FIYS 126 Education Policy Report

Professor Robert J. Lemke
Department of Economics and Business
Lake Forest College
Fall 2006

Directions:

The final writing assignment of the year is to write a 15 to 25 page policy report on any current policy relating to public education. For example, you might write on any part of No Child Left Behid, the ISAT, high-stakes testing, the current system for funding public schools, Title I funding, busing, teacher certification, or any number of other topics. Write about something you are interested in. Refer to the literature, laws, or government programs/policies whenever possible. This paper will require research/reading in addition to what has been assigned in class. You might also refer to your own experiences and observations, but that is not enough. Your report must include some data with statistical analysis and at least four print references (i.e. not on-line references). The purpose of the report is to inform readers of the current status of some education issue. The report should highlight problems or shortcomings of the current system (or defend the current system against common attacks). Some policy prescriptions (i.e. possible adjustments to the current system) must be proposed and defended.

Style and formating rules for the report are stated in the rubric, which is given below. The report must use quantitative data and contain some tables and/or graphs displaying the data. All tables and graphs are to be included at the end of the report. Each report will have the following features/sections:

Section titles (in bold) are to be used to help the reader through the paper. No section should be called "Body." The body of the report will include various sections, at least one of which introduces and analyses data. This section might come immediately after the Introduction. It might come toward the end of the paper. Simply put, students are left to organize the body of the paper as they see fit. Sections should be fairly short - usually between 3 and 8 paragraphs. And section titles should help the reader understand what is coming. For example, you might include sections called "No Child Left Behind," "The Common Core District Data," "Data Analysis," "Measuring Student Attendance," and so on. Sectioning the paper also helps the reader understand the argument of the paper. To get a better idea of sectioning a paper, you can look at any of the papers I have on-line: campus.lakeforest.edu/~lemke/index.html.

Everyone is encouraged to run an outline of your paper by me (which essentially indicates your section titles and what will be put in each section) early on in your research. On Thursday October 26 we will brainstorm and discuss possible ideas for the Education Policy Report as a class. On Tuesday November 14, each student needs to describe the main idea of his or her report to the class in 2 to 3 minutes.

Policy Reports are due at the start of class on Tuesday November 28. Each student will also present his or her report to the class in a 15 minute PowerPoint presentation after Thanksgiving. On 11/28, 11/30, and 12/5, we will meet in room 505 of Young Hall for the presentations. Each student will be assigned a particular date for his or her presentation on Tuesday November 21.

Rubric for Scoring Policy Reports:

There are 24 categories listed below. Each category has either 5, 10, or 15 maximum points possible. Nineteen categories concern the written policy report, for which a maximum score of 115 is possible. The last five categories concern the in-class presentation, for which a maximum score of 35 is possible.

Style: One inch margins, 12 point Times Roman font, double-spaced throughout. Bold and numbered section titles. Extra blank line before each section title.

  1. All components in the above list.
  2. One error in the above list.
  3. Two errors in the above list.
  4. Three errors in the above list.
  5. Four or more errors in the above list.

Page Numbering: Ten point Times Roman font for page numbers placed at the bottom - center of each page. Neither the title page nor the first page of text receives a page number. The second page of text receives the number 2. All remaining pages are numbered consecutively.

  1. All components in the above list.
  2. One error in the above list.
  3. Two errors in the above list.
  4. Three errors in the above list.
  5. Four or more errors in the above list.

Spelling:

  1. No misspelled words.
  2. One or two misspelled words.
  3. Three or four misspelled words.
  4. Five or six misspelled words.
  5. Seven or more misspelled words.

Punctuation:

  1. No punctuation errors.
  2. One or two punctuation errors.
  3. Three or four punctuation errors.
  4. Five or six punctuation errors.
  5. Seven or more punctuation errors.

Informative Title: Your paper must include an informative title.

  1. An informative title, for example: The Relationship between Education and Earnings across Occupations
  2. A less informative title, for example: The Relationship between Education and Earnings
  3. A less informative title, for example: Education and Earnings
  4. A less informative title, for example: An Empirical Study of Education
  5. No title

Title Page: Title, 14 point Times Roman font, centered toward the top of the page. Include your name, email address, and date. Include an abstract of 100 to 200 words.

  1. All components in the above list.
  2. One error in the above list.
  3. Two errors in the above list.
  4. Three errors in the above list.
  5. Four or more errors in the above list.

Abstract: The abstract must introduce your topic as well as a brief summary of your policy prescription(s). The abstract should also draw the reader into the paper by demonstrating why the topic is interesting.

  1. An abstract that provides both aspects listed above under 200 words.
  2. An abstract that provides both aspects listed above in more than 200 words.
  3. An abstract that provides only one of the aspects listed above under 200 words.
  4. An abstract that provides only one of the aspects listed above in more than 200 words.
  5. An abstract that fails to provide either of the aspects listed above.

Writing: Your paper must be well-written and clear. Each paragraph should move the paper along with a clear purpose. Each section should have its own purpose, be well-motivated, and end with clear knowledge imparted to the reader. As the reader, I should never wonder what is being said or why it is being said. You do not want to write a paper in which, when I am reading it, I ever ask myself, "What does this sentence mean?" or "What is the point of this paragraph/argument?" or say to myself "I don't understand what is being said." Each instant of such a question is an instant of unclarity.

  1. A consistently well-written and clear paper.
  2. One instance of unclarity.
  3. Two instances of unclarity.
  4. Three instances of unclarity.
  5. Four or more instances of unclarity.

Topic: After reading your paper, I will reflect upon your primary topic and/or empirical question. I should be able to precisely state your research topic without returning to the paper.

  1. I have a clear understanding of your topic (e.g. Busing is an inexpensive way to improve racial integration across schools in small school districts, but not in large school districts).
  2. I have a vague understanding of your topic (e.g. Busing and racial integration go hand-in-hand).
  3. I cannot reiterate your question even generally (e.g. I have no idea what your paper was about other than it dealt with education policy).

Policy Presciption: After reading your paper, I will reflect upon your topic and then on your policy prescriptions. I should be able to precisely state your policy prescription(s) without returning to the paper.

  1. I have a clear understanding of your policy prescriptions (e.g. the federal government should pay up to $2 per student per mile in order to bus students to different schools in order to improve racial integration across schools, but only in districts with fewer than 6000 students).
  2. I have a vague understanding of your policy prescriptions (e.g. the federal government should devote more money to busing).
  3. I cannot reiterate your policy prescriptions even generally (e.g. I have no idea what policy change you are advocating).

Citations: Citations in the text should refer to the author(s) by last name, followed by the year of the publication in parentheses. Or, if the text does not refer to the author directly, then the author(s) last name(s) and year of publication should be included in parentheses, separated by a comma. If mulitple sources are listed, separate them by a semicolon. If a citation has two authors, list both last names. If a citation has three or more authors, list the first author's last name follwed by "et al.". For example:

There is a large literature showing that the cost of child care plays a major role in the labor market decisions of women with children (Anderson and Levine, 1999; Chaplin et al., 2000).

Heckman (1974) provides the static theory in the standard context of a mother choosing her hours worked when facing a specific child care market.
You should use direct quotations as little as possible. If you do use quotes, then place a comma following the year and include the page number, such as Heckman (1974, p. 23). If you quote more than one line of text, then you should separate the quote from the text with blank lines at the beginning and the end of the quotation, and include double margins.

  1. Correct citations.
  2. One or two incorrect citations.
  3. Three or four incorrect citations.
  4. Five or six incorrect citations.
  5. Seven or more incorrect citations.

Introduction: The introduction clearly introduces your topic and demonstrates why it is interesting. The introduction also provides the context for showing where your question fits into the literature. (If you find it useful, you can include a Literature Review section following your introduction that provides the context, but most reports can be written so that the literature review is incorporated into the introduction) and throughout the body of the text.) The introduction must also introduce your data very briefly, and provide a quick summary of your policy prescriptions.

  1. An introduction that provides a clear, comprehensive, and accurate understanding of your topic, its importance, how it relates to the literature, and your policy prescriptions.
  2. An introduction that fails to provide context relating your paper to the literature.
  3. An introduction that fails to introduce the data.
  4. An introduction that fails to summarize your policy prescriptions or to demonstrate why your topic is interesting.
  5. An introduction that fails to clearly introduce your topic.

Context: After reading the body of the policy report, I should have a firm understanding of the importance and context of your topic.

  1. I have a clear and comprehensive understanding of the importance and context of your topic.
  2. I understand the topic and why it is important, but I am unable to provide a strong context for the topic. (Context can be provided in many ways. The natural way is to relate the topic to other literature and/or to motivate the topic by showing that it applies to many people, schools, districts, etc.)
  3. I understand the general topic, but I have only a vague understanding of the topic's importance.
  4. I have a vague understanding of the topic.
  5. I have no understanding of the topic's interest, importance, or context.

Data: The data section identifies the data source completely and accruately. You must specify all cuts you made on the data (if any) and why. It must define every variable you use/create. And you must present the summary statistics for each variable. At a minimum, the summary statistics include the number of observations and the mean, minimum, and maximum for each variable. For some projects, however, you may want/need to present more summary statistics, such as summary statistics separately for rich and poor districts or a histogram of an average value over time. Every policy report will have a table of descriptive statistics. After reading your data section:

  1. I have a clear, accruate, and comprehensive understanding of your data and variables.
  2. At most two variables are not described well in the text, but the table of descriptive statistics clarifies the definitions.
  3. There is one inconsistency between the text and the table of descriptive statistics that I cannot rectify.
  4. There are at most three inconsistencies between the text and the table of descriptive statistics.
  5. I don't have confidence that your data represent what the paper claims they represent.

Interpreting Tables and Graphs: Every policy report must include some tables and/or graphs. After reading the text that discusses tables and graphs:

  1. All tables and graphs were clear and explained as such in the text.
  2. At most two incidents occured in which a table or graph was not well described in the text, but the table or graph reported the data correctly.
  3. There are at most two incidents where the text and table/graph are equally unclear.
  4. There are at most four incidents where the text and table/graph are equally unclear.
  5. I don't have confidence that your tables/graphs or what the policy report claims they represent.

Policy Prescriptions: The policy report must include a discussion of possible policy prescriptions. (If you advocate for a current policy, then care must be taken to defend the current policy against proposed reform policies.) Not only must the prescriptions be clear, but they must also be defended/supported.

  1. I have an understanding of the proposed policy prescriptions and have a complete and accurate understanding of why the policy presciptions are good ideas, will work to solve a particular problem, and/or are better than other possible prescriptions.
  2. I understand the policy prescriptions, and all but one are supported well.
  3. I understand the policy prescriptions, and all but two are supported well.
  4. I understand the policy prescriptions, but none are supported well.
  5. There are no policy prescriptions provided in the report.

Conclusion: The conclusion must re-present the paper's primary topics and policy prescriptions. The conclusion must be written so that a reader, if she or he only reads the conclusion, still understands the paper completely -- what the topic/question was, how it was investigated, and what the policy prescriptions were.

  1. I have a clear and accurate understanding of the topic and the policy prescriptions from reading just the conclusion.
  2. The conclusion gives a good description of the topic and policy prescriptions but omits one or two small aspects.
  3. The conclusion gives a fairly good description of the topic and policy prescriptions but omits one or two larger aspects.
  4. The conclusion offers a vague description of the topic and/or policy prescriptions.
  5. The conclusion mentions the general topic, but fails to identify a particular topic or policy prescription.

References: You must have at least four references cited in your paper. List all of your references on a separate page (or pages) immediately following your conclusion (and before your tables and graphs). You should not use web references, and do not include when or where or how you obtained the reference. Just cite them as is common in the economics literature. For example:

References

Anderson, Patricia M. and Phillip B. Levine, “Child Care and Mothers’ Employment Decisions,” NBER Working Paper 7058, March, 1999.

Averett, Susan L., H. Elizabeth Peters and Donald M. Waldman, “Tax Credits, Labor Supply, and Child Care,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 79(1), pp. 125-135, February, 1997.

Gustafsson, Siv, and Frank Stafford, “Child Care Subsidies and Labor Supply in Sweden,” Journal of Human Resources, 27(1), pp. 204-230, Winter, 1992.

Heckman, James J., “Effects of Child-Care Programs on Women’s Work Effort,” Journal of Political Economy, 82(2), Special Issue, pp. S136-S163, March/April, 1974.

Hofferth, Sandra L., “Comment on The Importance of Child Care Costs to Women’s Decision Making,” in The Economics of Child Care, in David M. Blau ed., Russell Sage Foundation, New York, pp. 119-126, 1991.

  1. All components mentioned above are consistently represented in the list of references.
  2. One component is consistently misrepresented, or one or two references have mistakes.
  3. Two components are consistently misrepresented, or three or four references have mistakes.
  4. Three components are consistently misrepresented.
  5. Four or more components are consistently misrepresented, or web references are used.

Tables and Graphs: Tables and graphs are to be included at the end of the paper, following your reference section. One table or graph per page. Each table and graph is numbered consecutively and includes a title. Each should also include a note beneath it. The standard rule is that tables and graphs must be understandable, more or less, without reading the paper. Thus, do not include variable names, but rather write out what each variable means. Tables must be clear and informative. In the text, be sure to refer to tables by their number. For example, you might write: "In Table 2, we see that ...". You can check out how I present tables and refer to them in any of my papers (other than the voting paper) that I have posted to the web at campus.lakeforest.edu/~lemke/index.html.

  1. All tables and graphs are clear, understandable, and labeled appropriately.
  2. One table or graph is not clear or neat, or one aspect of the tables and graphs is routinely misrepresented.
  3. Two tables or graphs are not clear or neat, or two aspects of the tables and graphs are routinely misrepresented.
  4. Three tables or graphs are not clear or neat, or three aspects of the tables and graphs are routinely misrepresented.
  5. Four or more tables or graphs are not clear or neat, or four aspects of the tables and graphs are routinely misrepresented.

Presentation: Style All presenters should be well-dressed, speak at a reasonable pace, have a good presence (don't fidget), have good eye-contact, and be serious.

  1. All five components listed above.
  2. Four of the five components.
  3. Three of the five components.
  4. Two of the five components.
  5. One of the five components.

Presentation: Slides All presenters must give a PowerPoint presentation. The presenter must have command of PowerPoint. PowerPoint slides need to be informative, free of errors, and easy to read.

  1. PowerPoint slides were informative, free of errors, and easy to read.
  2. PowerPoint slides were below-standard in one of the three categories listed above.
  3. PowerPoint slides were below-standard in two of the three categories listed above.
  4. PowerPoint slides were below-standard in all three of the categories listed above.
  5. PowerPoint was not used in the presentation.

Presentation: Timing Presentations should be between 13 and 17 minutes.

  1. The presentation was between 13 and 17 minutes.
  2. The presentation was 11, 12, 18, or 19 minutes.
  3. The presentation was 9, 10, or 20 minutes.
  4. The presentation was 7 or 8 minutes.
  5. The presentation was under 7 minutes or over 20 minutes.

Presentation: Information The presentation must present the main ideas of the policy report including policy prescriptions. Given just the information presented:

  1. I have a clear and accurate understanding of the topic and the policy prescriptions.
  2. I have a clear and accurate understanding of the topic, but there are one or two parts of the policy prescriptions that remain unclear.
  3. I have a clear and accurate understanding of the topic, but there are three or more parts of the policy prescriptions that remain unclear.
  4. I have a general idea of the topic.
  5. I have no idea of the general topic.

Presentation: Questions and Answers Each presenter must take questions from the audience.

  1. All questions were clearly answered and in a timely manner.
  2. All questions were clearly answered, but some could have been answered more directly.
  3. Most but not all questions were clearly answered.
  4. Most but not all questions were clearly answered, and some could have been answered more directly.
  5. None of the questions were answered well.