Week 7 Discussion 1
4040 unread replies.8181 replies.
“Monitoring Observed Policy Outcomes” Please respond to the following:
Discuss the relationship between ill-structured problems and approaches to monitoring. Then, describe a real or hypothetical problem and recommend at least one effective way to monitor the policy outcomes. Support your position.
Use at least two threats to validity and develop a rebuttal to two of the following statements: (a) The greater the cost of an alternative, the less likely it is that the alternative will be pursued. (b) The enforcement of the maximum speed limit of 55 mph increases the costs of exceeding the speed limit. (c) The mileage death rate fell from 4.3 to 3.6 deaths per 100 million miles after the implementation of the 55-mph speed limit. (Refer to Figure 6.13 before responding.)
The relationship between a not well organized issue and monitoring is that all through the solving process, the determinations and arrangements must be advocated.
Solvers need to continually monitor and assess their reasoning process until finishing the critical thinking. Monitoring permits creation of information about the causes and results of policies, examines relations between strategy program operations and their watched results (Dunn, 2012). Poorly organized issues and ways to deal with monitoring often get confused in monitoring not well organized issues in view of absence of clear characterizing or recognizing of requirements. The speculative issue is “recording numbers” Now for this situation we don’t know whether positive, negative or whole numbers are to be composed.
Furthermore, the extent is not given. In such cases it is viable to monitor the arrangement by reclassifying obliges and framing an all round organized issue. A case in point will be issues that have more than one arrangement way and contain elements of instability in what standard or idea to utilize, for example, case-based issues, investigating, outline issues, frameworks examination issues and difficulties (S.L., 2006).
The greater the cost of an alternative, the less likely it is that the alternative will be pursued:
This is a legitimate supposition as the cost goes up the odds that the alternative will be sought after less .The counter will be that there could be supplements and substitutes which could be utilized for this alternative and henceforth the chance that this alternative may not go down on its cost is the answer. The danger to legitimacy is that there are sure autonomous variables that can’t be controlled and which are past the factual testes of importance. This could undermine the legitimacy of the supposition.
The mileage death rate fell from 4.3 to 3.6 deaths per 100 million miles after the implementation of the 55-mph speed limit:
The counter for this would be that the mileage demise rate couldn’t have fallen quite recently because of this cause and there could have been such a large number of different causes that could have prompted the fall. There could have been numerous different reasons too which ascribed to this fall. So attributing the fall in the death rate to only this is not a substantial supposition. The danger if legitimacy could be the huge populace uses to concentrate on the impacts of the test and this could have been wrong. The information gathering devices could have been poorly coordinated.
Dunn, W. (2012). Public policy analysis: An introduction (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
S.L., C., & Tan, C. (2006, March 7). Investigating Singapore Pre-service Teachers’ Ill-structured Problem-solving Processes in an Asynchronous Online Environment: Implications for Reflective Thinking. Retrieved August 16, 2016 athttp://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ847602.pd