus before. A twenty-hour ride has just about dimmed her enthusiasm—poor baby. Thank God she slept. We left the Howard Street station in Detroit at 10:00 last night and got here at 5:15 today. In this rotten weather, it’ll be dark soon. We haven’t eaten since we finished our snacks. Jeez, the smell from this Market Street Grill is drivin’ me crazy. What have I done? My ticket was $59. That’s crazy! Maybe I should o’ kept my money.
I aint got no idea where to go here. The number I have for my mother ain’t givin’ me no answer. I only have three quarters for the phone. Thirty dollars and my kid and this ol’ beach bag with Steph’s clothes and beanie babies and some things for myself, that’s all I have.
And jeez, is this place small, and cold. I know I gotta find us some help. This number still ain’t answering. There’s no message. Maybe this isn’t even the number . . . It’s gettin’ late. What are we gonna do?
Representing case-analysis problems in terms of stories is not enough to engage learners in the kind of thinking that is necessary for solving case problems. The story should be embellished with relevant legal statutes, welfare policies of the state, newspaper stories about similar cases, or interviews with family members, welfare agents, or others with relevant perspectives. A policy-analysis story includes multiple forms of representation necessary to tell the whole story.
When telling the story and setting the problem, it is equally, if not more, important to provide students with a specific, authentic task to solve. In the social-welfare problem just described, we required students to counsel this woman, who was seeking to move from welfare to work. Their counseling not only had to be legally correct (the stu- dents became very frustrated by the complexity of the forms and the procedures that had to be completed by the recipients) but also empathic. The task may also have focused on determining the benefits for which this woman is eligible. Needless to say, different tasks will focus the attention of students on different information elements that are needed to solve the problem.
128 • Problem-Specific Design Models
The task also needs to be fairly specific. The task for a foreign- policy analysis problem on the Middle East might require the stu- dents to act as foreign-policy analysts for the State Department tasked with recommending specific policy actions to the Secretary of State about whether Palestinians should be granted independent statehood.
That is, there should be a specific kind of outcome (advice) associated with the task: not just a report but a report with specific action items. The more purposeful the task, the more engaging it will be. The same environment may be repurposed by redefining the task. Rather than making recommendations about statehood for the Palestinians, the task might be redefined as “How do we prevent further expansion of Israeli settlements into disputed lands?” Except for the task, the remainder of the environment may be the same or very similar.
HOW DO WE COLLECT AND ANALYZE INFORMATION ABOUT THE POLICY?
Most policy problems are replete with different perspectives on what the problem is, what issues are most relevant to the problem, and how the problem should be solved. The front page of any newspaper normally includes descriptions of policy problems. According to the model in Figure 6.1, after setting the problem students must begin collecting and analyzing different interpretations and perspectives on the problem.
WHICH KINDS OF MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVES DO WE PRESENT FOR POLICY-ANALYSIS PROBLEMS?
Based on the contextual analysis for each problem, you need to represent all of the important perspectives on that problem by presenting cases as alternative perspectives (see Chapter 13). As described in Chapter 13, each case (in this case minimal representations or examples of different viewpoints) that represent a meaningful interpretation of the problem or some aspect of the problem. Based on cognitive flexibility theory (Spiro, Feltovich, Jacobson, & Coulson, 1991), by examining the differ- ent facets of a problem, students are better able to construct a rich and robust mental representation of the problem. Depending on the problem, different kinds of perspectives may be represented.
The most obvious kind of case perspective to provide are per- sonal perspectives. In a policy-problem learning environment that we developed years ago, one problem focused on the liberation of Kosovo from the Serbs. This was a complex, international policy Policy-Analysis Problems • 129
problem that was vexing the Clinton Administration. Several solutions were being considered, including declaring Kosovo an interim inter- national protectorate, establishing Kosovo as an independent state, negotiating with Serbia conditions for the partition of Kosovo with some parts to fall under Kosovar Albanian rule, and some parts under Yugoslavian rule, or making Kosovo part of a greater Albania. In order to make such a policy decision, Clinton relied on numerous advisers in his cabinet and called on each to provide their perspective.
In the environment, we represented the perspectives that were taken or would be taken by different members of the committee listed on the left side of Figure 6.2, which also illustrates the perspective of the Chair- man of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Needless to say, the perspectives of the different members of the committee varied substantially.
A problem as complex as the Kosovo crisis, or any other inter- national crisis for that matter, can and should be viewed through different disciplinary lenses. Cases or examples that represent these different disciplinary perspectives may also be presented. For an inter- national crisis, there are clearly historical, anthropological, sociological, legal, economic, psychological, religious, and geographical perspectives that need to be considered. Historically, it is important to describe the war in 1389 when the Kosovars defeated the Serbs, who never forgot.
Anthropologically and sociologically, the Kosovars and Serbs have different beliefs and values that emerged throughout history, as did the Macedonians, Croatians, and other societies in the Balkans.
Kosovars and Serbs have different religious values, so cases showing the
Figure 6.2 Committee member perspective on Kosovo crisis.
130 • Problem-Specific Design Models