policy proposal research paper

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Starting the research process
• How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

Published on October 12, 2022 by Shona McCombes and Tegan George. Revised on September 5, 2024.

A research proposal describes what you will investigate, why it’s important, and how you will conduct your research.

The format of a research proposal varies between fields, but most proposals will contain at least these elements:

Introduction

Literature review.

• Research design

Reference list

While the sections may vary, the overall objective is always the same. A research proposal serves as a blueprint and guide for your research plan, helping you get organized and feel confident in the path forward you choose to take.

Table of contents

Research proposal purpose, research proposal examples, research design and methods, contribution to knowledge, research schedule, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research proposals.

Academics often have to write research proposals to get funding for their projects. As a student, you might have to write a research proposal as part of a grad school application , or prior to starting your thesis or dissertation .

In addition to helping you figure out what your research can look like, a proposal can also serve to demonstrate why your project is worth pursuing to a funder, educational institution, or supervisor.

Research proposal length

The length of a research proposal can vary quite a bit. A bachelor’s or master’s thesis proposal can be just a few pages, while proposals for PhD dissertations or research funding are usually much longer and more detailed. Your supervisor can help you determine the best length for your work.

One trick to get started is to think of your proposal’s structure as a shorter version of your thesis or dissertation , only without the results , conclusion and discussion sections.

Download our research proposal template

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Writing a research proposal can be quite challenging, but a good starting point could be to look at some examples. We’ve included a few for you below.

• Example research proposal #1: “A Conceptual Framework for Scheduling Constraint Management”
• Example research proposal #2: “Medical Students as Mediators of Change in Tobacco Use”

Like your dissertation or thesis, the proposal will usually have a title page that includes:

• The proposed title of your project
• Your supervisor’s name
• Your institution and department

The first part of your proposal is the initial pitch for your project. Make sure it succinctly explains what you want to do and why.

Your introduction should:

• Introduce your topic
• Give necessary background and context
• Outline your  problem statement  and research questions

To guide your introduction , include information about:

• Who could have an interest in the topic (e.g., scientists, policymakers)
• How much is already known about the topic
• What is missing from this current knowledge
• What new insights your research will contribute
• Why you believe this research is worth doing

As you get started, it’s important to demonstrate that you’re familiar with the most important research on your topic. A strong literature review  shows your reader that your project has a solid foundation in existing knowledge or theory. It also shows that you’re not simply repeating what other people have already done or said, but rather using existing research as a jumping-off point for your own.

In this section, share exactly how your project will contribute to ongoing conversations in the field by:

• Comparing and contrasting the main theories, methods, and debates
• Examining the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches
• Explaining how will you build on, challenge, or synthesize prior scholarship

Following the literature review, restate your main  objectives . This brings the focus back to your own project. Next, your research design or methodology section will describe your overall approach, and the practical steps you will take to answer your research questions.

To finish your proposal on a strong note, explore the potential implications of your research for your field. Emphasize again what you aim to contribute and why it matters.

For example, your results might have implications for:

• Improving best practices
• Informing policymaking decisions
• Strengthening a theory or model
• Challenging popular or scientific beliefs
• Creating a basis for future research

Last but not least, your research proposal must include correct citations for every source you have used, compiled in a reference list . To create citations quickly and easily, you can use our free APA citation generator .

Some institutions or funders require a detailed timeline of the project, asking you to forecast what you will do at each stage and how long it may take. While not always required, be sure to check the requirements of your project.

Here’s an example schedule to help you get started. You can also download a template at the button below.

Download our research schedule template

If you are applying for research funding, chances are you will have to include a detailed budget. This shows your estimates of how much each part of your project will cost.

Make sure to check what type of costs the funding body will agree to cover. For each item, include:

• Cost : exactly how much money do you need?
• Justification : why is this cost necessary to complete the research?
• Source : how did you calculate the amount?

To determine your budget, think about:

• Travel costs : do you need to go somewhere to collect your data? How will you get there, and how much time will you need? What will you do there (e.g., interviews, archival research)?
• Materials : do you need access to any tools or technologies?
• Help : do you need to hire any research assistants for the project? What will they do, and how much will you pay them?

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

Methodology

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

Once you’ve decided on your research objectives , you need to explain them in your paper, at the end of your problem statement .

Keep your research objectives clear and concise, and use appropriate verbs to accurately convey the work that you will carry out for each one.

I will compare …

A research aim is a broad statement indicating the general purpose of your research project. It should appear in your introduction at the end of your problem statement , before your research objectives.

Research objectives are more specific than your research aim. They indicate the specific ways you’ll address the overarching aim.

A PhD, which is short for philosophiae doctor (doctor of philosophy in Latin), is the highest university degree that can be obtained. In a PhD, students spend 3–5 years writing a dissertation , which aims to make a significant, original contribution to current knowledge.

A PhD is intended to prepare students for a career as a researcher, whether that be in academia, the public sector, or the private sector.

A master’s is a 1- or 2-year graduate degree that can prepare you for a variety of careers.

All master’s involve graduate-level coursework. Some are research-intensive and intend to prepare students for further study in a PhD; these usually require their students to write a master’s thesis . Others focus on professional training for a specific career.

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

The best way to remember the difference between a research plan and a research proposal is that they have fundamentally different audiences. A research plan helps you, the researcher, organize your thoughts. On the other hand, a dissertation proposal or research proposal aims to convince others (e.g., a supervisor, a funding body, or a dissertation committee) that your research topic is relevant and worthy of being conducted.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. & George, T. (2024, September 05). How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved September 10, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-proposal/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a problem statement | guide & examples, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

EDU 507: Law, Policy, and Ethical Decision-Making: Writing Policy Analysis and Proposal Papers

• Research Tips This link opens in a new window
• Writing Policy Analysis and Proposal Papers

Resources for Analyzing Policies and Writing Recommendations

A major assignment for EDU 507 in the past was a policy analysis proposal.  This assignment synthesized two common tasks for the educational leader: analyzing the policies that affect their institutions or educational contexts, and making recommendations based on that analysis.  While there is no proposal component required this semester, the resources below will still be helpful for preparing the critical law and policy paper, and for understanding how to use a policy analysis to propose changes.

To the right, you will find books about policy analysis in education that you can borrow from Ikeda Library.  The library subscribes to Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , an academic journal that you might find useful as well.  Below are resources to help you master both the policy analysis and proposal formats.  You will also find a list of eBooks available at Ikeda Library, and links to external resources, on proposal writing in the Comparative and International Education LibGuide .

As you will find, no one source completely reflects your assignment's parameters.  You will need to make decisions about what elements or aspects of  each format best meets your needs as you put together your analysis and recommendations for the consumption of your target audience.  Creating a portrait of your audience--who they are, why they are interested, what evidence will be most persuasive to them, what format would best meet their needs and expectations as readers--before you begin will help you determine how best to create a document that not only breaks down a policy for them in a way they will understand, but also persuades them that your suggestions are definitely the best for this situation. 

• Tips for Writing Policy Papers This resource by the Policy Lab at Stanford Law School incorporates a number of analysis strategies into a comprehensive guide for creating policy papers. The overviews of the PEST and SWOT analysis methods might be particularly useful for finding good starting points to help you think through your analysis.
• How to Do a Policy Analysis Paper This short article by Dr. Shane Hall at Synonym.com also provides a general approach to writing a policy analysis that includes examples of the kinds of information that should usually be considered or included.
• Suggestions for Writing Policy Analyses Philip Doty created this page for a Library Science class on Government Information at the University of Texas at Austin. It focuses on the possible structures that policy analyses can take and has suggestions for what information belongs where.
• What Is a Policy Paper? This page is from A User's Guide to Political Science, part of the Government Department's site at Wesleyan University. While intended for political science majors, this page has many useful resources for all policy analysts and has questions to help you determine your audience's needs.
• Policy Analysis for California Education: Policy Briefs This resource includes briefs, reports, and working papers on policies important to educators in California. The policy briefs are possible sources for the paper, and examples of real world applications of this assignment.
• Writing Effective Proposals This page by the California Department of Education focuses on proposal writing. While it is meant to help those seeking funds more than proposing policy changes, many of the elements required are the same. The section on technical writing has good tips for thinking about your audience and making the paper easier to read.
• Proposal: Elements of a Proposal Argument This page describes how to write a policy proposal for an education setting. The page was written by Charles Nelson for his composition course at Kean University.
• Requesting Action: Tasks for Developing Proposals and Petitions This comes from the Public Policy Writing course website by Catherine Smith from East Carolina University. Writing a policy proposal is discussed at the bottom of the page, with ideas for potential audiences and how to find problems that need to be addressed closer to the top.
• Proposal Writing Resources This list of resources at the University of Northern Colorado's Office of Sponsored Programs page has links to a number of sites and agencies, some Colorado-oriented. Many of the sources are specific to grant proposal writing, but have tips and information useful for policy proposals as well.

Books on Policy Analysis in Education at Ikeda Library

• Developing Effective Policy Analysis in Higher Education by Judith I. Gill (Editor); Laura Saunders (Editor) Call Number: LA227.4 .D48 1992 ISBN: 1555427375 Publication Date: 1993-02-03

eBooks on Policy Analysis in Education at Ikeda Library

• << Previous: Research Tips
• Next: Survey >>
• Last Updated: Jul 9, 2024 2:41 PM
• URL: https://libguides.soka.edu/EDU_507

Ikeda Library • 1 University Drive, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 • 949-480-4205 • [email protected] • © 2021 Soka University of America

A guide to policy analysis as a research method

• August 2018
• Health Promotion International 34(5)

• Deakin University
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

• Swinburne University of Technology

• Monash University (Australia)

Abstract and Figures

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• J CURRICULUM STUD

• Shengquan Luo
• Nabila Chouaib Kante

• Elena Reger

• Idit Zimmerman

• Olamide John Oladele

• Edwin B. P. de Jong

• Rivana Alwardah
• Izhhari Ichasul Dwitama
• Asep Sunandar Nugraha
• Darmayanti 1✉

• John McInerney
• S Meiklejohn
• Paul Lombardo
• Frank Fischer

• BMC PUBLIC HEALTH

• SOC SCI MED

• B. Guy Peters

• POLICY STUD J

• Katherine C. Hicks
• Dev Strischek
• Dana R. Hermanson
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

How to Write a Policy Analysis Paper in 6 Easy Steps (+Examples)

Working on a policy analysis paper is both challenging and fulfilling. In this article, we'll guide you through the process, whether you're new to the field or experienced. Understanding how policies are made, evaluated, and recommended is crucial for making a difference in public discussions and decisions. We'll cover everything from defining your goals to researching thoroughly, analyzing data, and presenting persuasive arguments. By following these steps, you'll be able to communicate your ideas effectively, shape procedure debates, and contribute to positive changes in society. Should you need more hands-on aid with the assignment, hire a college essay writer for the maximum result.

What Is a Policy Analysis Paper

A policy analysis essay definition is a comprehensive examination and evaluation of a particular policy or set of policies within a given context. It involves analyzing the rationale behind the system, its objectives, implementation strategies, and its intended and unintended consequences. This type of paper aims to provide insights into the effectiveness, efficiency, equity, and feasibility of the approach, often considering various perspectives, stakeholders, and alternatives. Through rigorous research, data analysis, and critical reasoning, procedure analysis papers aim to inform decision-makers, scholars, and the public about the strengths and weaknesses of existing policies and propose recommendations for improvement or alternative courses of action.

Haven’t Written a Policy Analysis Paper Before?

Let expert writers guide you through the process!

Policy Analysis Paper Purpose

The purpose of a policy analysis paper is to critically assess a specific procedure or set of policies in order to provide valuable insights into its effectiveness, implications, and potential areas for improvement. By examining the underlying rationale, objectives, and outcomes of the implementation, this type of paper aims to inform decision-makers, stakeholders, and the public about its strengths, weaknesses, and impacts on society. 

Students are writing a policy analysis paper in college for several reasons. Firstly, it allows them to develop critical thinking and analytical skills by evaluating real-world policies and their implications. Additionally, it helps students understand the complexities of policy-making processes and how policies impact various stakeholders. Writing analysis papers also enhances research and writing skills, as students must gather and synthesize information from diverse sources to support their arguments effectively. Furthermore, engaging with procedure analysis fosters civic engagement and social responsibility, encouraging students to contribute to public discourse and advocate for evidence-based solutions. Are you dealing with multiple assignments all at the same time? If you’re about to address the audience, say, ‘ write a speech for me ,’ so our experts can relieve your workload.

Topic Ideas for Policy Analysis Paper

Here’s a collection of 50 thought-provoking policy analysis paper topics for your inspiration. In addition, we’d like to offer you informative essay topics for the purpose of learning and self-education.

• The viability of a universal healthcare system: An analysis.
• Plastic bag bans: Environmental implications examined.
• Tax credits for renewable energy adoption: Assessing effectiveness.
• Social security and raising the retirement age: Exploring implications.
• Implementing a four-day workweek: Feasibility assessment.
• Community policing strategies: Effectiveness in crime reduction.
• Increasing the minimum wage: Consequences evaluated.
• School voucher programs: Impact on educational equity.
• Congestion pricing for urban areas: Benefits and drawbacks analyzed.
• Government subsidies for electric vehicles: Effectiveness assessed.
• Zoning laws and affordable housing availability: An investigation.
• National carbon tax: Feasibility and impact explored.
• Mandatory voting laws: Consequences for political participation.
• Drug rehabilitation programs: Effectiveness in reducing recidivism.
• Legalizing marijuana: Public health implications examined.
• Immigration policies and cultural diversity: Assessing impact.
• Privatizing water utilities: Consequences analyzed.
• Anti-bullying policies in schools: Effectiveness evaluated.
• Free college tuition programs: Benefits and drawbacks assessed.
• Wealth tax implementation: Feasibility analysis.
• Ride-sharing services and traditional taxi industries: Impact assessment.
• Gender quotas in corporate leadership: Effectiveness examined.
• National gun registry: Implications and feasibility explored.
• Expanding nuclear energy production: Consequences evaluated.
• Mandatory parental leave policies: Effectiveness assessment.
• Charter school expansion: Impact on public education explored.
• Basic income implementation: Viability and consequences assessed.
• Affordable housing initiatives: Success factors examined.
• Internet privacy regulations: Impact on data security analyzed.
• Corporate tax breaks: Economic implications assessed.
• Universal preschool programs: Long-term benefits explored.
• Climate change adaptation policies: Effectiveness in resilience building.
• Universal voting by mail: Implications for voter turnout examined.
• Reducing military spending: Consequences and feasibility analyzed.
• Workplace diversity training: Effectiveness in promoting inclusivity.
• Renewable energy subsidies: Impact on energy independence assessed.
• Telecommuting incentives: Feasibility and impact on traffic analyzed.
• Carbon capture and storage initiatives: Viability and effectiveness.
• Local food sourcing policies: Benefits for communities examined.
• Police body camera mandates: Impact on accountability assessed.
• Community land trust programs: Success factors and limitations.
• Mental health parity laws: Effectiveness in improving access.
• Corporate social responsibility regulations: Impact on sustainability.
• Universal pre-kindergarten education: Social and economic benefits.
• Land value tax implementation: Impact on property markets assessed.
• Affordable childcare initiatives: Impact on workforce participation.
• Smart city technology investments: Benefits for urban development.
• Flexible work hour policies: Impact on productivity and well-being.
• Prescription drug pricing regulations: Consequences for affordability.
• Public-private partnerships for infrastructure development: Effectiveness and risks assessed.

If you need more ideas, you may want to consult our guide on argumentative essay topics , which will definitely help kickstart your creativity. 

How to Structure a Policy Analysis Paper

A policy analysis paper format demands organizing your content coherently and logically to effectively communicate your analysis and findings. Here's a typical structure you can follow:

Introduction

• Provide an overview of the issue or problem you're analyzing.
• Clearly state the purpose of your analysis.
• Introduce the policy or policies under review.
• Provide background information to contextualize the issue.
• State your thesis or research question.

Policy Context and Background

• Provide more in-depth background information on the issue.
• Describe the historical development of the policies.
• Discuss the context in which the procedure was implemented.
• Identify key stakeholders and their interests in the strategy.

Policy Analysis Framework

• Explain the framework or methodology you're using to analyze the policy.
• Define key concepts and terms relevant to your analysis.
• Discuss any theoretical frameworks or models guiding your analysis.
• Outline the criteria or criteria you will use to evaluate the procedure's effectiveness.

Policy Goals and Objectives

• Identify and discuss the stated goals and objectives of the policy.
• Evaluate the clarity and coherence of these goals.
• Discuss any potential conflicts or contradictions among the goals.

Policy Implementation

• Describe how the policy has been implemented in practice.
• Discuss any challenges or barriers to implementation.
• Evaluate the effectiveness of implementation strategies.

Policy Outcomes and Impacts

• Assess the outcomes and impacts of the policy.
• Evaluate the extent to which the procedure has achieved its intended goals.
• Discuss any unintended consequences or side effects of the approach.

Policy Alternatives

• Identify and discuss alternative policy options or approaches.
• Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each alternative.
• Discuss the potential trade-offs associated with each alternative.

Recommendations

• Based on your analysis, provide recommendations for policymakers.
• Discuss specific actions or changes that could improve the process.
• Justify your recommendations with evidence from your analysis.
• Summarize the main findings of your analysis.
• Restate your thesis or research question.
• Reflect on the broader implications of your analysis.
• Discuss any limitations or areas for further research.
• Provide a list of sources cited in your paper.
• Follow the appropriate citation style (e.g., APA, MLA, Chicago).

Need help with the assignment at this stage? Hire writer for political essay help to save time and secure optimal academic results.

How to Write a Policy Analysis Paper

In this section, we'll cover the basics of writing a policy analysis paper. This type of paper involves breaking down complicated policy issues, figuring out how well they're working, and suggesting ways to make them better. We'll walk you through the steps, like defining the goals of the implementation, looking at how it's being put into action, and checking what effects it's having. By the end, you'll have the skills to write a clear, well-reasoned paper that can help shape policies for the better. 

Understanding the Policy Issue

Start by thoroughly understanding the policy issue or problem you're analyzing. Research its background, context, and significance. Identify key stakeholders, relevant laws or regulations, and any existing policies addressing the issue.

Defining the Scope and Purpose

Clearly define the scope and purpose of your analysis. Determine what specific aspect of the approach you'll focus on and why it's important. Clarify the goals of your analysis and what you hope to achieve with your paper. Use an expert essay writing service to streamline your effort in producing a first-class paper. 

Gathering Data and Evidence

Collect relevant data and evidence to support your analysis. This may include statistical information, case studies, expert opinions, and academic research. Use credible sources and ensure your data is accurate and up-to-date.

Analyzing the Policy

A policy analysis paper evaluates the legislative program’s effectiveness, strengths, weaknesses, and implications. Use a structured approach, such as a SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) or cost-benefit analysis, to assess the procedure from multiple perspectives. Consider its intended goals, implementation strategies, outcomes, and unintended consequences. If you need help with SWOT analysis, using our analytical essay writing service is highly recommended. 

Developing Recommendations

Based on your analysis, develop clear and actionable recommendations for policymakers or stakeholders. Identify specific changes or improvements that could enhance the system’s effectiveness or address its shortcomings. Support your recommendations with evidence and reasoning.

Writing and Communicating Your Analysis

Organize your analysis into a coherent and persuasive paper. Structure your paper with an introduction, background information, analysis, recommendations, and conclusion. Use clear and concise language, avoiding jargon or technical terms unless necessary. Provide citations for your sources and evidence. Finally, ensure your paper is well-written, logically organized, and effectively communicates your insights and recommendations.

Policy Analysis Paper Example

A policy analysis paper example serves as a valuable learning tool for students by providing a concrete model to follow and reference when undertaking their own analysis assignments. By studying an example paper, students can gain insights into the structure, content, and methodology of analysis, helping them understand how to effectively frame their analysis, support their arguments with evidence, and formulate actionable recommendations.

Example 1: “Implementing Universal Basic Income”

This policy analysis paper examines the feasibility and potential impacts of implementing a Universal Basic Income (UBI) program in the United States. It explores various options for UBI design, including cost and financing considerations, labor market effects, poverty reduction potential, and administrative feasibility. By reviewing existing evidence and debates surrounding UBI, the paper aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the opportunities and challenges associated with adopting such a program, ultimately highlighting the need for careful analysis, experimentation, and stakeholder engagement in shaping effective UBI policies.

Example 2: “Addressing Climate Change through Carbon Pricing”

This policy analysis paper examines the role of carbon pricing policies in addressing climate change, evaluating their efficacy, implementation challenges, and potential impacts. Carbon pricing mechanisms, including carbon taxes and cap-and-trade systems, aim to internalize the external costs of carbon emissions and incentivize emission reductions. The paper discusses the economic efficiency of carbon pricing in promoting innovation and investment in clean technologies while also addressing equity considerations regarding its distributional impacts on low-income households and vulnerable communities.

Writing a policy analysis paper is super important for students because it helps them learn how to tackle tough societal problems and make smart decisions. You get to sharpen your thinking skills, learn how to research thoroughly and become better at expressing yourself clearly. Plus, writing these papers helps students practice effectively communicating their ideas, which is a skill they'll need in their future careers, whether they work in government, nonprofits, or elsewhere. By digging into real-world issues, students also get a better grip on how politics, economics, and society all fit together. If you’re not committed to handling this task yourself, instruct our experts, saying, ‘ write my essay ,’ and receive the most competent help within hours. 

How Short Is Your Deadline?

Use our writing service to submit an A-grade policy analysis paper on time.

What Is a Policy Analysis Paper Outline?

How to write a policy analysis paper, what is a policy analysis paper.

is an expert in nursing and healthcare, with a strong background in history, law, and literature. Holding advanced degrees in nursing and public health, his analytical approach and comprehensive knowledge help students navigate complex topics. On EssayPro blog, Adam provides insightful articles on everything from historical analysis to the intricacies of healthcare policies. In his downtime, he enjoys historical documentaries and volunteering at local clinics.

Policy Briefs

What this handout is about.

This handout will offer tips for writing effective policy briefs. Be sure to check with your instructor about their specific expectations for your assignment.

What are policy briefs?

Imagine that you’re an elected official serving on a committee that sets the standards cars must meet to pass a state inspection. You know that this is a complex issue, and you’d like to learn more about existing policies, the effects of emissions on the environment and on public health, the economic consequences of different possible approaches, and more–you want to make an informed decision. But you don’t have time to research all of these issues! You need a policy brief.

A policy brief presents a concise summary of information that can help readers understand, and likely make decisions about, government policies. Policy briefs may give objective summaries of relevant research, suggest possible policy options, or go even further and argue for particular courses of action.

How do policy briefs differ from other kinds of writing assignments?

You may encounter policy brief assignments in many different academic disciplines, from public health and environmental science to education and social work. If you’re reading this handout because you’re having your first encounter with such an assignment, don’t worry–many of your existing skills and strategies, like using evidence , being concise , and organizing your information effectively , will help you succeed at this form of writing. However, policy briefs are distinctive in several ways.

In some of your college writing, you’ve addressed your peers, your professors, or other members of your academic field. Policy briefs are usually created for a more general reader or policy maker who has a stake in the issue that you’re discussing.

Tone and terminology

Many academic disciplines discourage using unnecessary jargon, but clear language is especially important in policy briefs. If you find yourself using jargon, try to replace it with more direct language that a non-specialist reader would be more likely to understand. When specialized terminology is necessary, explain it quickly and clearly to ensure that your reader doesn’t get confused.

Policy briefs are distinctive in their focus on communicating the practical implications of research to a specific audience. Suppose that you and your roommate both write research-based papers about global warming. Your roommate is writing a research paper for an environmental science course, and you are writing a policy brief for a course on public policy. You might both use the exact same sources in writing your papers. So, how might those papers differ?

Your roommate’s research paper is likely to present the findings of previous studies and synthesize them in order to present an argument about what we know. It might also discuss the methods and processes used in the research.

Your policy brief might synthesize the same scientific findings, but it will deploy them for a very specific purpose: to help readers decide what they should do. It will relate the findings to current policy debates, with an emphasis on applying the research outcomes rather than assessing the research procedures. A research paper might also suggest practical actions, but a policy brief is likely to emphasize them more strongly and develop them more fully.

To support these changes in audience, tone, and purpose, policy briefs have a distinctive format. You should consult your assignment prompt and/or your professor for instructions about the specific requirements of your assignment, but most policy briefs have several features in common. They tend to use lots of headings and have relatively short sections. This structure differs from many short papers in the humanities that may have a title but no further headings, and from reports in the sciences that may follow the “IMRAD” structure of introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Your brief might include graphs, charts, or other visual aids that make it easier to digest the most important information within sections.  Policy briefs often include some of these sections:

• Title: A good title quickly communicates the contents of the brief in a memorable way.
• Executive Summary: This section is often one to two paragraphs long; it includes an overview of the problem and the proposed policy action.
• Context or Scope of Problem: This section communicates the importance of the problem and aims to convince the reader of the necessity of policy action.
• Policy Alternatives: This section discusses the current policy approach and explains proposed options. It should be fair and accurate while convincing the reader why the policy action proposed in the brief is the most desirable.
• Policy Recommendations: This section contains the most detailed explanation of the concrete steps to be taken to address the policy issue.
• Appendices: If some readers might need further support in order to accept your argument but doing so in the brief itself might derail the conversation for other readers, you might include the extra information in an appendix.
• Consulted or Recommended Sources: These should be reliable sources that you have used throughout your brief to guide your policy discussion and recommendations.

Depending on your specific topic and assignment, you might combine sections or break them down into several more specific ones.

How do I identify a problem for my policy brief?

An effective policy brief must propose a solution to a well-defined problem that can be addressed at the level of policy. This may sound easy, but it can take a lot of work to think of a problem in a way that is open to policy action.

For example, “bad spending habits in young adults” might be a problem that you feel strongly about, but you can’t simply implement a policy to “make better financial decisions.” In order to make it the subject of a policy brief, you’ll need to look for research on the topic and narrow it down. Is the problem a lack of financial education, predatory lending practices, dishonest advertising, or something else? Narrowing to one of these (and perhaps further) would allow you to write a brief that can propose concrete policy action.

For another example, let’s say that you wanted to address children’s health. This is a big issue, and too broad to serve as the focus of a policy brief, but it could serve as a starting point for research. As you begin to research studies on children’s health, you might decide to zoom in on the more specific issue of childhood obesity. You’ll need to consult the research further to decide what factors contribute to it in order to propose policy changes. Is it lack of exercise, nutritional deficiencies, a combination of these, or something else? Choosing one or another of these issues, your brief would zoom in even further to specific proposals that might include exercise initiatives, nutritional guidelines, or school lunch programs.

The key is that you define the problem and its contributing factors as specifically as possible so that some sort of concrete policy action (at the local, state, or national level) is feasible.

Framing the issue

Once you’ve identified the problem for yourself, you need to decide how you will present it to your reader. Your own process of identifying the problem likely had some stops, starts, and dead-ends, but your goal in framing the issue for your reader is to provide the most direct path to understanding the problem and the proposed policy change. It can be helpful to think of some of the most pressing questions your audience will have and attempt to preemptively answer those questions. Here are some questions you might want to consider:

What is the problem?

Understanding what the problem is, in the clearest terms possible, will give your reader a reference point. Later, when you’re discussing complex information, your reader can refer back to the initial problem. This will help to ‘anchor’ them throughout the course of your argument. Every piece of information in the brief should be clearly and easily connected to the problem.

What is the scope of the problem?

Knowing the extent of the problem helps to frame the policy issue for your reader. Is the problem statewide, national, or international? How many people does this issue affect? Daily? Annually? This is a great place for any statistical information you may have gathered through your research.

Who are the stakeholders?

Who does this issue affect? Adult women? College-educated men? Children from bilingual homes? The primary group being affected is important, and knowing who this group is allows the reader to assign a face to the policy issue.

Policy issues can include a complex network of stakeholders. Double check whether you have inadvertently excluded any of them from your analysis. For example, a policy about children’s nutrition obviously involves the children, but it might also include food producers, distributors, parents, and nutritionists (and other experts). Some stakeholders might be reluctant to accept your policy change or even acknowledge the existence of the problem, which is why your brief must be convincing in its use of evidence and clear in its communication.

Effective policy-writing

This handout has emphasized that good policy briefs are clear, concise, and focused on applying credible research to policy problems. Let’s take a look at two versions of the introduction to a policy brief to see how someone might write and revise to achieve these qualities:

A “not-so-good” policy brief

Adolescents’ Dermatologic Health in Outlandia: A Call to Action

The Report on Adolescents’ Dermatologic Health in Outlandia (2010), issued by Secretary of Health Dr. Polly Galver, served as a platform to increase public awareness on the importance of dermatologic health for adolescents. Among the major themes of the report are that dermatologic health is essential to general health and well-being and that profound and consequential dermatologic health disparities exist in the state of Outlandia. Dr. Galver stated that what amounts to a silent epidemic of acne is affecting some population groups–restricting activities as schools, work, and home–and often significantly diminishing the quality of life. Dr. Galver issued the Report on Adolescents’ Dermatologic Health as a wake-up call to policymakers and health professionals on issues regarding the state’s dermatologic health. (“ Not so good policy brief ,” Reproduced with permission of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD.)

This paragraph introduces a relevant and credible source, but it fails to use that source to explain a problem and propose policy action. The reader is likely to be confused because the word “acne” does not appear until the middle of the paragraph, and the brief never states what action should be taken to address it. In addition to this lack of focus, the paragraph also includes unnecessary phrases like “among the major themes” that could be removed to make it more concise.

A better policy brief

Seeing Spots: Addressing the Silent Epidemic of Acne in Outlandia’s Youth

Acne is the most common chronic disease among adolescents in Outlandia (Outlandia Department of Health, 2010). Long considered a benign rite of passage, acne actually has far-reaching effects on the health and well being of adolescents, significantly affecting success in school, social relationships, and general quality of life. Yet large portions of the state’s population are unable to access treatment for acne. The Secretary of Health’s Report on Adolescents’ Dermatologic Health in Outlandia (2010) is a call to action for policymakers and health professionals to improve the health and wellbeing of Outlandia’s youth by increasing access to dermatologic care (“ A Better Policy Brief” , Reproduced with permission of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD.)

This paragraph is far more focused and concise than the first version. The opening sentence is straightforward; instead of focusing on the source, it makes a clear and memorable point that is supported by the source. Additionally, though the first version was titled “a call to action,” it did not actually say what that action might be. In this version, it is clear that the call is for increased access to dermatologic care.

Keep in mind that clarity, conciseness, and consistent focus are rarely easy to achieve in a first draft. Careful editing and revision are key parts of writing policy briefs.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Smith, Catherine F. 2016. Writing Public Policy , 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

Young, Eoin, and Lisa Quinn. n.d. “The Policy Brief.” University of Delaware. Accessed June 24, 2019. https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/blog.lrei.org/dist/c/104/wp-content/uploads/sites/346/2009/11/PolicyBrief-described.pdf .

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Criminal Justice

IResearchNet

Academic Writing Services

Writing policy proposals in criminal justice.

This article delves into the intricate process of developing policy proposals within the United States criminal justice system. The introduction contextualizes the significance of policy proposals, emphasizing their pivotal role in shaping the landscape of law enforcement, judiciary, and community relations. The exploration of historical perspectives and contemporary challenges provides a nuanced understanding of the evolving nature of criminal justice policies. The article outlines key elements crucial for effective policy proposals, including rigorous research, stakeholder engagement, and adherence to legal and ethical standards. Delving into the legislative process, the discussion navigates the intricacies of crafting, presenting, and ultimately advocating for policy proposals within the dynamic political landscape. Drawing on case studies, the article analyzes both successful and failed policy initiatives, offering valuable insights and lessons for future endeavors. In conclusion, the article underscores the importance of evidence-based, collaborative, and ethically sound policy-making, urging continued research and engagement to shape a more equitable and effective criminal justice system.

Introduction

In the intricate web of the United States criminal justice system, the formulation of policy proposals stands as a cornerstone for fostering systemic change and addressing evolving societal needs. This section provides a succinct exploration of the pivotal role that policy proposals play in shaping the multifaceted landscape of law enforcement, judiciary, and community interactions. As societal dynamics continually shift, the ability to adapt and reform policies becomes paramount in ensuring the system’s responsiveness to emerging challenges.

Defining the essence of policy proposals within the context of criminal justice, this subsection elucidates the nuanced nature of these proposals as strategic instruments for effecting change. Policy proposals encapsulate comprehensive plans and recommendations designed to address issues, enhance efficiency, and ultimately bring about positive transformations within the criminal justice framework. By dissecting their essential elements, this section underscores the significance of policy proposals as dynamic instruments that shape the very fabric of the criminal justice system.

The effectiveness of policy proposals hinges on a foundation of evidence-based and data-driven decision-making. This subsection highlights the paramount importance of relying on empirical evidence and robust data analyses in crafting policies that are not only responsive to societal needs but also rooted in a sound understanding of the complex issues at hand. As the criminal justice system grapples with intricate challenges, an emphasis on evidence-based practices ensures that policy proposals are not only theoretically sound but also practical and capable of fostering positive, measurable impacts. This commitment to data-driven approaches serves as a guiding principle throughout the article, emphasizing the critical role of empirical support in shaping policies that stand the test of real-world implementation.

Understanding the Context

This section delves into the historical evolution of policies within the criminal justice system, tracing their development in response to dynamic societal shifts and challenges. Examining key historical junctures, it explores how the landscape of criminal justice policies has been shaped by societal transformations, ranging from shifts in public attitudes to significant cultural, economic, and political changes. By understanding the historical context, we gain insight into the adaptive nature of policies, illustrating their capacity to mirror and respond to the evolving needs and expectations of society.

Building on the historical perspective, this subsection examines the profound impact of landmark legal cases on the formulation of criminal justice policies. By analyzing key court decisions that have shaped the interpretation and application of laws, we uncover how legal precedents serve as catalysts for policy evolution. The section illuminates the intricate interplay between judicial rulings and policy development, showcasing the role of the legal system in influencing and often necessitating revisions to existing policies.

Turning the focus to the contemporary landscape, this part of the article identifies and analyzes pressing challenges within the current criminal justice system that demand policy attention. By scrutinizing issues such as disparities in sentencing, police-community relations, and the overburdened correctional system, we aim to pinpoint areas where policies can play a transformative role. This analysis lays the groundwork for the subsequent discussion on the formulation of targeted and responsive policy proposals.

Acknowledging the dynamic nature of society, this subsection explores how contemporary challenges in the criminal justice system are intertwined with broader social, economic, and technological changes. The impact of these factors on crime rates, law enforcement strategies, and the administration of justice necessitates a nuanced understanding of the evolving landscape. By scrutinizing the intersection of these influences, policymakers can better anticipate and address emerging challenges, ensuring that policy responses remain adaptive and effective in the face of a rapidly changing world.

Key Elements of Effective Policy Proposals

This segment underscores the fundamental role of empirical evidence in crafting effective policy proposals within the criminal justice system. By emphasizing the necessity of grounding proposals in robust data and research findings, policymakers can ensure that their initiatives are informed by a deep understanding of the issues at hand. This subsection explores how empirical evidence serves as a foundation for identifying problems, evaluating their scope, and proposing targeted solutions, thereby enhancing the likelihood of policy success.

Building on the empirical foundation, this section highlights the significance of conducting thorough literature reviews and case studies in the policy development process. By delving into existing research, policymakers can contextualize their proposals, identify gaps in current understanding, and draw on successful models from other jurisdictions. An examination of relevant literature and case studies contributes to the formulation of well-informed, contextually aware policy proposals that stand up to scrutiny and enhance the likelihood of successful implementation.

This subsection emphasizes the necessity of engaging a diverse array of stakeholders throughout the policy development process. From law enforcement and the judiciary to community groups and advocacy organizations, the involvement of key stakeholders ensures that policies are comprehensive, responsive, and reflective of the varied perspectives within the criminal justice system. By fostering inclusive participation, policymakers can harness collective expertise, address potential blind spots, and increase the likelihood of policy acceptance and success.

Building on stakeholder identification, this section delves into the importance of establishing collaborative relationships with various entities involved in the criminal justice process. Effective communication and collaboration with law enforcement, the judiciary, community groups, and advocacy organizations are essential for garnering support, navigating potential challenges, and ensuring that proposed policies align with the practical realities of implementation. The establishment of these collaborative partnerships contributes to the development of policies that are not only well-informed but also garner broader support and acceptance.

Turning attention to the legal framework, this subsection underscores the imperative of ensuring that policy proposals align with constitutional principles. By adhering to the fundamental tenets of the Constitution, policymakers can craft policies that withstand legal scrutiny and adhere to the principles of justice and fairness. This section explores how a keen awareness of constitutional considerations is pivotal in safeguarding the legitimacy and effectiveness of proposed criminal justice policies.

Complementing the legal focus, this part of the article delves into the importance of addressing ethical concerns associated with civil liberties and human rights in policy proposals. Recognizing the potential impact of policies on individual rights and freedoms, policymakers must navigate the delicate balance between public safety and protecting the rights of citizens. By incorporating ethical considerations into the policy development process, proposals can align with broader societal values, fostering a criminal justice system that is not only effective but also just and equitable.

The Legislative Process

This section provides an overview of the legislative process in the United States, delineating the roles of both the federal Congress and state legislatures in shaping and passing criminal justice policies. By elucidating the distinct functions and responsibilities of these legislative bodies, policymakers can navigate the intricate pathways through which policies evolve from proposals to enacted laws. Understanding the federal-state interplay is essential for crafting policies that align with the legal frameworks of each jurisdiction.

Building on the legislative overview, this subsection explores the committee system within legislative bodies and its profound impact on the fate of policy proposals. An in-depth analysis of how committees vet and shape proposed legislation provides valuable insights into the hurdles and opportunities for policy advocates. Understanding the committee system’s dynamics is crucial for tailoring policy proposals to align with committee priorities and garnering influential support for successful advancement.

Transitioning to the practical aspects of policy development, this segment emphasizes the necessity of drafting clear and concise policy language. Clarity in language not only ensures that policymakers and legislators understand the intent and impact of proposals but also facilitates public comprehension. This section delves into the art of crafting precise language that encapsulates the policy’s objectives, parameters, and anticipated outcomes, minimizing ambiguity and maximizing the proposal’s effectiveness.

Effective communication is paramount in presenting policy proposals to legislators and policymakers. This subsection explores strategies for conveying complex ideas, evidence, and the societal significance of proposed policies. By examining communication methods such as testimony, briefings, and public forums, policymakers can enhance their ability to articulate the rationale behind proposals, respond to inquiries, and build persuasive narratives that resonate with decision-makers.

This segment delves into the intricate political dynamics that influence the adoption of criminal justice policies. By examining the influences of public opinion, interest groups, and election cycles, policymakers can anticipate challenges and opportunities in advancing their proposals. Understanding the political landscape is vital for tailoring policy approaches that align with prevailing sentiments while also addressing the systemic issues at the core of criminal justice challenges.

Acknowledging the inherently political nature of policy adoption, this subsection underscores the importance of building bipartisan support for criminal justice policy proposals. By transcending partisan divides, policymakers increase the likelihood of policy acceptance and long-term success. Strategies for fostering bipartisan collaboration, coalition-building, and outreach to lawmakers with diverse ideological perspectives are explored, emphasizing the collaborative efforts necessary for effective policy advancement in a politically diverse landscape.

Case Studies

This section engages in an analysis of successful criminal justice policy proposals that have yielded positive outcomes. By scrutinizing policies at both the federal and state levels, this examination seeks to identify key initiatives that have effectively addressed specific challenges within the criminal justice system. Through a lens of empirical evidence and real-world impact, policymakers can glean valuable insights into the factors contributing to the success of these policies and their applicability to broader systemic improvements.

Building on the analysis, this subsection aims to distill common elements present in the successful implementation of criminal justice policies. By identifying recurring themes, strategies, and approaches employed in these success stories, policymakers can extract valuable principles that contribute to the efficacy of policy implementation. Understanding these commonalities lays the groundwork for the development of evidence-based best practices, facilitating the creation of policies with a higher likelihood of achieving positive, tangible outcomes.

Shifting focus to the other side of the spectrum, this section delves into the examination of failed criminal justice policy proposals. Through an in-depth analysis of policies that did not achieve their intended objectives, policymakers gain valuable insights into the pitfalls, challenges, and contextual factors contributing to failure. Understanding these shortcomings is crucial for refining future policy initiatives, avoiding recurrent issues, and fostering a more resilient approach to criminal justice reform.

Concluding the case study analysis, this subsection extracts valuable insights from failed proposals to inform future policy development. By critically evaluating the root causes of failure and the complex interplay of factors involved, policymakers can enhance their capacity to anticipate challenges, adjust strategies, and develop more resilient and adaptive policies. The lessons learned from failed proposals contribute to the iterative nature of policy development, emphasizing the importance of continuous learning and improvement in the pursuit of effective criminal justice reform.

As we conclude this exploration of the intricate process of developing policy proposals within the United States criminal justice system, it is imperative to reaffirm the central role that these proposals play in shaping the trajectory of law enforcement, judiciary, and community relations. Policy proposals stand as dynamic instruments for fostering systemic change, addressing societal challenges, and ensuring the continued evolution of a responsive and effective criminal justice system.

Throughout this article, a consistent theme has emerged – the critical importance of evidence-based, collaborative, and ethical policy-making. Grounding policies in empirical evidence, engaging diverse stakeholders, and navigating legal and ethical considerations are foundational principles for crafting initiatives that stand up to scrutiny and bring about meaningful change. The emphasis on these principles underscores the commitment to ensuring that policy proposals not only address immediate challenges but also contribute to the long-term integrity and effectiveness of the criminal justice system.

In conclusion, this article serves as a call to action for continued research, innovation, and active engagement in shaping the future of criminal justice policies. The challenges facing the criminal justice system are multifaceted and ever-evolving, requiring a sustained commitment to staying informed, adapting strategies, and collaborating across disciplines. Policymakers, researchers, practitioners, and community members alike are urged to contribute to the ongoing dialogue, drawing on the lessons learned from successful and failed policies, to collectively forge a more equitable, transparent, and responsive criminal justice system. By embracing the principles outlined in this article and fostering a culture of continuous improvement, we can collectively strive towards a criminal justice system that reflects the values of justice, fairness, and the well-being of all members of society.

Bibliography

• Clear, T. R. (2007). Imprisoning communities: How mass incarceration makes disadvantaged neighborhoods worse. Oxford University Press.
• Cresswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.
• Garland, D. (2001). The culture of control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. University of Chicago Press.
• Holton, R. (2018). Making law and policy that work: A handbook for law and policy makers on reforming criminal justice and related areas. Hart Publishing.
• Lipton, D., Martinson, R., & Wilks, J. (1975). The effectiveness of correctional treatment: A survey of treatment evaluation studies. Praeger Publishers.
• Mastrofski, S. D., Ritti, R. R., & Hoffmaster, D. (1987). Organizational models of police: A theoretical and empirical analysis. Journal of Criminal Justice, 15(1), 1-18.
• Nagin, D. S., & Telep, C. W. (2017). Procedural justice and legal compliance: A theoretical perspective. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 13, 5-28.
• Reiss, A. J. (1992). Police organization in the twentieth century. Crime and Justice, 15, 327-377.
• Rosenbaum, D. P., & Lurigio, A. J. (1994). Measuring the deterrent effect of imprisonment: A methodological note. Criminology, 32(3), 355-376.
• Sampson, R. J., & Wilson, W. J. (1995). Toward a theory of race, crime, and urban inequality. In J. Hagan & R. Peterson (Eds.), Crime and inequality (pp. 37-56). Stanford University Press.
• Skogan, W. G. (2006). Asymmetry in the impact of encounters with police. Policing and Society, 16(2), 99-126.
• Thacher, D. (2001). The rise of community policing as an ideal type. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 7(1), 239-258.
• Tyler, T. R. (2003). Procedural justice, legitimacy, and the effective rule of law. Crime and Justice, 30(1), 283-357.
• van Dijk, J. J. (2008). The world of crime: Breaking the silence on problems of security, justice, and development across the world. Sage Publications.
• Weisburd, D., & Eck, J. E. (2004). What can police do to reduce crime, disorder, and fear? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 593(1), 42-65.

Princeton Correspondents on Undergraduate Research

A Freshman’s Guide to Writing a Research Policy Memo

The freshman seminars are one of the unique experiences at Princeton. While they may seem intimidating at first, they made me think of the process of research in my very first year in college. Not everyone might become a full-time researcher – I, for example, want to become a policy analyst – but many of our jobs will involve research, and the structure of the freshman seminar is very conducive to the research process. In the Economics of Immigration seminar that I took with Professor Leah Boustan during Fall 2019, we discussed aspects of the economic effects of immigration both on the receiving country and on the migrants themselves. Our final deliverable was a research policy memo – a document that describes a policy intervention by the government, by first arguing the need for it, then describing its advantages, and finally proposing a way by which it might be implemented. In order to write an effective memo, I had to research an issue that necessitated looking at it from diverse points of view. The process made me appreciate several principles of writing a policy memo.

First and foremost, define the problem precisely and clearly . It sounds almost common-sense, but it turned out to be a complicated exercise. For example, for my memo, I proposed a way by which the US government could arrest the economic deterioration in struggling regions like the Midwest incentivizing the labor workforce that had migrated to other areas to return. It is easy to choose a broad, pervasive issue – regional inequality in my case – but, when writing a paper, it is important to focus on a particular aspect of that issue. The idea came to me – quite serendipitously – in the seminar when we were discussing studies that showed that low-skilled immigrants tend to benefit more when they are part of enclaves that have more high-skilled workers. I was also aware that the decline of manufacturing in the Midwest precipitated an exodus of the younger or the wealthier members of the region (who tend to be more productive) in search of better opportunities.

I later realized that such moments of serendipity are often inspired by discussions that take place around us, whether inside the classroom or outside it. During the seminar, I discussed the idea with Professor Boustan, who helped me refine my thoughts and focus on the specific issue of knowledge transfer between the natives and the returning population. Focusing on a particular issue enables you to comprehensively examine the issue at hand, rather than skim over several partially-developed ideas.

Sometimes the discussions spilled outside the classroom, and at such times, I realized that I was sometimes making arguments that did not help with my overall narrative. That leads to the second guiding principle: in order to make a persuasive argument, make sure that your narrative never strays from the stated problem . I often found myself exploring all the different ripples of an idea, which seemed very enticing at first, but soon after they led me down the proverbial rabbit hole. At such times, I found it useful to discuss the issues with friends. As outsiders or as students who were not in this class, they would ask some – in retrospect – simple but powerful questions (“the decline of manufacturing in the Rust Belt is interesting, but how is that important for the proposal?”) that made me realize that I was wandering away from my stated problem. That is not to say that these other arguments were not important – it is just that I would not do any justice to them in my proposal.

The third principle that I realized is to think through the larger strands of your argument and how they relate to each other . While my policy prescription was mainly economic, Prof. Boustan had sensitized us to the fact that migration is also a deeply personal and social issue. Thus, while describing the severity of the problem, I often found that it made sense to emphasize the human cost of economic despair – and then emphasize the economic aspects of the problem. Economics is a social discipline, looking at societal issues, and therefore, it often makes eminent sense to explore the problem from multiple disciplines that inform the human condition.

Finally, give a great deal of thought to the implementation of your idea , in other words, if your ideas are going to help solve some problem, try to explain how those ideas can be turned into actionable advice. For example, while the main component of my policy prescription took the form of economic incentives for the returning population, I also had to emphasize the psychological reasons as to why they might return. In this, I was inspired by the examples of several countries like India, China, South Korea, and others, that have used a combination of economic incentives along with sentimental reasons to attract their famous native-born, who had emigrated to other countries, back to their homeland. Thus, even though my memo was about economic policy, I took time to emphasize family considerations and nostalgia for the place of one’s childhood.

Proper implementation is vitally important to the success of any project, and I found that thinking of the mechanism of implementation influenced every aspect of my research – right from how I thought about the research question. In my experience, one should consider implementation from the very beginning, even when the idea is a work-in-process, and continue to revise these ideas iteratively as they continue along the research process. While these guidelines are specifically for writing a policy memo, many of them are applicable to writing research papers more generally. Of course, not every research paper will need to consider all these principles. The issue of implementation would possibly not be a consideration for researchers in mathematics writing a paper that proves a theorem but would be for any research that has a component of practice. In general, however, I believe that these principles would be useful in a wide variety of contexts and many disciplines. Keeping these principles in mind should be very helpful in creating a coherent, persuasive, and well-structured paper – whether it’s a policy memo or otherwise.

–  Abhimanyu Banerjee, Social Sciences Correspondent

Share this:

• Share on Tumblr

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

A policy memo is a practical, professionally written document that can vary in length from one page to over twenty-five pages. It provides analysis and recommendations directed to a predetermined audience regarding a specific situation, topic, or issue. A well-written policy memo reflects attention to the policy problem. It is well organized and structured in a clear and concise style that assumes the reader possesses limited knowledge of, as well as little time to conduct research about, the topic of concern. There is no thesis statement or overall theoretical framework underpinning the document; the focus is on describing one or more specific policy recommendations and their supporting action items.

Bhasin, Tavishi and Charity Butcher. “Teaching Effective Policy Memo Writing and Infographics in a Policy Programme.” European Political Science 21 (2022): 1-17; Davis, Jennifer. Guide to Writing Effective Policy Memos. MIT OpenCourseWare, Water and Sanitation Infrastructure Planning in Developing Countries, Spring 2004; Judge, Andrew. "Designing and Implementing Policy Writing Assessments: A Practical Guide." Teaching Public Administration 39 (2021): 351-368; Pennock, Andrew. “The Case for Using Policy Writing in Undergraduate Political Science Courses.” PS: Political Science and Politics 44 (January 2011): 141-146.

How to Approach Writing a Policy Memo

Benefits of Writing a Policy Memo

Writing a policy memo is intended to support the following learning outcomes:

• Helps students learn how to write academically rigorous, persuasive papers about a specific “real-world” issue;
• Teaches how to choose and craft a document’s content based on the needs of a particular audience [rather than for a general readership];
• Prepares students to write an effective position paper in non-academic settings;
• Promotes researching, organizing, and writing a persuasive paper that emphasizes presenting evidence-based recommendations rather than simply reporting a study's findings;
• Teaches students to be client-oriented and to better anticipate the assumptions and concerns of their targeted readership;
• Encourages reflective thinking about the cause and consequential effect of a particular recommendation and to anticipate what questions stakeholder groups may have; and,
• Enables students to create original work that synthesizes policy-making research into a clearly written document advocating change and specific courses of action.

Do not approach writing a policy memo in the same way as you would an academic research paper . Yes, there are certain commonalities in how the content is presented [e.g., a well-written problem statement], but the overarching objective of a policy memo is not to discover or create new knowledge. It is focused on providing to a predetermined group of readers the rationale for choosing a particular policy alternative and/or specific courses of action leading to positive social and political change within society. In this sense, most policy memos possess a component of advocacy and advice intended to promote evidence-based dialog about an issue.

Essential Elements of an Effective Policy Memo Focus and Objectives The overall content of your memo should be strategically aimed at achieving the following goal: convincing your target audience about the accuracy of your analysis and, by extension, that your policy recommendations are valid. Avoid lengthy digressions and superfluous narration that can distract the reader from understanding the policy problem. Note that your target audience is defined in two ways: by the decision-makers who can advocate for or implement change and by individuals and groups most likely impacted by your policy recommendations should they be implemented. Professionally Written Always keep in mind that a policy memorandum is a tool for decision-making. Keep it professional and avoid hyperbole and clever or indeterminate language that could undermine the credibility of your document. The presentation and content of the memo should be polished, easy to understand, and free of jargon. Writing professionally does not imply that you can’t be passionate about your topic, but your policy recommendations should be evidence-based and grounded in solid reasoning and a succinct writing style. Evidence-based A policy memo is not an argumentative debate paper. The reader should expect your recommendations to be based upon evidence that the problem exists and understand the consequences [both good and bad] of adopting particular policy alternatives. To address this, policy memos should include a clear cost-benefit analysis that considers anticipated outcomes, the potential impact on stakeholder groups you have identified, clear and quantifiable performance goals, and how success will be measured. Accessibility A policy memo requires clear and simple language that avoids unnecessary jargon and concepts of an academic discipline. Do not skip around. Use one paragraph to develop one idea or argument and make that idea or argument explicit within the first one or two sentences. Your memo should have a straightforward, explicit organizational structure that provides well-explained arguments arranged within a logical sequence of reasoning [think in terms of an if/then logic model--if this policy recommendation, then this action; if this benefit, then this potential cost; if this group is allocated resources, then this group may be excluded]. Presentation Style The visual impact of your memo affects the reader’s ability to grasp your ideas quickly and easily. Include a table of contents and list of figures and charts, if necessary. Subdivide the text using clear and descriptive headings to guide the reader. Incorporate devices such as capitalization, bold text, and bulleted items, but be consistent, and don’t go crazy; the purpose is to facilitate access to specific sections of the paper for successive readings. If it is difficult to find information in your document, policy makers will not use it. Practical and Feasible Your memorandum should provide a set of actions based on what is actually happening in reality. Do not base your policy recommendations on future scenarios or hypothetical situations that could be interpreted as unlikely to occur or that do not appear possible because you have not adequately explained the circumstances supporting these scenarios. Here again, your cost-benefit analysis can be essential to validating the practicality and feasibility of your recommendations. Explicit Transparency Provide specific criteria to assess either the success or failure of the policies you are recommending. As much as possible, this criteria should be derived from your cost/benefit analysis or framed as a SWOT [Strengths-weaknesses, opportunities-threats]. Do not hide or under-report information that does not support your policy recommendations. Just as you would note the limitations of your study in a research paper, a policy memo should describe issues of weakness of your analysis. Explain why they may arise and why your recommendations are still valid despite these issues. Be open and straightforward because doing so strengthens your arguments and it will help the reader assess the overall impact of recommended policy changes.

NOTE: Technically, it would not be wrong for your policy memo to argue for maintaining the status quo. However, the general objective of a policy memo assignment is to critically examine opportunities for transformative change and to highlight the risks of on-going complacency. If you choose to argue for maintaining the current policy trajectory, in whole or in part, be concise in identifying and systematically refuting all relevant policy options. Again, it must be rooted in an evidence-based cost/benefit analysis. Whether maintaining current policies is short-term or long-term [and these need to be clearly defined], you must explain concisely why each possible outcome of maintaining the status quo would be preferable to any alternative policy options and recommended courses of action. If your argument for maintaining the status quo is short-term, explain what factors in the future could trigger a policy-related course correction.

Herman, Luciana. Policy Memos. John F. Kennedy School of Government. Harvard University; How to Write a Public Policy Memo. Student Learning Center. University of California, Berkeley; Policy Memo. Thompson Writing Program, Writing Studio. Duke University; Policy Memo Guidelines. Cornell Fellows Program. Cornell University; Memo: Audience and Purpose. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Policy Memo Requirements and Guidelines, 2012-2013 edition. Institute for Public Policy Studies. University of Denver; Thrall, A. Trevor. How to Write a Policy Memo. University of Michigan--Dearborn, 2006; Mastro, Oriana Skylar. "Teach What you Preach: A Comprehensive Guide to the Policy Memo as a Methods Teaching Tool." Journal of Political Science Education 17 (2021): 326-340; Writing Effective Memos. Electronic Hallway. Daniel J. Evans School of Public Affairs. University of Washington; Writing Effective Policy Memos. Water & Sanitation Infrastructure Planning syllabus. Spring 2004. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Structure and Writing Style

The contents of a policy memo can be organized in a variety of ways. Below is a general template adapted from the “Policy Memo Requirements and Guidelines, 2012-2013 edition” published by the Institute for Public Policy Studies at the University of Denver and from suggestions made in the book, A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem-Solving [Eugene Bardach. 4th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2012] . Both sources provide useful approaches to writing a policy memo in the event your professor does not provide specific guidance. Overall, the tone of your writing should be formal but assertive. Note that the most important consideration in terms of writing style is professionalism, not creativity. I.  Cover Page Provide a complete and informative cover page that includes the document title, date, the full names and titles of the writer or writers [i.e., Joe Smith, Student, Department of Political Science, University of Southern California]. The title of the policy memo should be formally written and specific to the policy issue [e.g., “Charter Schools, Fair Housing, and Legal Standards: A Call for Equal Treatment”]. For longer memos, consider including a brief executive summary that highlights key findings and recommendations.

II.  Introduction and Problem Definition A policy memorandum should begin with a short summary introduction that defines the policy problem, provides important contextual background information, and explains what issues are being covered. This is followed by a short justification for writing the memo, why a decision needs to be made [answering the “So What?” question], and an outline of the recommendations you make or key themes the reader should keep in mind. Summarize your main points in a few sentences, then conclude with a description of how the remainder of the memo is organized.

III.  Methods This is usually where other research about the problem or issue of concern is summarized. Describe how you plan to identify and locate the information on which your policy memo is based. This may include peer-reviewed journals and books as well as possible professionals you interviewed, databases and websites you explored, or legislative histories or relevant case law that you used. Remember this is not intended to be a thorough literature review; only choose sources that persuasively support your position or that help lay a foundation for understanding why actions need to be taken.

IV.  Issue Analysis This section is where you explain in detail how you examined the issue and, by so doing, persuade the reader of the appropriateness of your analysis. This is followed by a description of how your analysis contributes to the current policy debate. It is important to demonstrate that the policy issue may be more complex than a basic pro versus con debate. Very few public policy debates can be reduced to this type of rhetorical dichotomy. Be sure your analysis is thorough and takes into account all factors that may influence possible strategies that could advance a recommended set of solutions.

V.  Proposed Solutions Write a brief review of the specific solutions you evaluated, noting the criteria by which you examined and compared different proposed policy alternatives. Identify the stakeholders impacted by the proposed solutions and describe in what ways they will benefit from your proposed solution. Focus on identifying solutions that have not been proposed or tested elsewhere. Offer a contrarian viewpoint that challenges the reader to take into account a new perspective on the research problem. Note that you can propose solutions that may be considered radical or unorthodox, but they must be realistic and politically feasible.

VI.  Strategic Recommendations Solutions are just opinions until you provide a path that delineates how to get from where you are to where you want to go. Describe what you believe are the best recommended courses of action [i.e., "action items"]. In writing this section, state the broad approach to be taken, with specific, practical steps or measures that should be implemented. Be sure to also state by whom and within what time frame these actions should be taken. Conclude by highlighting the consequences of maintaining the status quo [or if supporting the status quo, why change at this time would be detrimental]. Also, clearly explain why your strategic recommendations are best suited for addressing the current policy situation.

VI.  Limitations As in any academic paper, you must describe limitations to your analysis. In particular, ask yourself if each of your recommendations are realistic, feasible, and sustainable, and in particular, that they can be implemented within the current bureaucratic, economic, political, cultural, social, or other type of contextual climate in which they reside. If not, you should go back and clarify your recommendations and provide further evidence as to why the recommendation is most appropriate for addressing the issue. It does not necessarily undermine the overall recommendations of your study if the limitation cannot be overcome, but you must clearly acknowledge this. Place the limitation within the context of a critical issue that needs further study in concurrence with possible implementation [i.e., findings indicate service learning promotes civic engagement, but there is a lack of data on the types of service learning programs that exist among high schools in South Central Los Angeles].

VII.  Cost-Benefit Analysis This section may be optional but, in some cases, your professor may ask you to include an explicit summary analysis of the costs and benefits of each recommendation. If you are asked to include a separate cost-benefit analysis, be concise and brief. Since most policy memos do not have a formal conclusion, the cost-benefit analysis can act as your conclusion by summarizing the key differences among policy alternatives and recommended courses of action.

NOTE:   A feature found in many policy memos is the inclusion of text boxes or sidebars that are separate from the main body of text. A text box contains a useful checklist, case study, summary, example, quotation, definition, or expansion of an idea that is located close to the text it supports. A sidebar is a type of exclamation located beside or within the main content that brings further attention to a key point or is used to encourage the reader to pay particular attention to that section of the memo. A sidebar often contains a quotation or brief statement lifted from the main text. Both features are appropriate to use in your policy memo, but don't overdo it. Limit the use of a text box or sidebar to only the most essential text that expands or adds value to understanding content in a specific section of the policy memo, in particular, in the issue analysis section or when describing your strategic recommendations.

Bardach, Eugene. A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem-Solving . 4th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2012; Herman, Luciana. Policy Memos. John F. Kennedy School of Government. Harvard University; How to Write a Public Policy Memo. Student Learning Center. University of California, Berkeley; Policy Memo Guidelines. Cornell Fellows Program. Cornell University; Memo: Audience and Purpose. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Pennock, Andrew. “The Case for Using Policy Writing in Undergraduate Political Science Courses.” PS: Political Science and Politics 44 (January 2011): 141-146; Policy Memo Requirements and Guidelines, 2012-2013 edition. Institute for Public Policy Studies. University of Denver; Text Boxes and Callouts. Australian Government Style Manual; Thrall, A. Trevor. How to Write a Policy Memo. University of Michigan--Dearborn, 2006; Sajedinejad, S., et al. From Research to Impact: A Toolkit for Developing Effective Policy Briefs . Toronto, Ontario: Policy Bench, Fraser Mustard Institute of Human Development, University of Toronto, 2021; What Are Policy Briefs. FAO Corporate Document Repository. United Nations; Writing Effective Memos. Electronic Hallway. Daniel J. Evans School of Public Affairs. University of Washington; Writing Effective Policy Memos. Water & Sanitation Infrastructure Planning syllabus. Spring 2004. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Proofreading the Memo

Problems to Avoid

The style and arrangement of an effectively written memo can differ because no two policies, nor their intended audience of readers, are exactly the same. Nevertheless, before you submit your policy memo, be sure you proofread the document so that you avoid these common problems. If you identify one or more of these problems, you should rewrite or re-organize the content accordingly.

1.  Acknowledge the Law of Unintended Consequences . No policy analysis is complete until you have identified for whom the policy actions are supposed to benefit and identify what groups may be impacted by the consequences of their implementation. Review your memo and make sure you have clearly delineated who could be helped and who could be potentially harmed or excluded from benefiting from your recommended policy actions. As noted by Wilcoxen, this is also important because describing who may or may not benefit can help you anticipate which stakeholder groups will support your policy recommendations and which groups will likely oppose it. Calculating potential "winners" and "losers" will help reveal how much it may cost to compensate those groups excluded from benefiting. By building this compensation into your policy recommendations, you are better able to show the reader how to reduce political obstacles.

2.  Anticipate the Reader's Questions . Examine your recommended courses of action and identify any open-ended, declarative, indeterminate, or ambiguous statements that could lead the reader to have to ask further questions. For example, you declare that the most important factor supporting school choice among parents is distance from home. Without clarification or additional information, this could lead the reader to ask numerous questions, such as, why or by what means do you know this, what distance is considered to be too far, what factors contribute to parent's decision about school choice and distance from schools, or what age group does this most apply to. Clarify these types of open-ended statements so that your policy recommendations can be more fully understood and accepted as valid.

3.  Be Concise . Being succinct in your writing does not relate to the overall length of the policy memo or the amount of words you use. It relates to your ability to provide a lot of information clearly and without superfluous detail. Strategies include r eviewing long paragraphs and breaking them up into parts, looking for long sentences and eliminating unnecessary qualifiers and modifiers, and deleting prepositional phrases in favor of adjectives or adverbs. The overarching goal is to be thorough and precise in how your ideas are presented and to avoid writing that uses too many words or excessively technical expressions.

4.  Focus on the Results . While it is important that your memo describe the methods by which you gathered and analyzed the data informing your policy recommendations, the content should focus on explaining the results of your analysis and the logic underpinning your recommendations. Remember your audience. The reader is presumably a decision-maker with limited knowledge of the issue and who has little time to contemplate the methods of analysis. The validity of your findings will be determined primarily by your reader's determination that your policy recommendations and supporting action items are realistic and rooted in sound reasoning. Review your memo and make sure the statement about how you gathered the data is brief and concise. If necessary, technical issues or raw data can be included in an appendix.

5.  Minimize Subjective Reasoning . Although the memo should be persuasive, avoid emphasizing your personal opinion about the topic. A policy memo should be written in a professional tone with recommendations based upon empirical reasoning while, at the same time, reflecting a level of passion about your topic. However, being passionate does not imply being opinionated. The memo should emphasize presenting all of the facts a reader would need to reach their own conclusions about the validity of your recommendations.

6.  Use of Non-textual Elements . It is common for policy memos to include data, statistics, and other types of information that require visualization. Review all tables, charts, figures, graphs, photographs, and other non-textual elements and make sure they are labeled correctly. Examine each in relation to the text, making sure they are described adequately and that they relate to the overall content of your memo. If these elements are located in appendices, make sure descriptive references to them within the text are correct [i.e., reference to Figure 2 is actually the table you want the reader to look at].

Bardach, Eugene and Eric M. Pataschnik. A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem-Solving . 5th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2016; Herman, Luciana. Policy Memos. John F. Kennedy School of Government. Harvard University; How to Write a Public Policy Memo. Student Learning Center. University of California, Berkeley; Memo: Audience and Purpose. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Policy Memo Requirements and Guidelines, 2012-2013 edition. Institute for Public Policy Studies. University of Denver; Wilcoxen, Peter J. Tips on Writing a Policy Memo. PAI 723, Economics for Public Decisions Course Syllabus. Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University.

Writing Tip

Difference Between a Policy Memo and a Policy Brief

A policy memo and a policy brief share much in common. They both describe the rationale for choosing particular policy alternatives or courses of action, they both contain persuasive language, and both documents are written for non-experts, such as, practitioners, politicians, non-governmental agency workers, lobbyists, and others who work on or regularly make decisions about the issue addressed in the document. Both documents are free of jargon or technical terminology and focus on communicating the practical implications of prior policy research to a specific audience based on available evidence.

Ironically, however, a policy memo is typically shorter in length than a policy “brief.” A policy memo usually ranges from one to twenty-five pages, while a policy brief can be anywhere from twenty to more than a hundred pages in length depending on the complexity of the topic. Therefore:

• A policy brief is commonly produced in response to a request from a decision-maker concerning an issue that requires more thorough information to address the underlying policy problem or they are produced by an advocacy group or organization for the purpose of influencing a specific policy, often in an urgent tone. Non-textual elements , such as, figures, charts, graphs, or diagrams, are often included.
• A policy memo is concisely written and presents information, ideas, and recommendations clearly so the reader can quickly scan the document for the most relevant points. Policy memos focus on brevity and often synthesize existing evidence in language that is direct, specific, and with minimal background information or historical context. Non-textual elements are only included if necessary.

Guide to Writing an Effective Policy Memo. Leadership for Educational Equity, New York; Policy Briefs. The Writing Center, University of North Carolina;  Policy Memo. Writing Studio, Duke University; Manny, Karoline. What is a Policy Brief/Memo? Grace Doherty Library, Centra College; Sajedinejad, S., et al. From Research to Impact: A Toolkit for Developing Effective Policy Briefs . Toronto, Ontario: Policy Bench. Fraser Mustard Institute of Human Development, University of Toronto, 2021.

Another Writing Tip

Citing Sources

Policy memos generally do not include extensive footnotes, endnotes, further readings, or a bibliography. However, if you use supporting information in a memo, cite the source in the text. For example, you may refer to a study that supported a specific assertion by referencing it in the following manner: "A study published in 2012 by the Eagleton Center for Public Interest Polling showed that public opinion towards China was....” However, some assignments may require a formal list of references. Before writing your memo, be sure you are clear about how your professor wants you to cite any sources referred to in your analysis.

Policy Memo. Thompson Writing Program, Writing Studio. Duke University.

Yet Another Writing Tip

Using Non-Textual Elements

Policy memos are not just text-based but frequently include numeric tables and charts or other non-textual elements, such as photographs, maps, and illustrations. However, it is important that you use non-textual elements judiciously and only in relation to supplementing and clarifying arguments made in the text so as not to distract the reader from the main points of your memo . As with any non-textual elements, describe what the reader is seeing and why the data is important to understanding the policy problem.

Still Yet Another Writing Tip

Including Appendices

The purpose of an appendix is to provide supplementary material that is not an essential part of the main text but which may be helpful in providing the reader with more complete information. If you have information that is vital to understanding an issue discussed in the memo, it can be included in one or more appendices. However, if you have a lot of information, don't write a five page memo and include twenty pages of appendices. Memos are intended to be  succinct and clearly expressed. If there is a lot of data, refer to the source and summarize it, or discuss with your professor how it should be included.

• << Previous: Writing Field Notes
• Next: Writing a Reflective Paper >>
• Last Updated: Jun 3, 2024 9:44 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

8 steps to drafting a policy proposal

Creating an effective policy proposal is a critical skill for any lobbyist, especially when addressing issues of public concern. The ability to craft a compelling and persuasive policy proposal can significantly influence the success of your lobbying efforts. Here's a brief guide to creating a policy proposal,

STEP 1: Identify the Issue

Clearly define the issue of public concern you want to address. Understanding the problem in-depth is crucial for formulating a viable solution.

STEP 2: Research and Analysis

Conduct thorough research to gather relevant data and information. This includes understanding existing policies, stakeholders' perspectives, and potential impacts of the proposed changes.

STEP 3: Define Your Objective

Clearly articulate the goal of your proposal. What specific change or outcome are you advocating for?

STEP 4: Develop a Strategy

Outline a strategic approach to achieve your objective. This involves identifying key stakeholders, potential allies, and opposition, and planning how to engage with them.

STEP 5: Draft the Proposa l

Write a clear, concise, and compelling proposal. It should include an introduction to the issue, evidence-based analysis, your proposed solution, and the expected benefits of the solution.

STEP 6: Engage Stakeholders

Build support for your proposal by engaging with key stakeholders. This includes decision-makers, influencers, and the public.

STEP 7: Present the Proposal

Prepare to present your proposal in various forums, adapting your communication style to different audiences.

STEP 8: Follow-up and Adaptation

Be prepared to follow up with stakeholders, address feedback, and adapt your proposal as necessary.

Our Comprehensive Course

In our full course, we delve deeper into each of these steps, providing you with the tools, techniques, and insider knowledge to become a successful lobbyist. You will learn:

- Advanced research techniques specific to policy-making.

- Strategies for stakeholder engagement and coalition building.

- Techniques for persuasive writing and effective communication.

- Methods for monitoring and evaluating policy impact.

This course is designed not only to teach you how to write a policy proposal but also to complete a comprehensive lobbying strategy from start to finish. It's an invaluable resource for anyone looking to make a meaningful impact in the world of public policy and advocacy.

Stay tuned for more information on our course and learn the art of transforming public concerns into actionable policy changes!

COURSE RELATED TO THIS ARTICLE

RELATED NEWS & ARTICLES

Επαλήθευση χρέους στο πλαίσιο εκκαθαρίσεων στην Κύπρο

Protect Your Business: the Legal Essentials Every Entrepreneur Must Know

Επιχορήγηση της ΑνΑΔ – Ποιος είναι ο «δικαιούχος»;

Social Media

Public Policy Research Paper

View sample Public Policy Research Paper. Browse other research paper examples and check the list of political science  research paper topics for more inspiration. If you need a research paper written according to all the academic standards, you can always turn to our experienced writers for help. This is how your paper can get an A! Also, chech our custom research proposal writing service for professional assistance. We offer high-quality assignments for reasonable rates.

I. Introduction

Academic writing, editing, proofreading, and problem solving services, get 10% off with 24start discount code, ii. public administration as a foundation for the study of public policy, iii. open-systems administration, iv. stages models of public policy, v. agenda setting, vi. policy formulation and adoption, vii. decision-making models and policy formulation and adoption, viii. implementation, ix. evaluation, x. alternative models in the study of public policy, xi. future directions.

Policy studies emerged as an important focus in political science in the 1970s. In 1969, David Easton (1969), president of the American Political Science Association, was frustrated with the trend in political science research to study narrow questions that lent themselves to the quantitative methods expected by the behavioral movement. Thus, he called for a postbehavioral revolution where political scientists would study the most important political problems of the day even when quantitative methodologies could not be employed. Easton’s call served as a catalyst for policy research that sought to explain and predict policy patterns as well as to evaluate the relative impact of various types of policy solutions.

This research paper discusses a variety of approaches to the study of public policy and shows how the public administration and public policy subfields are closely related and at times intertwined. At the time of Easton’s call for relevance, the public administration subfield had declined as a prominent subfield in the discipline. The behavioral movement had prevailed in expectations for quantitative research, and public administration had not moved toward a grand theory or wed itself to quantitative methods. However, it had gravitated toward more policy-relevant models and concepts that were important foundations for the emerging field of public policy.

One of the policy subfield’s great advantages for those interested in government and politics is its interdisciplinary and holistic focus. Research is broad ranging and borrows heavily from the work of neighboring subfields and other academic disciplines. This can be found in its use of ideas such as systems theory, plural and elite models, subsystems concepts, and decision-making research.

Over the last four decades, a number of strands of policy research have developed as the subfield has matured. This research paper uses the policy stages framework to organize most of the literature discussed. However, a few of the newer policy frameworks follow this discussion in the alternative models and future directions sections of this research paper.

Policy and administration studies have many areas of overlapping interest. Michael Nelson (1977) suggested that the popularity of policy studies was temporal and it was more a modified version of public administration than a new subfield. A close study shows that the two fields do have substantial overlap, and a review of public administration literature is important to one’s understanding of public policy.

American scholarly attention to public administration dates back to the late 1800s when Woodrow Wilson (1887) wrote his classic essay calling for the development of a career public service. An increase in the professionalism of government administration was necessary to meet the increasing quantity and complexity of government activities. He encouraged comparative study of administration and argued that since administration is distinct from politics, the United States could examine administrative practices of European monarchies without fear of undermining its democratic form of government.

Wilson’s work was written around the same time that the path-breaking German sociologist Max Weber conducted his seminal studies on bureaucracy. Weber (1946) and Wilson (1887) each posited principles of efficiency, centralized authority, hierarchical structures, educated workers, and application of expertise to administration. Weber saw the development of bureaucracy as a natural corollary to modern government and asserted that its rule-driven decisions supported the rule of law and egalitarian values of democracy. The classical model of administration was further developed by scholars who participated in the scientific management and principles schools of administration. Scholars such as Luther Gulick, Frederick Taylor, and Leonard White reinforced the view of bureaucracy as a rational, efficient, hierarchical machine. This paradigm contributed to the sense that administration and policy were conducted in separate spheres and that organizations were controlled by the administrator at the top of the organization’s hierarchy. A careful reading of the early scholars, especially Wilson and Weber, shows that they realized the line between policy and politics was not as distinct as later scholars’ attributions. Wilson (1887) discussed the need for public opinion to be a guide for administrators but also stated that administrators should have some discretionary authority. Weber (1946) cautioned that bureaucrats would use their wealth of information and knowledge to their advantage, observed that bureaucrats were likely to categorize specialized information as official secrets, and warned that an authoritative monarch would be powerless opposite an administrative expert.

By the mid-1900s, many administration scholars challenged the classical model and its primary attention to structure, formal rules, and hierarchy within a single organization. Instead, open-systems scholars discussed the influence of other systems on the political system and how changes in the environment required organizations to adapt. Philip Selznick (1949) in his study, TVA and the Grass Roots, revealed how significantly local grassroots organizations and interests can affect an agency implementing public policy. He showed how organizations have to consider threats from external organizations and interests. One strategy to lessen or neutralize the threat was co-optation. Organizations incorporated dissident parties either formally or informally into their decision-making structures. These representatives provided increased legitimacy by expanding the perspectives that made up the decision-making body. Ideally, the representative also communicated information favorably back to the external group. When necessary, agency officials changed policy requirements to reduce external hostility to their programs. Since these policy changes occurred without participation of elected officials, a more positive view of co-optation suggested that it increased the level of democratic participation at the local level. Selznick’s contributions to an understanding of the important role of external influences, implementation, and intergovernmental complexity have been significant contributions to the study of public policy.

In addition, the open-systems model encouraged thinking about organizations as organisms rather than human machines. Thus, to understand organizations, scholars need to study both formal and informal elements rather than rely on the overwhelming emphasis that the classical model places on formal structures. Chester Barnard (1938) posited that executives and scholars must seek to understand an organization’s people, customs, myths, and values as much as the organization’s structure and rules.

The open-systems model of administration continues to contribute to policy scholarship. It helps to show that policies are not self-implementing and that the administrative variable has an independent impact on the effectiveness of programs. Policy scholars are still coming to terms with the nexus of formal and informal elements of the policy process, and the institutional and constructivist scholars are currently building on the insights of Barnard and others.

As the public policy subfield was developing, it relied heavily on case studies that permitted holistic examination of a single policy. These case studies suggested important generalizations about the policy process that extended the focus of policy scholars to include the examination of the political and administrative processes that preceded and followed formal adoption of policy. Very early in the subfield, a stages heuristic became the dominant model. The stages model typically identified agenda setting, policy formulation, policy adoption, policy implementation, and policy evaluation as the sequential processes of the model (Anderson, 1975; Jones, 1970). Theoretical case studies of the stages contributed to increased understanding of the policy process, especially in the areas of agenda setting, implementation, and evaluation, which had previously received less attention from political scientists than policy formulation and adoption. As useful as the stages heuristic was in organizing the policy subfield, it fell prey to intense criticism for a variety of reasons: no causal theory, insufficient research guidance, too little multistage research, insufficient hypothesis generation, imprecise prediction, and too much linearity (Sabatier, 1991). However, it should be noted that even the scholars who were most closely associated with developing the model clearly indicated that the stages often were not distinct in actual practice and their order and characteristics could be quite varied (Anderson; Jones).

More than four decades later, the stages heuristic continues to anchor a substantial amount of policy research. The processes involved in getting the attention of the government, building coalitions of support, navigating the formal processes of policy adoption, crafting implementation, and modifying the policy over time continue to be essential elements of policy study even for those who are employing other, newer approaches.

Studies of agenda setting have tried to discern why some issues are given serious attention by government and others are not. Even among those that do receive serious attention, the question arises as to why some issues move quickly to reach agenda status and others take much longer. Thus, policy scholars sought to delineate the circumstances that make it more or less likely for a problem to be recognized and attended to by public officials.

Cobb and Elder (1975) observed the variation in the ability of groups to gain access to public officials and argued that this access influenced whether an issue was elevated to the formal agenda of a governmental entity. By the time public policy became a serious subfield, the importance of differential access to public officials had already been explored by the work of Schattschneider (1960). His work drew attention to the uneven participation in governmental decisions. His findings, that business interests and upper classes dominated public policy participation, flew in the face of the traditional pluralists’ claims of policy openness. It also elevated examination of how governmental leaders moved some issues onto the agenda and blocked others. Two years later, another pivotal study added to this point by developing the concept of “nondecisions” and arguing that the blocking of certain issues from advancing onto the agenda is an important type of policy power that needs to be studied even if it is difficult to observe (Bachrach & Baratz, 1962). Bachrach and Baratz assert that disadvantaged groups are less likely to demand change when existing policies benefit widely accepted and powerful interests.

How a problem is defined affects whether and how public officials address it. Schattschneider (1960) was a very early voice in discussing this dimension of the policy process in his delineation of public versus private problems. To gain legitimacy and thereby earn a spot on the agenda, issues needed to be defined as public problems. When issues were judged to be inappropriate for governmental attention, there was little chance that the issue would move beyond a private issue (Eyestone, 1978). Problem-definition research also placed perception and belief systems within the study of policy. Symbolic interactionists in sociology made the foundational contribution to this approach, arguing that human beings act on the basis of meanings they attach to things rather than on factual, objective definitions. This emphasis has found new energy in work by Stone (1988) and more recent scholars using the constructivist approach (Schneider & Sidney, 2009).

The multiple streams model articulated by Kingdon (1984) is sometimes given status as an independent approach to policy studies. It examines three separate streams of activity: problems, policies, and politics. These three dimensions of the policy process progress relatively independently of one another but occasionally couple, usually as a result of a policy entrepreneur who senses the opportunity to connect a problem with a policy proposal. When the political timing is right, the entrepreneur will push the coupled problem and solution through the policy window. Speed is important since the policy window of opportunity usually does not stay open long. Thus, agenda setting is intimately tied to an available solution and a political opportunity. This model is an excellent example of how public administration has contributed to the policy subfield since it is an adaptation of the so-called garbage can model advanced by three public administration scholars in their analysis of organizational processes and choice (Cohen, March, & Olsen, 1972).

Kingdon (1984) heightened the importance of politically capable individuals who he termed policy entrepreneurs. Policy entrepreneurs are opportunists who take advantage of crises or unanticipated events to push their policy proposals. Or they might take advantage of existing coalitions and work to soften up key policy communities. Another strategy is to modify the definition of the problem in order to take advantage of potential support to successfully push the proposal through the window. Ultimately, the entrepreneur is most successful when he or she is able to take advantage of political events or the national mood to promote a good idea that is technically feasible, consistent with core values, fiscally tolerable, and politically acceptable. However, there are many instances where issues fail to achieve or retain agenda status. Reasons for this include financial cost, lack of acceptance by the public or policy elites, opposition of powerful interests, and dominance of other issues (Kingdon).

Policy formulation focuses on the drafting and consideration of proposals by an attentive policy community while policy adoption refers to the passage of the proposal through the formal institutions that have the authority to adopt the policy. This part of the larger policy cycle received the most scholarly attention prior to the development of the policy subfield. It is closely associated with the institutions of government and is typically considered the key decision in the policy process.

In the multiple streams model, it is evident that the first three stages of the policy cycle—agenda setting, formulation, and adoption—take place more or less concurrently. Policy formulation itself focuses on the cognitive analysis and politics of designing a statute or other type of policy decision. The issue of rationality was a major focus of administration scholars in the middle of the 20th century. However, the debate between those arguing for rationality and against it continues. Today, rational choice theorists argue that a rational choice model is the best heuristic for studying, understanding, and predicting the outcomes of policy participants (Ostrom, 2007). The competing view is that scholars need to analyze language and political calculation to better understand the formulation and adoption processes (Allison, 1971; Halperin, 1974; Kingdon, 1984; Schneider & Sidney, 2009; Stone, 1988).

Many models incorporate both rational and political elements. Perhaps this is because the process itself incorporates both rational and political elements. Using a bounded rationality approach, policy analysts develop policy options, predict impacts, and oversee evaluation studies. But on the other side of the equation, political brokers approach the political landscape strategically, using data and analysis as well as other tactics to secure majorities at each stage in the adoption process.

One of the areas of greatest interest to policy scholars is the advocacy and policy design role of executive-legislative-interest group networks. Early scholars of political science advanced a number of models related to interest groups. One of the most noteworthy was David Truman (1951), who concluded that significant interests would organize to influence policies of concern to them. According to Truman and other pluralists, government’s role was often one of facilitating and legitimating group compromise. In addition, pluralists suggested that executive agencies often participated in the bargaining, protecting their interests similar to any other group.

Additional models of executive-legislative-interest group relations preceded the development of the policy subfield and more have been created since. All of these models include groups inside and outside of government and portray coalition formation organizing around a specific policy interest. Numerous terms have been assigned to these models, including iron triangles, subgovernments, policy subsystems, issue networks, policy monopolies, and advocacy coalitions. Each of these versions of policy communities assumes the importance of relationships among actors interested in the policy issue. These models are not exclusively used in the American political context. They have been broadly applied to research in multiple political systems by scholars in many disciplines. In the context of the United States, however, these policy communities thrive in part as a result of the decentralized and fragmented structure of its political institutions. Given the inability of the president and Congress as a whole to be informed and active participants on all issues, those issues that are not receiving widespread public attention and news coverage tend to be left to communities of people who have a deep interest in the specialized policy area.

In the 1960s, these communities were thought to be very stable relationships. In several case studies, the relationships were analyzed to be so stable that they were referred to as iron triangles (Cater, 1959). This conveys a pejorative view of the activity largely because the relationships among the governmental entities in the triangle and the interest groups were characterized as closed. New interests who wanted to communicate a competing set of demands and proposals were not acknowledged. Freeman (1955), in his studies of Indian affairs, showed how these policy subsystems brought stability to a policy area by bridging the executive and legislative branches with key interest groups. Each of these entities needed good relationships with the other two to enhance the likelihood of advancing its institutional and policy goals. This mutual dependence meant that once the subsystem emerged, its accommodations became the basis for determining which issues were placed on the agenda and which ones were not. These patterns of accommodation could be broken up by changes in committee leadership, widespread media attention to an issue in the policy area, or presidential interest. Once the visible interest in the policy topic waned, the subsystem political dynamic was likely to reemerge.

Hugh Heclo (1978) viewed the relationship between policy and administration as a vitally important one, especially as the role of government grew. He suggested that in the search for iron triangles, scholars sought to discover an exceptionally powerful and autonomous executive-legislative-interest group cluster of actors who dominated policy making by policy area. In the process, he believed that policy scholars ignored the more open and more commonly existing webs of people he referred to as issue networks. Issue networks are composed of those who are knowledgeable about the issue in terms of substantive knowledge as well as the history of its policy twists and turns. Policy knowledge is more heavily emphasized in this model, and it is the primary means through which additional participants can join this fluid web of relationships. In addition to being more fluid and episodic than subgovernments, issue networks, as shared-knowledge groups, have more points of view and conflicts than the iron triangle and subsystem frameworks. As aspects of the policy debate change, so do participants in the network. Thus, iron triangles and subsystems may still exist in some policy areas at some points in time, but the more typical pattern is one of a looser, increasingly complex kaleidoscope of policy (Heclo, 1978; Meier, 1985; Sabatier, 1991). For administrators and legislators, it provides a less stable and less predictable arrangement but one that permits greater maneuverability as well since these skilled politicians have the potential to split, expand, and recombine the many segments of the issue network. The irony of the issue network is that, when compared with iron triangles, it expands the number of participants involved, thereby making policymakers contend with more conflict among multiple points of view. It also accepts that involvement in the policy process is contingent on a greater understanding of the increased complexities of the policy area. Heclo (1978) suggests that this pattern of knowledge-based participation may actually increase the cynicism of the general public as the gap between activists and the public expands.

Heclo’s (1978) work was a pivotal change in the subfield’s orientation toward the nature and behavior of policy participants. Since Heclo, numerous scholars have articulated a variety of more diverse webs of policy participants, from Meier’s (1985) regulatory subsystem to Sabatier’s (1988) advocacy coalition framework. In the final analysis, though, whether one uses a looser, more episodic network or a more centralized and stable subsystem, the general public has virtually no role in any of the models. Given the level of specialized learning necessary to truly engage in the conversation among participants in the policy process, the general public’s role is minimal unless the issue somehow ignites widespread interest.

In the early literature on decision making, rationality was elevated to a normative standard. Operations research during World War II contributed to an expectation for clear, measureable objectives, extensive research, and, ideally, evaluation of choices based on evidence. The rational-comprehensive model that emerged ideally required the clarification and prioritizing of objectives, followed by identifying a comprehensive range of options for achieving the ranked objectives, analyzing the capacity of each option to maximize ranked objectives, and choosing the alternative that best achieves the objective at the least cost. This model has continued to retain its normative appeal, but scholars have repeatedly shown that actual decisions are not made this way. Lindblom (1959) argued that the model breaks down in its first step since people find it exceedingly difficult to agree on the relative priorities of values and goals. In the public realm, policymakers must wrestle with conflicting values among the various participants involved. Even the thinking of a single participant often includes conflicting and unresolved priorities among values. Thus, these values are not usually clarified and rank ordered prior to designing a policy. Therefore, policies often embody conflicting values. Lindblom suggested that most policy is made following a process of successive limited comparisons. Analysis is truncated to a few feasible alternatives that are incrementally different from existing practice, and choice is made based on which option receives consensual support. Pluralistic preferences and bargaining processes fit the incremental model well. Furthermore, this model can be expanded to a more intentional and strategic process for achieving substantial change since it is usually easier to achieve several successive incremental changes in policy over several years rather than attempting to secure support for major change in the first instance.

One of the most important contributors to the theories of decision making is Nobel prize winner Herbert Simon (1957). He argued that there are many reasons that rational-comprehensive models are not possible. First, information is lacking and people are not likely to be able to identify all possible alternatives. Second, the ability to accurately predict the outcomes of the many possible alternative choices is unlikely. And third, humans do not have the cognitive capacity to know and remember all that is required by the comprehensive model. Given these limitations, human beings accept what Simon terms satisficing. Under this approach to decision making, it is only necessary to find a solution that meets goals at an acceptable level rather than an optimal level.

Graham Allison’s (1971) classic work analyzing the Cuban missile crisis shows how three different models of decision making each lead to very different explanations of the crisis. His rational actor model can be compared to Simon’s bounded rationality model in that the goal is to choose the alternative that advances the national interest. The rational actor model assumes that nations function as centralized unitary actors where policy choices are made to maximize the national interest. Allison uses chess analogies to emphasize the strategic elements of the choice equation. Thus, the language of the model is of an optimizing effort, but the model recognizes the knowledge limitations and additional uncertainties that constrain choice. The advantages of this model are that it is simplified and stabilizes dramatically the information one needs to make choices. Morton Halperin (1974) emphasizes that given the number of bureaucratic departments and bureaucrats involved in decision making, it is difficult to confirm the unitary actor assumption of the model. The rational actor model assumes that all policymakers agree on the interpretation of the national interest. Halperin argued that this level of unity on what constitutes the national interest is rare in American history. One period followed World War II when the emergence of the cold war and the fear of communism solidified views of the national interest. This type of consensus also emerged for a short period after September 11, 2001.

Allison’s (1971) second model examines governmental decision making as a function of the output of organizations. The organizational process model, which borrows heavily from public administration literature, argues that organizations serve as the primary actors in governmental decision making. Given their hierarchy and centralization, each organization functions in a unified manner alongside other organizations. Under this model, analysts need to consider the outputs of multiple organizations. These outputs are the result of standard operating procedures, and organizational choices are in line with Lindblom’s model of incrementalism. The best predictor for what organizations will produce in the future is to examine the status quo. Importantly, organizational decisions and behaviors are influenced by existing routines and values of the organization.

The third model Allison (1971) advanced was the bureaucratic politics or governmental politics model. This model is probably the one most closely attributed to Allison since it was the most original of the three. Under the governmental politics model, there are numerous individual participants who influence governmental choices and behaviors. Government decisions are more resultants rather than choices since decisions are a combination of actions by numerous participants in the process. Many of the participants become part of the process as a result of an organizational affiliation that they have, and they often take actions based on the values and objectives of their organization using the action channels their organizations provide them. As each of the participants takes actions advancing their personal and organizational interests, they may be involved in overt bargaining with other participants. Equally often, though, participants are inclined to take the actions permitted by their position in the system. The governmental decision is really the interaction and summation of all of these independent decisions rather than coordinated intention. Obviously, this model of decision making is not based on a single set of organizational or national values. Pluralistic values and actions dominate the process.

Just as public administration scholarship was important to the understanding of agenda setting, it also plays a central role in formulation and adoption processes. Both the subsystem and network approaches and the decision-making approaches rely heavily on public administration literature and concepts. The level of bureaucratic participation in policy making becomes even more the focus of policy making in the implementation of public policy.

Implementation includes the administrative activities that convert a statute or other authoritative policy into a functioning program. Traditionally, implementation was characterized as a simple process of following the directives in the statute, administrative rule, executive order, or court ruling. Since early studies assumed that this took place without much delay or discrepancy from the policy’s intent, relatively little attention was paid to this process prior to the emergence of public policy as a subfield.

One study that stands out for being well ahead of the development of the policy subfield was sociologist Phillip Selznick’s (1949) study of the Tennessee Valley Authority. This case study is one of the few studies that provided guidance to the complexity of implementation and the degree to which the contours of a policy could be significantly altered based on the decisions of implementers. Since his study focused on organizations as organic systems that adapt to their external environment, his findings created an awareness of how external forces cause policies adopted in Washington to be altered in the field. Selznick showed how organizations were dependent on local support and how local opposition from powerful groups generated adaptations in policy.

Selznick’s (1949) study also challenged the traditional top-down view of implementation. Under the traditional top-down framework, bureaucrats function as instruments of the policymakers and respond to the command and control of those above them in a process similar to hierarchical lines of authority in a bureaucratic organization. However, scholars soon realized that implementation processes were much more complex and evolutionary than initially thought. Numerous studies showed that implementation was not faithful to the original plan for a variety of reasons. First and foremost, statutes and other formal policies often did not communicate with 100% clarity. There were gaps, overlaps, and contradictions. Thus, even if a bureaucrat was willing to function as a Weberian machine, it was typically the case that bureaucrats had to make significant decisions throughout the process of designing implementation. Even Woodrow Wilson (1887), whose work contributed to the policy–administration dichotomy framework, realized that all administrators operated with some discretion. Although the policy–administration dichotomy was successfully characterized by the public administration literature as unrealistic, policy scholars assumed the concept in their top-down implementation models until sufficient implementation case studies accumulated to convince most that the paradigm was inaccurate. Although there are still a variety of approaches to the study of implementation, most would agree that statutes are altered at least to some extent in the process of implementation. Policies are not self-implementing.

Another complexity in the implementation process that affects whether implemented programs align with statutes is that many national programs are carried out at the state and local levels, which dramatically increases the number of policy actors involved. This increase in the number of decision points creates huge difficulties for timely implementation and necessary communication and coordination. Pressman and Wildvasky (1973) masterfully show that as the number of participants and decision points increase, the likelihood of accurate implementation declines. Two-way interaction models were a reaction to the inadequacies of the top-down models. Bardach (1977) and Lipsky (1979) posit that statutes and other authoritative decisions made by policy-makers interact with decisions of implementers to create the actual policy. As implementers work through the issues of how to carry out the statute, they make choices that modify the policy. In addition, “street level” bureaucrats make use of discretionary authority as they engage in the day-to-day work of public policy. Accepting that implementation is an interactive process rather than a command and control hierarchy dictated by legislators focuses attention on the distance between a policy as originally designed or passed and the policy as implemented.

Majone and Wildavsky (1984) take the interactive model one step further in their work “Implementation as Evolution.” It posits that having the implementing agency modify the original policy design may actually produce beneficial results relative to the original goals of the statute. For example, if the original statute makes assumptions about cause and effect that are inaccurate, then having implementing bureaucrats modify the policy through implementation strategies would be a positive step as long as the changes they are making are in line with a commitment to the objectives and impacts the policy was supposed to produce. Both the implementation as evolution and the other two-way interaction approaches make it obvious how important it is to have agencies that are committed to the policy objectives.

Building on the work of all of these scholars, Mazmanian and Sabatier (1983) develop a synthetic conceptual framework to guide implementation studies as part of the larger policy process. They assert that it is necessary to examine the statute or other formal policy statement to assess its clarity of objectives, accuracy of causal assumptions, and effectiveness of decision rules provided to the implementing agencies. In addition, the researcher must appraise the sufficiency of financial resources, the specificity of the authority relationships, and formal access by outsiders. Variables beyond the statute and outside the implementing agency are also emphasized, including socioeconomic conditions, media attention, public and constituency group support, enthusiasm of higher level public authorities, and the commitment and skill of agency leaders. In addition to internal and external variables, there is also a recognition that implementation success is affected by the difficulty of the problem and the degree of change being sought.

Given the potential for significant adjustments to policy to occur as a result of implementation decisions, a diachronic approach of studying policies over a decade or more is recommended. Without a long-term view, the ability to understand the evolution of policy as it occurs in implementation will be incomplete.

Most stage models of public policy end with evaluation, the systematic assessment of the policy’s impact. Importantly, policies need to be examined for both intended and unintended consequences. Evaluations are completed by the implementers themselves and by external policy analysts. Internal evaluations conducted by the implementing agency have the benefit of getting those who work with the policy on a day-to-day basis to recognize problems and propose solutions. Evaluations by outside analysts tend to bring external perspectives to the process and may possess increased legitimacy from the perspective of elected officials. One trend in the last several decades is for more ideologically affiliated think tanks to publish external policy analyses. These are usually provided with a particular point of view and thus do not necessarily offer the benefits of other external evaluations.

Distinctions should also be made between the evaluation of policy outputs and policy outcomes. Analysis of outputs draws attention to whether the administrative processes are in place through such measures as number and types of clients served. Outcomes refer to whether the policy is achieving desired results on policy goals as well as other unintended impacts.

For policy scholars, impact and outcome studies have received more interest than output studies. Scholars have also sought to understand how policy analysis leads to revisions, transformation, or termination of policies by elected officials. As could be seen in the previous discussion of implementation, revision of policy is often ongoing from the beginning of implementation decisions. However, most stage models have viewed evaluation as isolated from implementation and as more associated with the judgments of policy-impact recommendations for policy revisions. There is a tendency for this stage to look something like the feedback loop of the political systems model.

Systematic policy analysis grew as an important part of the policy process during the 1960s as government attempted to apply economic theory to policy making. Cost–benefit analysis, operations research, and various program performance measures incorporated in budgeting processes were primary tools of the effort. Thus, this part of the policy process is most closely associated with rational models of decision making. It was not unusual for program evaluation and periodic reporting to be statutorily required to assist in legislative oversight and budgeting processes. As the national government expanded the number of large domestic programs, along with detailed prescriptions and administration, collected evidence mounted that the programs were not achieving their lofty goals. Accountability continues as a common refrain today, but the capacity to systematically evaluate programs and to redesign them with effective performance measures has not been as easy or as successful as hoped. Once again, it is possible to see the tension between expectations for rational decision making as the vehicle for better policies and the reality that suggests there are significant human and organizational limitations to rationality. Even when systematic analysis is required, the uncertainty surrounding appropriate measures and the interpretation of results make evaluation as much politics as science.

Deborah Stone (1988), one of the leading critics of rational models of public policy, advanced a concept she termed policy paradox. She argued that politicians typically have dual goals: policy objectives and political objectives. Furthermore, she observed that analysis itself is political since it is rife with framing, definitions, and interpretations. Political participants frequently articulate an argument that on its face appears linear and rational but on closer examination appears constructed to achieve a political purpose. She offered the concept of political reasoning, rather than rational decision making, to understand the struggles of policy communities competing over which ideas, policy definitions, and corresponding solutions will prevail.

A closely related facet of the evaluation literature is the attention given to the use of knowledge generated through policy analysis. Generally, scholars have concluded that knowledge is not the most important dimension of policy decisions. Politics and the limitations of human and organizational capacity intervene (Simon, 1957). Even when decision makers seek information to help make policy, it is frequently questioned, interpreted in different ways, expensive, and incomplete. Although many write very pessimistically about the lack of use of policy knowledge, Carol Weiss (1977) argued that policy knowledge has been successfully used to identify problems, reconsider policy strategies, and provide an enlightenment function. Through the enlightenment process, information accumulates and causes policymakers to redefine the problem, retroactively make sense of why programs did not succeed, or readjust policy objectives to more realistic levels. Finally, policy knowledge is more likely to be used when it is timely and when participants see strategic benefit in doing so.

In 1991, Paul Sabatier criticized the stages heuristic and challenged the field to develop better models. Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith (1993) put forward an alternative heuristic referred to as the advocacy coalition framework. They suggested that the stages model is too simplistic given the number of participants, institutions, and influences in the policy process. In their more complex model, they incorporate governmental and nongovernmental institutions, external conditions and events, and the multiples webs of these entities that align or compete with each other to influence policy. Furthermore, whereas the stages heuristic signals that policy follows a linear process, the advocacy coalition framework sees policies as nonlinear and rarely terminating. Multiple policies affecting the policy domain overlap and affect one another, as do policy implementations at multiple levels of government. Researchers who study a policy arena for several decades will observe policy adaptations and eventually significant change. This occurs because of learning on the part of the participant coalitions that may compete over preferences based on different resources and belief systems. However, the advocacy coalition framework posits that the most substantial changes in policy are more likely to come from external events and conditions than from policy learning. To be able to witness this, scholars must be prepared to follow a policy area for several decades since advocacy coalitions tend to be relatively stable. Some scholars (Lester & Stewart, 2000) see the advocacy coalition framework as a development within evaluation research that could be incorporated within the stages model, but Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith (1993) claim that the model provides an important and enhanced alternative model.

Another model of note is the punctuated-equilibrium framework (Baumgartner & Jones, 1993). This model is similar to the advocacy coalition model in terms of the need to look at policy over long periods of time since most policy follows incremental change and relatively stable patterns over many years before incurring major change. Major punctuations occur in the context of changed beliefs among the policy community and often a new venue for implementation. Once implemented, equilibrium is reestablished, and the policy arena goes back to a lengthy period of stability. The punctuated-equilibrium model also draws attention to the importance of institutions since they tend to help ingrain the results of the dominant coalition and to resist pressures for change.

Elinor Ostrom (2007) and many others articulate a preference for a model of institutional rational choice. This model builds on the discipline’s traditional emphasis on institutional structures and rules. Ostrom argued that institutions should be defined as rules, norms, and strategies that characterize entities with repeated processes. Rules dictate who has advantages in the pursuit of policy preferences and frequently determine who the major players are in the policy. This model also examines the hierarchical ordering of rules. Thus, constitutional rules influence options for players at other levels of policy choice all the way down to the operational, day-to-day decisions of policy actors. Rules can take the form of formal, written provisions or can be norms based on shared understandings by participants or guides that individuals develop to direct their own behaviors. These working rules help to provide stability in the midst of uncertainty. Once the study of levels and types of rules is achieved, the researcher can make probabilistic predictions using rational choice analysis. This model brings attention back to the formal versus informal distinction that was made by administration scholars many decades earlier.

One must ask whether any of the models will rise to a position of dominance in the near future. Given that scholars agree that the policy process is complex and patterns of human behavior are varied, the search for a dominant, robust, parsimonious model is unlikely to be successful. This effort is also exacerbated by the number of contributing disciplines to the subfield. Frustration over this situation is also likely to continue. Perhaps Kenneth Meier (2009) captures it best when he complains that there are so many models, their ability to guide research is analogous to the interstate highway system’s ability to guide a vacation. A more positive point of view may come from the realization that there is a lot of overlap among the various models. For example, the advocacy coalition framework, stages framework, punctuated equilibria model, and the institutional rational choice model all describe the importance of institutional structures, political brokers, external influences, and shared meanings.

Looking at policy processes more holistically and studying policies over the long term to incorporate evolution and change are recent trends in policy research that are likely to continue in the future. The role of beliefs and the processes leading to shared meanings also appear to be increasing in importance (Schneider & Ingram, 1997). It remains to be seen whether future studies integrate policy and public administration models. The literature of the two subfields has numerous parallels. Very few policies can be implemented without the significant involvement of an administrative system. The fact that the same policy can produce such different results across different implementing subunits (e.g., states, counties, or schools) suggests that agencies and individuals make a huge difference. Leadership styles and administrative cultures may offer vital insight to explaining the variation (Hicklin & Godwin, 2009; Robichau & Lynn, 2009).

Given the large number of models and participating disciplines, the methodologies employed in the subfield will continue to range from qualitative to quantitative. The quantitative methods employed in large-N comparative studies and some evaluation studies are likely to continue, as are the more qualitative methods of case studies and language analysis approaches. This is not necessarily a negative. As Easton (1969) argued in his call for a postbehavioral revolution, the important objective is to be relevant even if it means sacrificing the quantitative methods called for in the behavioral movement. Thus, a mixture of quantitative and qualitative measures is likely to continue to characterize the policy subfield.

Bibliography:

• Allison, G. T. (1971). Essence of decision: Explaining the Cuban missile crisis. Boston: Little, Brown.
• Anderson, J. (1975). Public policy making. New York: Praeger. Bachrach, P. S., & Baratz, M. S. (1962). Two faces of power. American Political Science Review, 56, 947-952.
• Bardach, E. (1977). The implementation game. Cambridge: MIT Press.
• Barnard, C. I. (1938). Functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Baumgartner, B. D., & Jones, F. R. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Cater, D. (1959). The fourth branch of government. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
• Cobb, R. W., & Elder, C. D. (1975). Issue creation and agenda building. In J. Anderson (Ed.), Cases in public policy making (pp. 10 21). New York: Praeger.
• Cohen, M., March, J., & Olsen, J. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 1-25.
• Easton, D. (1953). The political system. New York: Knopf. Easton, D. (1969). The new revolution in political science. American Political Science Review, 63, 1051-1061.
• Eyestone, R. (1978). From social issues to public policy. New York: Wiley.
• Freeman, J. L. (1955). The political process: Executive bureau legislative committee relations. New York: Random House.
• Gulick, L., & Urwick, L. (Eds). (1937). Papers on the science of administration. New York: Institute of Public Administration.
• Halperin, M. H. (1974). Bureaucratic politics and foreign policy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
• Heclo, H. (1978). Issue networks and the executive establishment. In A. King (Ed.), The new American political system (pp. 87-124). Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.
• Hicklin, A., & Godwin, E. (2009). Agents of change: The role of public managers in public policy. Policy Studies Journal, 37(1), 13-20.
• Jones, C. O. (1970). An introduction to the study of public policy. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
• Kingdon, J.W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Boston: Little, Brown.
• Lester, J. P., & Stewart, J. (2000). Public policy: An evolutionary approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
• Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of muddling through. Public Administration Review, 19, 78-88.
• Lipsky, M. (1979). Street level bureaucracy. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
• Majone, G., & Wildavsky, A. (1984). Implementation as evolution. In J. L. Pressman & A. Wildavsky (Eds.), Implementation (3rd ed., pp. 163-180). Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Mazmanian, D. H., & Sabatier, P. A. (1983). Implementation and public policy. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
• Meier, K. J. (1985). Regulation: Politics, bureaucracy & economics. New York: St. Martin’s.
• Meier, K. J. (2009). Policy theory, policy theory everywhere: Ravings of a deranged policy scholar. Policy Studies Journal, 37(1), 5-12.
• Nelson, M. (1977, September). What’s wrong with political science? Washington Monthly, 9(7), 12-20.
• Ostrom, E. (2007). Institutional rational choice. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 21-64). Boulder: CO: Westview Press.
• Pressman, J. L., & Wildavsky, A. (1973). Implementation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Ranney, A. (1968). The study of policy content: A framework of choice. In A. Ranney (Ed.), Political science and public policy (pp. 3 21). Chicago: Markham.
• Rivlin, A. M. (1971). Systematic thinking for social action. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
• Robichau, R. W., & Lynn, L. E., Jr. (2009). The implementation of public policy: Still the missing link. Policy Studies Journal, 37(1), 21-36.
• Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21(2), 129-168.
• Sabatier, P. A. (1991, June). Political science and public policy. PS: Political Science & Politics, 24(2), 143-147.
• Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins Smith, H. C. (1993). Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
• Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The semi-sovereign people. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
• Schneider, A., & Ingram, H. (1997). Social constructions in the study of public policy. In J. A. Holstein & J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 189-211). New York: Guilford Press.
• Schneider, A., & Sidney, M. (2009). What is next for policy design and social construction theory? Policy Studies Journal, 37, 103-120.
• Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the grass roots. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Simon,H. (1957). Models of man: Social and rational. New York: Wiley.
• Stone, D.A. (1988). Policy paradox and political reason. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
• Taylor, FW. (1911). Scientific management. New York: Harper & Row.
• Truman, D. (1951). The governmental process. New York: Knopf.
• Weber, M. (1946). Bureaucracy. In H. H. Gerth & C. W. Mills (Eds. & Trans.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociology. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Weiss, C. H. (1977). Research for policy’s sake: The enlightenment function of social research. Policy Analysis, 3, 531-546.
• White, L. D. (1926). Introduction to the study of public administration. New York: Macmillan.
• Wilson, W. (1887). The study of administration. Political Science Quarterly, 2(2), 197-222.

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

• AI Content Shield
• AI KW Research
• AI Assistant
• SEO Optimizer
• AI KW Clustering
• Customer reviews
• The NLO Revolution
• Press Center
• Help Center
• Content Resources
• Facebook Group

A Detailed Guide to Public Policy Proposal Example

Table of Contents

Creating a public policy proposal example involves several critical steps, including identifying the problem. It also includes researching and analyzing the issue, developing solutions, and presenting the proposal to stakeholders.

In this article, we will provide a comprehensive guide to creating a public policy proposal, including the essential elements of a proposal. We will also outline the steps in developing a proposal and tips for effective proposal writing.

What Is a Public Policy Proposal Example?

Public policy proposals are essential tools that help governments, organizations, and individuals address various societal problems and challenges .

A public policy proposal is a document that outlines specific actions that should be taken to address a particular problem or issue. It is usually presented to policymakers or other relevant stakeholders, who then decide whether to implement the proposed solution.

Essential Elements of a Public Policy Proposal

While the specific details of a public policy proposal will vary depending on the problem being addressed, several essential elements should be included. These elements include:

Problem Statement

The problem statement briefly describes the problem or issue the proposal seeks to address. It should be clear, concise, and provide enough information to help the reader understand the nature and scope of the problem.

Background and Context

The background and context section provides additional information about the problem, including its history, causes, and relevant background information. It helps the reader understand why the problem is important and how it has developed.

Goals and Objectives

The goals and objectives section outlines the specific goals and objectives of the proposal. It should be clear, specific, and measurable, providing a clear roadmap for achieving the desired outcomes.

Proposed Solution

The proposed solution section outlines the specific actions that should be taken to address the problem. It should be based on research and analysis and feasible and practical.

Implementation Plan

The implementation plan outlines the steps you will take to implement the proposed solution. It should include a timeline, budget, and other relevant details.

Evaluation and Monitoring

The evaluation and monitoring section outlines how the proposal’s effectiveness will be measured and monitored over time.

It should include specific metrics and methods for measuring progress and evaluating outcomes.

Steps in Developing a Public Policy Proposal

Developing a public policy proposal involves several critical steps, including:

Identify the Problem

The first step in developing a public policy proposal is to identify the problem or issue that needs to be addressed. This may involve conducting research, analyzing data, and consulting with stakeholders.

Conduct Research and Analysis

Once the problem has been identified, the next step is to conduct research and analysis. This is to understand the problem and potential solutions better. This may involve reviewing existing literature, analyzing data, and consulting with experts.

Develop Solutions

The next step is to develop potential solutions to the problem based on the research and analysis. It is important to consider various options and evaluate their feasibility, effectiveness, and potential drawbacks.

Select a Preferred Solution

Once a range of solutions has been developed, the next step is to select a preferred solution. This is based on feasibility, effectiveness, cost, and political feasibility criteria.

Develop the Proposal

With the preferred solution selected, the next step is to develop the public policy proposal. This involves drafting the essential elements of the proposal, including the problem statement, background, and context. And also goals and objectives proposed solutions, implementation plans, and evaluation and monitoring plans.

Consult With Stakeholders

Before finalizing the proposal, consulting with relevant stakeholders, including policymakers, experts, and other affected parties is essential. This can help ensure that the proposal is practical, feasible, and has broad support.

Refine the Proposal

Based on feedback from stakeholders, the proposal may need to be refined or revised to address any concerns or objections. This may involve further research or analysis, adjusting the proposed solution or implementation plan, or modifying the evaluation and monitoring plan.

Present the Proposal

Once the proposal has been refined and finalized, it is presented to relevant stakeholders, including policymakers, decision-makers, and other affected parties. This may involve formal presentations, meetings, or written submissions.

Tips for Effective Proposal Writing

Writing a public policy proposal can be a challenging task. To ensure that your proposal is effective and persuasive, here are some tips to consider:

1. Be Clear and Concise

Your proposal should be written in clear, concise language that is easy to understand. Avoid technical jargon or complex terminology that may confuse or alienate your audience.

2. Provide Evidence

Your proposal should be based on evidence and research. Use data, statistics, and other relevant information to support your arguments and recommendations.

3. Focus on Outcomes

Your proposal should focus on achieving specific outcomes and goals. Ensure that your proposal clearly articulates what you hope to achieve and how you will measure success.

4. Consider the Feasibility

Your proposal should be feasible and practical. Consider the political, economic, and social context in which your proposal will be implemented and ensure that it is viable and achievable.

5. Be Persuasive

Your proposal should be persuasive and compelling. Use persuasive language, compelling arguments, and engaging visuals to help make your case.

6. Consult With Stakeholders

Consult with relevant stakeholders, including policymakers, experts, and other affected parties. This ensures your proposal is well-informed, practical, and has broad support.

Developing a public policy proposal requires careful consideration, research, and planning.

You can create a compelling proposal by following the steps outlined in this guide and implementing the tips provided. This has the potential to make a significant impact on the world.

While it may require effort and attention to detail, the result can be a positive change in policy. This benefits society as a whole. With dedication and a focus on the desired outcomes, creating a public policy proposal can be a fulfilling and rewarding experience.

Abir Ghenaiet

Abir is a data analyst and researcher. Among her interests are artificial intelligence, machine learning, and natural language processing. As a humanitarian and educator, she actively supports women in tech and promotes diversity.

Explore All Proposal Generator Articles

Creative terms and conditions agreement in business proposal.

In business, proposals are essential for securing contracts and agreements with clients. However, a proposal is only complete with terms…

• Proposal Generator

Free guide to a statement of proposal sample

A statement of proposal is a document that outlines a proposed project or initiative in detail. It is typically used…

Free Proposal Letter for Training and Development for a Head Start

Training and development are essential to improve employees’ skills, knowledge, and productivity. A well-crafted training proposal can help an organization…

Detailed Guide to Free HR Consulting Proposal

HR consulting is an essential service for businesses of all sizes. HR consultants provide expert guidance to organizations on various…

Key Guide to Better Remote Work Proposal

The rise of remote work has been a significant trend in the business world over the last few years. With…

Guide to Free E-Commerce Proposal Template

E-commerce has become one of the most popular ways of doing business recently. With the increasing number of people using…

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: Writing a Policy Memo

• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Reading Research Effectively
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods

Using Non-Textual Elements

• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Annotated Bibliography
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Essays
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Bibliography

A policy memo is a practical and professionally written document that can vary in length from one page to over one hundred pages. It provides analysis and/or recommendations directed to a predetermined audience regarding a specific situation or topic. A well-written policy memo reflects attention to the research problem. It is well organized and structured in a clear and concise style that assumes the reader possesses limited knowledge of, as well as little time to conduct research about, the issue of concern. There is no thesis statement or overall theoretical framework underpinning the document; the focus is on describing one or more specific policy recommendations and their supporting action items.

Davis, Jennifer. Guide to Writing Effective Policy Memos . MIT OpenCourseWare, Water and Sanitation Infrastructure Planning in Developing Countries, Spring 2004; Pennock, Andrew. “The Case for Using Policy Writing in Undergraduate Political Science Courses.” PS: Political Science and Politics 44 (January 2011): 141-146.

How to Approach Writing a Policy Memo

Policy memo writing assignments are intended to promote the following learning outcomes :

• Help students learn how to write academically rigorous, persuasive papers about a specific “real-world” issue;
• Learn how to choose and craft a document’s content based on the needs of a particular audience [rather than for a general readership];
• Prepare students about how to write effectively in non-academic settings;
• Teach students to be client-oriented and to better anticipate the assumptions and concerns of their targeted readership; and,
• Enable students to create original work that synthesizes their research into a succinctly written document advocating change or a specific course of action.

You should not approach writing a policy memo like you would an academic research paper. Yes, there are certain commonalities in how the content is presented [e.g., a well-written problem statement], but the overarching objective of a policy memo is not to discover or create new knowledge. It is focused on providing a pre-determined group of readers the rationale for choosing a particular policy alternative or specific course of action. In this sense, most policy memos possess a component of advocacy and policy advice intended to promote evidence-based dialog about an issue.

Given these intended learning outcomes, keep in mind the following: Focus and Objectives The overall content of your memo should be strategically aimed at achieving the following goal: convincing your target audience about the accuracy of your analysis and, by extension, that your policy recommendations are valid. Avoid lengthy digressions and superfluous narration that can distract the reader from understanding the policy problem. Professionally Written Always keep in mind that a policy memorandum is a tool for decision-making. Keep it professional and avoid hyperbole that could undermine the credibility of your document. The presentation and content of the memo should be polished, easy to understand, and free of jargon. Writing professionally does not imply that you can’t be passionate about your topic, but your policy recommendations should be grounded in solid reasoning and a succinct writing style. Evidence-based A policy memo is not an argumentative debate paper. The reader should expect your recommendations to be based upon evidence that the problem exists and of the consequences [both good and bad] of adopting particular policy alternatives. To address this, policy memos should include a clear cost-benefit analysis that considers anticipated outcomes, the potential impact on stakeholder groups you have identified, clear and quantifiable performance goals, and how success is to be measured. Accessibility A policy memo requires clear and simple language that avoids unnecessary jargon and concepts of an academic discipline. Do not skip around. Use one paragraph to develop one idea or argument and make that idea or argument explicit within the first one or two sentences. Your memo should have a straightforward, explicit organizational structure that provides well-explained arguments arranged within a logical sequence of reasoning [think in terms of an if/then logic model--if this policy recommendation, then this action; if this benefit, then this potential cost; if this group is allocated resources, then who may be excluded]. Presentation Style The visual impact of your memo affects the reader’s ability to grasp your ideas quickly and easily. Include a table of contents and list of figures and charts, if necessary. Subdivide the text using clear and descriptive headings to guide the reader. Incorporate devices such as capitalization, bold text, and bulleted items but be consistent, and don’t go crazy; the purpose is to facilitate access to specific sections of the paper for successive readings. If it is difficult to find information in your document, policy makers will not use it. Practical and Feasible Your memorandum should provide a set of actions based on what is actually happening in reality. The purpose is never to base your policy recommendations on future scenarios that are unlikely to occur or that do not appear realistic to your targeted readers. Here again, your cost-benefit analysis can be essential to validating the practicality and feasibility to your recommendations. Explicit Transparency Provide specific criteria to assess either the success or failure of the policies you are recommending. As much as possible, this criteria should be derived from your cost/benefit analysis. Do not hide or under-report information that does not support your policy recommendations. Just as you should note limitations in an original research study, a policy memo should describe the weaknesses of your analysis. Be straightforward about it because doing so strengthens your arguments and it will help the reader to assess the overall impact of recommended policy changes.

NOTE : Technically, your policy memo could argue for maintaining the status quo. However, the general objective of policy memos is to examine opportunities for transformative change and the risks of on-going complacency. If you choose to argue for maintaining the current policy trajectory, be concise in identifying and systematically refuting all relevant policy options. Summarize why the outcomes of maintaining the status quo are preferable to any alterative policy options.

Herman, Luciana. Policy Memos . John F. Kennedy School of Government. Harvard University; How to Write a Public Policy Memo . Student Learning Center. University of California, Berkeley; Policy Memo . Thompson Writing Program, Writing Studio. Duke University; Policy Memo Guidelines . Cornell Fellows Program. Cornell University; Memo: Audience and Purpose . The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Policy Memo Requirements and Guidelines, 2012-2013 edition . Institute for Public Policy Studies. University of Denver; Thrall, A. Trevor. How to Write a Policy Memo . University of Michigan--Dearborn, 2006; Writing Effective Memos . Electronic Hallway. Daniel J. Evans School of Public Affairs. University of Washington; Writing Effective Policy Memos . Water & Sanitation Infrastructure Planning syllabus. Spring 2004. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Structure and Writing Style

The contents of a policy memo can be organized in a variety of ways. Below is a general template adapted from the “Policy Memo Requirements and Guidelines, 2012-2013 edition” published by the Institute for Public Policy Studies at the University of Denver and from suggestions made in the book, A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem-Solving [Eugene Bardach. 4th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2012] . Both provide useful approaches to writing a policy memo should your professor not provide you with specific guidance. The tone of your writing should be formal but assertive. Note that the most important consideration in terms of writing style is professionalism, not creativity. I.  Cover Page Provide a complete and informative cover page that includes the document title, date, the full names and titles of the writer or writers [i.e., Joe Smith, Student, Department of Political Science, University of Southern California]. The title of the policy memo should be formally written and specific to the policy issue [e.g., “Charter Schools, Fair Housing, and Legal Standards: A Call for Equal Treatment”]. For longer memos, consider including a brief executive summary that highlights key findings and recommendations.

II.  Introduction and Problem Definition A policy memorandum should begin with a short summary introduction that defines the policy problem, provides important contextual background information, and explains what issues the memo covers. This is followed by a short justification for writing the memo, why a decision needs to be made [answering the “So What?” question], and an outline of the recommendations you make or key themes the reader should keep in mind. Summarize your main points in a few sentences, then conclude with a description of how the remainder of the memo is organized.

III.  Methods This is usually where other research about the problem or issue of concern is summarized. Describe how you plan to identify and locate the information on which your policy memo is based. This may include peer-reviewed journals and books as well as possible professionals you interviewed, databases and websites you explored, or legislative histories or relevant case law that you used. Remember this is not intended to be a thorough literature review; only choose sources that persuasively support your position or that helps lay a foundation for understanding why actions need to be taken.

IV.  Issue Analysis This section is where you explain in detail how you examined the issue and, by so doing, persuade the reader of the appropriateness of your analysis. This is followed by a description of how your analysis contributes to the current policy debate. It is important to demonstrate that the policy issue may be more complex than a basic pro versus con debate. Very few public policy debates can be reduced to this type of rhetorical dichotomy. Be sure your analysis is thorough and takes into account all factors that may influence possible strategies that could advance a recommended set of solutions.

V.  Proposed Solutions Write a brief review of the specific solutions you evaluated, noting the criteria by which you examined and compared different proposed policy alternatives. Identify the stakeholders impacted by the proposed solutions and describe in what ways the stakeholders benefit from your proposed solution. Focus on identifying solutions that have not been proposed or tested elsewhere. Offer a contrarian viewpoint that challenges the reader to take into account a new perspective on the research problem. Note that you can propose solutions that may be considered radical or unorthodox, but they must be realistic and politically feasible.

VI.  Strategic Recommendations Solutions are just opinions until you provide a path that delineates how to get from where you are to where you want to go. Describe what you believe are the best recommended courses of action ["action items"]. In writing this section, state the broad approach to be taken, with specific practical steps or measures that should be implemented. Be sure to also state by whom and within what time frame these actions should be taken. Conclude by highlighting the consequences of maintaining the status quo [or if supporting the status quo, why change at this time would be detrimental]. Also, clearly explain why your strategic recommendations are best suited for addressing the current policy situation.

VI.  Limitations As in any academic paper, you must describe limitations to your analysis. In particular, ask yourself if each of your recommendations are realistic, feasible, and sustainable, and in particular, that they can be implemented within the current bureaucratic, economic, political, cultural, or other type of contextual climate in which they reside. If not, you should go back and clarify your recommendations or provide further evidence as to why the recommendation is most appropriate for addressing the issue. If the limitation cannot be overcome, it does not necessarily undermine the overall recommendations of your study, but you must clearly acknowledge it. Place the limitation within the context of a critical issue that needs further study in concurrence with possible implementation [i.e., findings indicate service learning promotes civic engagement, but.there is a lack of data on the types of service learning programs that exist among high schools in Los Angeles].

VII.  Cost-Benefit Analysis This section may be optional but, in some cases, policy memos include an explicit summary analysis of the costs and benefits of each strategic recommendation. If you are asked to include a separate cost-benefit analysis, be concise and brief. Since most policy memos do not have a formal conclusion, the cost-benefit analysis can act as your conclusion by summarizing the key differences among policy alternatives and recommended courses of action.

Bardach, Eugene. A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem-Solving . 4th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2012; Herman, Luciana. Policy Memos . John F. Kennedy School of Government. Harvard University; How to Write a Public Policy Memo . Student Learning Center. University of California, Berkeley;  Policy Memo Guidelines . Cornell Fellows Program. Cornell University; Memo: Audience and Purpose . The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Pennock, Andrew. “The Case for Using Policy Writing in Undergraduate Political Science Courses.” PS: Political Science and Politics 44 (January 2011): 141-146; Policy Memo Requirements and Guidelines, 2012-2013 edition . Institute for Public Policy Studies. University of Denver; Thrall, A. Trevor. How to Write a Policy Memo . University of Michigan--Dearborn, 2006; “ What Are Policy Briefs? ” FAO Corporate Document Repository. United Nations; Writing Effective Memos . Electronic Hallway. Daniel J. Evans School of Public Affairs. University of Washington; Writing Effective Policy Memos . Water & Sanitation Infrastructure Planning syllabus. Spring 2004. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Proofreading the Memo

Problems to Avoid

The style and arrangement of an effectively written memo can differ because no two policies, nor their intended audience of readers, are exactly the same. Nevertheless, before you submit your policy memo, be sure you proofread the document in order to avoid these common problems. If you identify one or more of them, you should rewrite or re-organize the content accordingly.

1.  Acknowledge the law of unintended consequences -- no policy analysis is complete until you have identified for whom the policy is supposed to benefit as well as identify what groups may be impacted by the consequences of implementation. Review your memo and make sure you have clearly delineated who could be helped and who could be potentially harmed or excluded from benefiting from your recommended policy actions. As noted by Wilcoxen, this is also important because describing who may or may not benefit can help you anticipate which stakeholder groups will support your policy recommendations and which groups will likely oppose it. Calculating potential winners and losers will help reveal how much it may cost to compensate those groups excluded from benefiting. By building this compensation into your policy recommendations, you are better able to show the reader how to reduce political obstacles.

2.  Anticipate the reader's questions -- examine your recommended courses of action and identify any open-ended, declarative, or ambiguous statements that could lead the reader to have to ask further questions. For example, you declare that the most important factor supporting school choice among parents is distance from home. Without clarification or additional information, a reader may question why or by what means do you know this, or what distance is considered to be too far? Or, what factors contribute to parent's decision about school choice and distance from schools? What age group does this most apply to? Clarify these types of open-ended statements so that your policy can be more fully understood.

3.  Be concise -- being succinct in your writing does not relate to the overall length of the policy memo or the amount of words you use. It relates to an ability to provide a lot of information clearly and without superfluous detail. Strategies include r eviewing long paragraphs and breaking them up into parts, looking for long sentences and eliminating unnecessary qualifiers and modifiers, and deleting prepositional phrases in favor of adjectives or adverbs. The overarching goal is to be thorough and precise in how you present ideas and to avoid writing that uses too many words or excessively technical expressions.

4. Focus on the results -- while it's important that your memo describe the methods by which you gathered and analyzed the data informing your policy recommendations, the content should focus on explaining the results of your analysis and the logic underpinning your recommendations. Remember your audience. The reader is presumably a decision-maker with limited knowledge of the issue and with little time to contemplate the methods of analysis. The validity of your findings will be determined primarily by your reader's determination that your policy recommendations and supporting action items are realistic and rooted in sound reasoning. Review your memo and make sure the statement about how you gathered the data is brief and concise. If necessary, technical issues or raw data can be included as an appendix.

5.  Minimize subjective reasoning -- avoid emphasizing your personal opinion about the topic. A policy memo should be written in a professional tone with recommendations based upon empirical reasoning while, at the same time, reflecting a level of passion about your topic. However, being passionate does not imply being opinionated. The memo should emphasize presenting all of the facts a reader would need to reach his or her own conclusions about the validity of your recommendations.

6.  Use of non-textual elements -- review all tables, charts, figures, graphs, or other non-textual elements and make sure they are labeled correctly. Examine each in relation to the text and make sure they are described adequately and relate to the overall content of your memo. If these elements are located in appendices, make sure references to them within the text is correct [i.e., reference to Figure 2 is actually the table you want the reader to look at].

Bardach, Eugene and Eric M. Pataschnik. A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem-Solving . 5th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2016; Herman, Luciana. Policy Memos . John F. Kennedy School of Government. Harvard University; How to Write a Public Policy Memo . Student Learning Center. University of California, Berkeley; Memo: Audience and Purpose . The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University;  Policy Memo Requirements and Guidelines, 2012-2013 edition . Institute for Public Policy Studies. University of Denver; Wilcoxen, Peter J. Tips on Writing a Policy Memo . PAI 723, Economics for Public Decisions Course Syllabus. Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University.

Writing Tip

Referencing Sources

Policy memos generally do not include footnotes, endnotes, further readings, or a bibliography. However, if you use supporting information in a memo, cite the source in the text. For example, you may refer to a study that supported a specific assertion by referencing it in the following manner: "A study published in 2012 by the Eagleton Center for Public Interest Polling showed that public opinion towards China was....” However, some assignments may require a formal list of references. Before writing your memo, be sure you are clear about how your professor wants you to cite any sources referred to in your analysis.

Policy Memo . Thompson Writing Program, Writing Studio. Duke University .

Another Writing Tip

Policy memos are not just text-based but they may also include numeric tables and charts or non-textual elements, such as photographs, maps, and illustrations. However, it is very important that you use non-textual elements judiciously and only in relation to supplementing and clarifying arguments made in the text so as not to distract the reader from the main points of your memo . As with any non-textual elements, describe what the reader is seeing and why the data is important to understanding the research problem.

Yet Another Writing Tip

Including Appendices

The purpose of an appendix is to provide supplementary material that is not an essential part of the main text but which may be helpful in providing the reader with more complete information. If you have information that is vital to understanding an issue discussed in the memo, it can be included in one or more appendices. However, if you have a lot of information, don't write a five page memo and include twenty pages of appendices. Memos are intended to be  succinct and clearly expressed. If there is a lot of data, refer to the source and summarize it, or discuss with your professor how it could be included.

• << Previous: Writing Field Notes
• Next: Writing a Research Proposal >>
• Last Updated: Jan 17, 2023 10:50 AM
• URL: https://libguides.pointloma.edu/ResearchPaper

• TemplateLab

Policy Proposal Templates

30 professional policy proposal templates [& examples].

Although you can use a policy proposal template for different purposes, there’s only one effective way to write it. A really good policy proposal should pull together all the required information in a persuasive and terse manner. Whether what you’re writing about involves a brand new system or just a small tweak in your advertising strategy, it is important to know how to write a policy proposal if you want it to get approved.

Table of Contents

• 1 Policy Proposal Templates
• 2 Types of policy proposals
• 3 Policy Proposal Examples
• 4 Parts of a policy proposal
• 5 Policy Proposals Samples
• 6 Tips for writing your policy proposal
• 7 Check your policy proposal template before submitting

Types of policy proposals

People create policies for a specific purpose which is primarily to maintain order and peace in a specific environment. There are always major issues in most workplaces which have gotten worse in the past few years. You shouldn’t take these for granted as they affect the workforce.

This is the reason why you would create a policy proposal template. Those who disobey the rules in your policy proposals example get subjected to disciplinary actions like sanctions. You can make a policy proposal for:

• Environmental Policies
• Health Policies
• HR Policies
• New Policies
• Policy Changes
• Public Policies
• Security Policies

Remember that this document is an attempt to deal with a particular problem. It should identify this problem, how it impacts an entity and should offer suggestions on how to solve it.

Before creating policy proposals examples, you have to collect information and facts. Include any supporting data that’s both credible and relevant to the problem. After the facts, you must specify the problem, establish which audience it affects, then offer a proposed solution.

After creating a hypothesis, it’s time to prove it with solid facts which you can get from scientific studies or survey statistics. Providing your policy proposal template with alternative solutions is highly appreciated too. However, you still have to prove that each solution is of help and you should back this up with hard facts.

Consider these practical pointers when you learn how to write a policy proposal:

• Make sure it’s relevant Claiming that there is an issue is easy said but proving this is a different story. The problem you choose to deal with must have a significant effect on the audience, meaning those directly affected by the problem.
• Be as specific as you can If you choose to deal with a certain issue in your policy proposal template, stick with that issue. Don’t introduce any other issues which aren’t related to the central purpose.
• Make sure your audience understands the purpose Whatever policy you recommend is often met with dissent, usually from a minority. To avoid this conflict, make sure that the readers understand the points from your own perspective. Explain why there’s a need for this policy and the benefits that your audience can derive from it.

Policy Proposal Examples

Parts of a policy proposal

Presenting a policy proposal is an excellent way to introduce your idea, especially to your supervisors who you can supply with the required information. With this, they can to decide upon knowing the complete implication of the decision they make. This also gives you the opportunity to create a structured and logical argument by laying everything down in support of your proposal.

If you present a well-made proposal to your manager, this gives him the impression that you’re genuinely concerned about the company. Any effective policy proposals examples generally contain the following parts:

• Introduction This is a brief summary of the proposal which makes mention of the problem, the solution, the costs, and the benefits. You identify your reader and just like in any other type of persuasion, you have to sound convincing. It will greatly help if you know the ways to appeal to the audience. To succeed in this, you should know who will read your proposal. Also, find out who decides if it should get denied or accepted. Expound on issues that you care about and use benefits and language that will resonate with your audience.
• Issue An issue is also referred to as the subject, main argument, purpose, background information, importance, and problem. It should answer the following questions: Who gets affected by the proposal? What’s your reason for writing the proposal? Give your explanation about the present situation including the issues associated with it.
• Solution The main definition of a solution in the context of a proposal includes your step-by-step plan, the benefits, and how to overcome any potential obstacles should they occur. You can also include here your required personnel if any. Their expertise and experience can add an element of persuasion to your proposal.
• Qualifications List down an overview of the personnel required to successfully implement the policy proposal.
• Conclusion of the benefits and costs and the wrap-up Explain in this final part on how you can balance the cost of the project against the benefits. This is the last chance you can reinforce your point so you might as well reiterate the main argument and purpose. Create a breakdown of the projected cost to use for each element of your project. Also, include a breakdown of the benefits of the project to the company or organization both non-monetary and monetary. This can convince the reader that there is a return of investment.

Finally, don’t forget to thank the reader for giving you the time to present your proposal. Also, provide them with your contact information. Make sure that this information is very clear so they can recognize the details easily.

Policy Proposals Samples

Tips for writing your policy proposal

Typically, there are two outcomes when it comes to policy proposals namely effectiveness and efficiency. Making changes to a certain setup can be a difficult undertaking but writing facts in an official document is an excellent way to present your case. In every policy proposal template, there’s always an attempt to deal with a problem.

The document also includes a description of how to solve or change such a problem. Knowing beforehand the necessary requirements and the steps to follow makes writing effective policy proposals examples easier. Here are some tips to help you out:

• Do research It’s always necessary to research so you can gather facts that to use in your proposal. What you should consider is any factual information as this adds credibility to what you’re proposing. Facts support the change you propose and you can use them to highlight the faults of the existing policies.
• Come up with a description of the problem As stated, start the proposal by identifying the issue and how this affects your audience. For instance, there’s a certain office practice or policy that you believe isn’t effective or hinders the efficiency of employees. Mention this in your proposal. If you have an issue with the findings of some research, explain your reasons against such and explain why.
• Come up with a proposed solution If you’re making a proposal, follow this up with your proposed solution as well as your implementation plans. For instance, on the issue of working remotely, you can make an outline of the rules to apply to home workers. Also, make an outline on how to monitor these employees.
• Present all of the facts Always make sure that what you present in your proposal are facts and not hearsay. You can draw these from scientific research that other companies and organizations have successfully followed in their new policy. You can also cite other credible sources to support your arguments. For instance, you can do some research on other companies which have successfully implemented the remote workplace concept. Include in your proposal the employee satisfaction and cost savings numbers in that company. If you need to present this with visual aids to explain better your proposal, then, by all means, do so.
• Wrap up your policy proposal template At the end of your proposal, write a brief conclusion that’s concise and limited to only one or two paragraphs. Here, you make a recap of all the information you’ve taken up in your proposal.
• Cite all of your sources It’s professional and courteous to make a write-up of all the sources you used for your document’s factual information. Also, include a bibliography page for all of the research you had used as sources in your proposal.

Check your policy proposal template before submitting

Make sure that your document is error-free. Clear writing is your best friend when you try to write persuasively. Before submitting the final draft of your proposal, make a few checks:

• Eliminate technical terms and jargon Jargon may be popular in business but not all people share the same love for these terms. Confusing terms may have some special meaning for you but using simpler words helps people understand you better.
• Avoid using a passive voice Avoid using a passive voice when expressing something which you can express in much simpler terms. A passive voice often sounds distant or even deceptive. Adding unnecessary words can obscure your point too.
• Proofread your proposal There are many applications that could help in proofreading your proposal. Grammarly is one of the most popular. This tool can pick up anything that looks grammatically incorrect and can even warn you about phrases which are stylistically poor. Sloppy grammar and spelling discredits the value of your proposal and can even lead to the proposal getting rejected.

More Templates

Cover Page Templates

Construction Proposal

Work From Home Policy

Policy and Procedure Templates

Policy Brief Templates

Security Policy Templates

• IPR Intranet

INSTITUTE FOR POLICY RESEARCH

• What We Study

Trending Policy Topics

Elections and Democracy

Conversations About Race and Racism

Universal Pre-K

Policing and Violence

The video above is decorative and not illustrative.

Policy Topics

• Social Policy
• Poverty, Inequality & Opportunity

Changes in children’s social environments have increased class gaps and reduced racial gaps in economic mobility

A recent study from Harvard University’s Opportunity Insights analyzes changes in economic opportunity using new data on 57 million children born between 1978 and 1992 from anonymized Census and tax records.

• Environment & Energy

Dustin Tingley: Using data and careful thinking to tackle big issues and drive large-scale impact

When it comes to clean energy, economic incentives are more persuasive than rational arguments

• Education, Training & Labor

Massachusetts has made community college tuition-free. What will that mean for enrollment, quality, and workforce development?

• Globalization
• Development & Economic Growth

Behind the Curve: Can Manufacturing Still Provide Inclusive Growth?

Manufacturing jobs, once the backbone of the modern US economy, have declined as a share of GDP over recent decades, darkening opportunities for middle-class advancement.

A research agenda for economic resilience in fossil fuel–dependent communities

World leaders have committed to a transition away from fossil fuels in the energy system.

Can Conversational Receptiveness Build Trust in the Media?

Trust in nonpartisan news is essential to civil society—but is declining in the United States. However, language that demonstrates active engagement with opposing views may build trust.

• Public Leadership & Management

Leadership Perspective: What Makes Leadership Development Impactful? Exploring a Whole-Person Approach

In our Harvard Business Review article published on February 28, 2023, “What Makes Leadership Development Programs Succeed,” we unveiled the pivotal factors distinguishing impactful leadership develop

Watch & Listen

• Human Rights & Justice

Moral Universalism, Interventionism, and Human Rights as Politics

• Science, Technology & Data
• Business & Regulation

Bruce Schneier’s “A Hacker’s Mind”

• Human Rights
• Gender, Race & Identity
• Advocacy & Social Movements

A New Theory of Systemic Police Terrorism

• Fairness & Justice

Black Veterans and the Civil Rights Movement

Get smart & reliable public policy insights right in your inbox. 

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Constructing a socio-legal framework proposal for governing large language model usage and application in education.

1. Introduction

2. framing current achievements in the field: state-of-the-art, 2.1. current soft law regulative enacted overview.

• In order to achieve a thriving ecosystem of digital education, it is necessary to introduce quality infrastructure and establish mutual connectivity. Then, effective planning and development of digital capacities should be implemented to educate teaching staff who could impart quality knowledge and provide quality platforms with user-friendly tools.
• The achievement of the second strategic goal refers to the improvement of digital skills and competencies, and the following actions are foreseen: take care of digital literacy, with a particular emphasis on recognizing misinformation; education in the field of computing; good knowledge and understanding of artificial intelligence; increase the number of girls in digital studies and women in the field of digital careers ( EU 2020 ).

2.2. Overview of LLM Usage Detection Technology

3. methodology, bibliometric description of the articles, 4. fundamental governing principles: recommendations for implementation of ai in education, 5. discussion and conclusions.

• Ethical guidelines and standards. Values compose and construct all communities, so they are foreseen as the founding principle. Existing codes of ethics in education should be supplemented by crucial directions guiding new frontiers of fairness in AI implementation in education ( Abdaljaleel et al. 2024 ; Bearman and Ajjawi 2023 ; Chan and Hu 2023 ; Chang et al. 2023 ; Chauncey and McKenna 2023 ; Gallent-Torres et al. 2023 ; J. Luo 2024 ; Michel-Villarreal et al. 2023 ; Rahman et al. 2023 ; Yan et al. 2024 ).
• Compliance upgrade. Overall, the vast existing system of regulation and standards across different aspects and functional parts of education need to be harmonized and adjusted to the AI framework. Most importantly, licensing, certification, quality, and safety standards must be reviewed and debated within a vast interdisciplinary expert network to ensure a comprehensive approach ( Abdaljaleel et al. 2024 ; Bauer et al. 2023 ; Bearman and Ajjawi 2023 ; Dempere et al. 2023 ; Khan 2023 ; J. Luo 2024 ; Pham et al. 2023 ; Yan et al. 2024 ).
• Data governance. In our right to protection, security, and privacy, transparent, robust, and unbreachable systems to collect, store, and govern sensitive data are necessary for an AI-driven education system. Data anonymization, protection, and consent are critical factors in rethinking these aspects in AI-supplemented education ( Bauer et al. 2023 ; Chan and Hu 2023 ; Chang et al. 2023 ; J. Luo 2024 ; Michel-Villarreal et al. 2023 ; Rejeb et al. 2024 ).
• AI systems’ transparency, understandability, and explainability are crucial in AI-involved decision-making processes that reflect different aspects of the educational system (e.g., student and teacher evaluation, hiring, and admission procedures) ( Bearman and Ajjawi 2023 ; Chan and Hu 2023 ; Gallent-Torres, J. Luo 2024 ; Ng et al. 2024 ; Perkins and Roe 2023 ; Gallent-Torres et al. 2023 ; Tarisayi 2024 ; Lee et al. 2024 ; Prasad and Sane 2024 ; Xu et al. 2024 ).
• Algorithm accountability and transparency. Mutual (social) trust between developers, producers, maintenance services, and users is crucial in building confidence and openness towards system bias and error elimination ( Michel-Villarreal et al. 2023 ; Chan and Hu 2023 ; Tarisayi 2024 ; Matthews and Volpe 2023 ).
• Quality control and auditing mechanisms are already well-established in continuous circles of accreditations, certifications, evaluations, revisions, and reviews embedded in educational settings. An amendment in existing procedures is needed to ensure AI-generated educational content fits the required users’ standards, needs, and expectations ( Bearman and Ajjawi 2023 ; Tang et al. 2024 ; Bauer et al. 2023 ; Bearman and Ajjawi 2023 ; Hung and Chen 2023 ; Khan 2023 ; Thanh et al. 2023 ).
• Accessibility standards. Embedding AI educational content novelties cannot leave anyone behind. Inclusion and diversity standards must be considered, as must alternative formats and compatibility with assistive technologies intended for special-needs social groups ( Abdaljaleel et al. 2024 ; Cowling et al. 2023 ; Dai et al. 2023 ; Matthews and Volpe 2023 ).
• Teacher training. The generational gap between digital nomads and “old school” teachers must be closed through mandated extensive teacher training and young researchers’ involvement reinforcement ( Abdaljaleel et al. 2024 ; Chan and Hu 2023 ; Chiu 2023 , 2024 ; Lo 2023 ; Ng et al. 2024 ).
• Research and innovation. Significant research is essential to determine the impact of generative AI on teaching, training, and learning outcomes. Longitudinal and comparative analysis, case studies, and best and past practice examples must precede the starting point or testing phase when introducing AI in education ( Abdaljaleel et al. 2024 ; Chang et al. 2023 ; Cowling et al. 2023 ; Dai et al. 2023 ; Yan et al. 2024 ).
• Regulatory bodies and enforcement mechanisms need to be equipped and enforced to oversee the implementation of AI in education and regularly ensure ethical, regulatory, and legislative compliance ( Chang et al. 2023 ; Gallent-Torres et al. 2023 ; Hung and Chen 2023 ; Khan 2023 ; H.-F. Li 2023 ; J. Luo 2024 ; Perkins and Roe 2023 ).
• Stakeholder initiative. As a unique asset that multiplies when shared, knowledge requires different perspectives to obtain the best performance. In aspiring to build a network of stakeholders with a unified goal of achieving excellence in AI deployment in education, stakeholder initiatives and perspectives can overcome new challenges ( Abdaljaleel et al. 2024 ; Chang et al. 2023 ).
• Internationalization, interdisciplinarity, and harmonization of best practices and collaboration can strengthen resilience, bring new solutions, help overcome emerging issues and challenges, accomplish consistency, and improve alignment across diverse jurisdictions ( Hung and Chen 2023 ; Khan 2023 ; Abdaljaleel et al. 2024 ; Chang et al. 2023 ; J. Luo 2024 ).

Author Contributions

Institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

• Abdaljaleel, Maram, Muna Barakat, Mariam Alsanafi, Nesreen A. Salim, Husam Abazid, Diana Malaeb, Ali Haider Mohammed, Bassam Abdul Rasool Hassan, Abdulrasool M. Wayyes, Sinan Subhi Farhan, and et al. 2024. A multinational study on the factors influencing university students’ attitudes and usage of ChatGPT. Scientific Reports 14: 1983. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alkhaaldi, Saif M. I., Carl H. Kassab, Zakia Dimassi, Leen Oyoun Alsoud, Maha Al Fahim, Cynthia Al Hageh, and Halah Ibrahim. 2023. Medical Student Experiences and Perceptions of ChatGPT and Artificial Intelligence: Cross-Sectional Study. JMIR Medical Education 9: e51302. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Asimov, Isaac. 1950. The Isaac Asimov Collection. In Runaround. I, Robot . New York: Doubleday, p. 40. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barrington, Nikki M., Nithin Gupta, Basel Musmar, David Doyle, Nicholas Panico, Nikhil Godbole, Taylor Reardon, and Randy S. D’Amico. 2023. A Bibliometric Analysis of the Rise of ChatGPT in Medical Research. Medical Sciences 11: 61. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bauer, Elisabeth, Martin Greisel, Ilia Kuznetsov, Markus Berndt, Ingo Kollar, Markus Dresel, Martin R. Fischer, and Frank Fischer. 2023. Using natural language processing to support peer-feedback in the age of artificial intelligence: A cross-disciplinary framework and a research agenda. British Journal of Educational Technology 54: 1222–45. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bearman, Margaret, and Rola Ajjawi. 2023. Learning to work with the black box: Pedagogy for a world with artificial intelligence. British Journal of Educational Technology 54: 1160–73. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Berger, Peter, and Thomas Luckmann. 2016. The social construction of reality. In Social Theory Re-Wired . London: Routledge, pp. 110–22. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bukar, Umar Ali, Md Shohel Sayeed, Siti Fatimah Abdul Razak, Sumendra Yogarayan, and Oluwatosin Ahmed Amodu. 2024. An integrative decision-making framework to guide policies on regulating ChatGPT usage. PeerJ Computer Science 10: e1845. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chan, Cecilia Ka Yuk, and Wenjie Hu. 2023. Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 20: 43. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chang, Daniel H., Michael Pin-Chuan Lin, Shiva Hajian, and Quincy Q. Wang. 2023. Educational Design Principles of Using AI Chatbot That Supports Self-Regulated Learning in Education: Goal Setting, Feedback, and Personalization. Sustainability 15: 12921. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chauncey, Sarah A., and H. Patricia McKenna. 2023. A framework and exemplars for ethical and responsible use of AI Chatbot technology to support teaching and learning. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 5: 100182. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chiu, Thomas K. F. 2023. The impact of Generative AI (GenAI) on practices, policies and research direction in education: A case of ChatGPT and Midjourney. Interactive Learning Environments , 1–17. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chiu, Thomas K. F. 2024. Future research recommendations for transforming higher education with generative AI. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 6: 100197. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cowling, Michael, Joseph Crawford, Kelly-Ann Allen, and Michael Wehmeyer. 2023. Using leadership to leverage ChatGPT and artificial intelligence for undergraduate and postgraduate research supervision. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 39: 89–103. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Crawford, Joseph, Kelly-Ann Allen, Bianca Pani, and Michael Cowling. 2024. When artificial intelligence substitutes humans in higher education: The cost of loneliness, student success, and retention. Studies in Higher Education 49: 883–97. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dai, Yun, Sichen Lai, Cher Ping Lim, and Ang Liu. 2023. ChatGPT and its impact on research supervision: Insights from Australian postgraduate research students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 39: 74–88. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dempere, Juan, Kennedy Modugu, Allam Hesham, and Lakshmana Kumar Ramasamy. 2023. The impact of ChatGPT on higher education. Frontiers in Education 8: 1206936. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Durkheim, Emile, and Emile Durkheim. 1982. What Is a Social Fact? The Rules of Sociological Method: And Selected Texts on Sociology and Its Method . Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 50–59. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dwivedi, Yogesh K., Nir Kshetri, Laurie Hughes, Emma Louise Slade, Anand Jeyaraj, Arpan Kumar Kar, Abdullah M. Baabdullah, Alex Koohang, Vishnupriya Raghavan, Manju Ahuja, and et al. 2023. “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management 71: 102642. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Etzioni, Amitai. 2000. Social norms: Internalization, persuasion, and history. Law and Society Review (JSTOR) 34: 157–78. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• EU. 2000. Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Official Journal of the European Union C 364: 21. [ Google Scholar ]
• EU. 2012. Consolidated Version of the Treaty on European Union. Official Journal of the European Union C 326: 18. [ Google Scholar ]
• EU. 2020. Digital Education Action Plan (2021–2027). Available online: https://education.ec.europa.eu/focus-topics/digital-education/action-plan (accessed on 2 April 2024).
• EU. 2024. Artificial Intelligence Act: MEPs Adopt Landmark Law. European Parliament News , March 13. Available online: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20240308IPR19015/artificial-intelligence-act-meps-adopt-landmark-law (accessed on 2 April 2024).
• European Commission. 2019. Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI. Available online: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/ethics-guidelines-trustworthy-ai (accessed on 7 April 2024).
• European Commission. 2022. Youth Sport, and Culture. In Ethical Guidelines on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Data in Teaching and Learning for Educators . Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. [ Google Scholar ]
• Farhi, Faycal, Riadh Jeljeli, Ibtehal Aburezeq, Fawzi Fayez Dweikat, Samer Ali Al-shami, and Radouane Slamene. 2023. Analyzing the students’ views, concerns, and perceived ethics about chat GPT usage. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 5: 100180. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fütterer, Tim, Christian Fischer, Anastasiia Alekseeva, Xiaobin Chen, Tamara Tate, Mark Warschauer, and Peter Gerjets. 2023. ChatGPT in education: Global reactions to AI innovations. Scientific Reports 13: 15310. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Gallent-Torres, Cinta, Alfredo Zapata-González, and José Luis Ortego-Hernando. 2023. The impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence in higher education: A focus on ethics and academic integrity; [ تأثير الذكاء االصطناعي التوليدي في التعليم العالي: وجهة نظر من األخالق والنزاهة األكاديمية ]; [生成式人工智能对高等教育的影响:从道德及学术诚信角度进行分析]; [O impacto da inteligência artificial generativa no ensino superior: Uma perspectiva ética e de integridade académica]; [El impacto de la inteligencia artificial generative en educación superior: Una mirada desde la ética y la integridad académica]. RELIEVE—Revista Electronica de Investigacion y Evaluacion Educativa 29: 1–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Habibi, Akhmad, Muhaimin Muhaimin, Bernadus Kopong Danibao, Yudha Gusti Wibowo, Sri Wahyuni, and Ade Octavia. 2023. ChatGPT in higher education learning: Acceptance and use. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 5: 100190. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hallevy, Gabriel. 2010. The criminal liability of artificial intelligence entities-from science fiction to legal social control. Akron Intellectual Property Journal (HeinOnline) 4: 171. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hasanein, Ahmed M., and Abu Elnasr E. Sobaih. 2023. Drivers and Consequences of ChatGPT Use in Higher Education: Key Stakeholder Perspectives. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education 13: 2599–2614. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Haverkamp, W., N. Strodthoff, J. Tennenbaum, and C. Israel. 2023. Big hype about ChapGPT in medicine: Is it something for rhythmologists? What must be taken into consideration?; [Großer Hype um ChatGPT in der Medizin: Ist es etwas für den Rhythmologen? Was muss man bedenken?]. Herzschrittmachertherapie und Elektrophysiologie 34: 240–45. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Holmes, Wayne, and Fengchun Miao. 2023. Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research . Paris: UNESCO Publishing. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hung, Jason, and Jackson Chen. 2023. The Benefits, Risks and Regulation of Using ChatGPT in Chinese Academia: A Content Analysis. Social Sciences 12: 380. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Imran, Muhammad, and Norah Almusharraf. 2023. Analyzing the role of ChatGPT as a writing assistant at higher education level: A systematic review of the literature. Contemporary Educational Technology 15: ep464. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Johnston, Heather, Rebecca F. Wells, Elizabeth M. Shanks, Timothy Boey, and Bryony N. Parsons. 2024. Student perspectives on the use of generative artificial intelligence technologies in higher education. International Journal for Educational Integrity 20: 2. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Karabacak, Mert, Burak Berksu Ozkara, Konstantinos Margetis, Max Wintermark, and Sotirios Bisdas. 2023. The Advent of Generative Language Models in Medical Education. JMIR Medical Education 9: e48163. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kayalı, Bünyami, Mehmet Yavuz, Şener Balat, and Mücahit Çalışan. 2023. Investigation of student experiences with ChatGPT-supported online learning applications in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 39: 20–39. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Khan, Sikandar Hayat. 2023. AI at Doorstep: ChatGPT and Academia. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan 33: 1085–86. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee, Hsin-Yu, Pei-Hua Chen, Wei-Sheng Wang, Yueh-Min Huang, and Ting-Ting Wu. 2024. Empowering ChatGPT with guidance mechanism in blended learning: Effect of self-regulated learning, higher-order thinking skills, and knowledge construction. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 21: 16. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, Hai-Feng. 2023. Effects of a ChatGPT-based flipped learning guiding approach on learners’ courseware project performances and perceptions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 39: 40–58. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lo, Chung Kwan. 2023. What Is the Impact of ChatGPT on Education? A Rapid Review of the Literature. Education Sciences 13: 410. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Luo, Jiahui. 2024. A critical review of GenAI policies in higher education assessment: A call to reconsider the “originality” of students’ work. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 19: 651–64. [ Google Scholar ]
• Luo, Yuanyuan, Huiting Weng, Li Yang, Ziwei Ding, and Qin Wang. 2023. College Students’ Employability, Cognition, and Demands for ChatGPT in the AI Era Among Chinese Nursing Students: Web-Based Survey. JMIR Formative Research 7: e50413. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Maslej, Nestor, Loredana Fattorini, Raymond Perrault, Vanessa Parli, Anka Reuel, Erik Brynjolfsson, John Etchemendy, Katrina Ligett, Terah Lyons, James Manyika, and et al. 2024. Artificial Intelligence Index Report 2024. Available online: https://policycommons.net/artifacts/12089781/hai_ai-index-report-2024/12983534/ (accessed on 5 April 2024).
• Matthews, Joshua A., and Catherine Rita Volpe. 2023. Academics’ perceptions of ChatGPT-generated written outputs: A practical application of Turing’s Imitation Game. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 39: 82–100. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Miao, Fengchun, Wayne Holmes, Ronghuai Huang, and Hui Zhang. 2021. AI and Education: A Guidance for Policymakers . Paris: UNESCO Publishing. [ Google Scholar ]
• Michel-Villarreal, Rosario, Eliseo Vilalta-Perdomo, David Ernesto Salinas-Navarro, Ricardo Thierry-Aguilera, and Flor Silvestre Gerardou. 2023. Challenges and Opportunities of Generative AI for Higher Education as Explained by ChatGPT. Education Sciences 13: 856. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mishra, Vibhu. 2024. General Assembly Adopts Landmark Resolution on Artificial Intelligence. UN News , March 21. Available online: https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147831 (accessed on 19 April 2024).
• Ng, Davy Tsz Kit, Chee Wei Tan, and Jac Ka Lok Leung. 2024. Empowering student self-regulated learning and science education through ChatGPT: A pioneering pilot study. British Journal of Educational Technology 55: 1328–53. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• OECD. 2019. Artificial Intelegence in Society . Paris: OECD Publishing. [ Google Scholar ]
• Orenstrakh, Michael Sheinman, Oscar Karnalim, Carlos Anibal Suarez, and Michael Liut. 2023. Detecting llm-generated text in computing education: A comparative study for chatgpt cases. arXiv arXiv:2307.07411. [ Google Scholar ]
• Perkins, Mike, and Jasper Roe. 2023. Decoding Academic Integrity Policies: A Corpus Linguistics Investigation of AI and Other Technological Threats. Higher Education Policy 37: 633–53. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pham, Thanh, Binh Nguyen, Son Ha, and Thanh Nguyen Ngoc. 2023. Digital transformation in engineering education: Exploring the potential of AI-assisted learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 39: 1–19. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pinaya, Walter H. L., Mark S. Graham, Eric Kerfoot, Petru-Daniel Tudosiu, Jessica Dafflon, Virginia Fernandez, Pedro Sanchez, Julia Wolleb, Pedro F. da Costa, Ashay Patel, and et al. 2023. Generative ai for medical imaging: Extending the monai framework. arXiv arXiv:2307.15208. [ Google Scholar ]
• Polyportis, Athanasios, and Nikolaos Pahos. 2024. Understanding students’ adoption of the ChatGPT chatbot in higher education: The role of anthropomorphism, trust, design novelty and institutional policy. Behaviour and Information Technology , 1–22. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Prasad, Prajish, and Aamod Sane. 2024. A Self-Regulated Learning Framework using Generative AI and its Application in CS Educational Intervention Design. Paper presented at the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Portland, OR, USA, March 20–23; pp. 1070–76. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rahman, Md. Shahinur, Md. Mahiuddin Sabbir, Jing Zhang, Iqbal Hossain Moral, and Gazi Md. Shakhawat Hossain. 2023. Examining students’ intention to use ChatGPT: Does trust matter? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 39: 51–71. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rejeb, Abderahman, Karim Rejeb, Andrea Appolloni, Horst Treiblmaier, and Mohammad Iranmanesh. 2024. Exploring the impact of ChatGPT on education: A web mining and machine learning approach. International Journal of Management Education 22: 100932. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Robledo, Dave Arthur R., Celso G. Zara, Sherryl M. Montalbo, Norrie E. Gayeta, Abegail L. Gonzales, Mary Grace A. Escarez, and Erma D. Maalihan. 2023. Development and Validation of a Survey Instrument on Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices (KAP) Regarding the Educational Use of ChatGPT among Preservice Teachers in the Philippines. International Journal of Information and Education Technology 13: 1582–1590. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Russell, Stuart, and Peter Norvig. 2021. Artificial intelligence: A modern Approach , 4th US ed. Aima: Caйт. Available online: https://aima.cs.berkeley.edu/ (accessed on 26 February 2023).
• Sakib, Nazmus, Fahim Islam Anik, and Lei Li. 2023. ChatGPT in IT Education Ecosystem: Unraveling Long-Term Impacts on Job Market, Student Learning, and Ethical Practices. Paper presented at the 24th Annual Conference on Information Technology Education, Marietta, GA, USA, October 11–14; pp. 73–78. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sarker, Mohammad Faruque, and Muhammad Shariat Ullah. 2023. A review of quality assessment criteria in secondary education with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Social Sciences and Humanities Open 8: 100740. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Šedlbauer, Josef, Jan Činčera, Martin Slavík, and Adéla Hartlová. 2024. Students’ reflections on their experience with ChatGPT. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 40: 1526–34. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tang, Ruixiang, Yu-Neng Chuang, and Xia Hu. 2024. The Science of Detecting LLM-Generated Text. Communications of the ACM 67: 50–59. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tarisayi, Kudzayi Savious. 2024. ChatGPT use in universities in South Africa through a socio-technical lens. Cogent Education 11: 2295654. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tegmark, Max. 2018. Life 3.0: Being Human in the Age of Artificial Intelligence . New York: Vintage. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thanh, Binh Nguyen, Diem Thi Hong Vo, Minh Nguyen Nhat, Thi Thu Tra Pham, Hieu Thai Trung, and Son Ha Xuan. 2023. Race with the machines: Assessing the capability of generative AI in solving authentic assessments. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 39: 59–81. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tranfield, David, David Denyer, and Palminder Smart. 2003. Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management 14: 207–22. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vignesh, Ramachandran, Palanisamy Pradeep, and Jaganathan Ravindran. 2023. Exploring the hurdles in Integrating Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education: A Talk with ChatGPT. Education in Medicine Journal 15: 103–6. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vuletić, Dominik. 2011. Pravni aspekti Lisabonske strategije i budući izazovi–razrada s motrišta pravne prirode mekog prava (soft law). Zbornik Pravnog fakulteta u Zagrebu (Pravni fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu) 61: 1011–36. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wach, Krzysztof, Cong Doanh Duong, Joanna Ejdys, Rūta Kazlauskaitė, Pawel Korzynski, Grzegorz Mazurek, Joanna Paliszkiewicz, and Ewa Ziemba. 2023. The dark side of generative artificial intelligence: A critical analysis of controversies and risks of ChatGPT. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review 11: 7–30. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Watson, Steven, and Jonathan Romic. 2024. ChatGPT and the entangled evolution of society, education, and technology: A systems theory perspective. European Educational Research Journal . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wu, Junchao, Shu Yang, Runzhe Zhan, Yulin Yuan, Derek F. Wong, and Lidia S. Chao. 2023. A survey on llm-gernerated text detection: Necessity, methods, and future directions. arXiv arXiv:2310.14724. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xu, Xiaoshu, Xibing Wang, Yunfeng Zhang, and Rong Zheng. 2024. Applying ChatGPT to tackle the side effects of personal learning environments from learner and learning perspective: An interview of experts in higher education. PLoS ONE 19: e0295646. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yan, Lixiang, Lele Sha, Linxuan Zhao, Yuheng Li, Roberto Martinez-Maldonado, Guanliang Chen, Xinyu Li, Yueqiao Jin, and Dragan Gašević. 2024. Practical and ethical challenges of large language models in education: A systematic scoping review. British Journal of Educational Technology 55: 90–112. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Mezak Matijevic, M.; Pisker, B.; Dokic, K. Constructing a Socio-Legal Framework Proposal for Governing Large Language Model Usage and Application in Education. Soc. Sci. 2024 , 13 , 479. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13090479

Mezak Matijevic M, Pisker B, Dokic K. Constructing a Socio-Legal Framework Proposal for Governing Large Language Model Usage and Application in Education. Social Sciences . 2024; 13(9):479. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13090479

Mezak Matijevic, Mirela, Barbara Pisker, and Kristian Dokic. 2024. "Constructing a Socio-Legal Framework Proposal for Governing Large Language Model Usage and Application in Education" Social Sciences 13, no. 9: 479. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13090479

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals