Analysis of the policy using the appropriate economic model
· Was the right model chosen?
· Was it effectively employed?
· Was it clearly explained?
· Was the graphical presentation effective? / Wrong model for problem; Correct model incorrectly implemented; Unclear explanation; Ineffective graph associated with model / Correct model properly employed; Explanation is weak so that reader must work hard to understand; Model graphic may be hard to understand / Clear explication and explanation of correct model; Graph is easy to read and properly demonstrates theory / Graceful explication and explanation of correct model; Graph is easy to read, properly demonstrates theory, and is aesthetically pleasing
Quantity and quality of data used to support your analysis
· Have you missed opportunities to support your claims and/or argument with numerical evidence?
· Have you overused data so that the numbers detract from your brief?
· How well have you selected your data?
· Are these powerful pieces of information or are they less useful?
· Are the data well-connected to the policy under consideration? / Little or no data used; Data used are incorrectly interpreted; Connection of data to policy unclear / Either too little or too much data used; Data choices may not be particularly potent Interpretation is correct; Weak connection between data and policy / Appropriate quantity of data used; Data chosen are powerful, though perhaps not uniformly so; Correct interpretation of data; Solid connection between data and policy / Appropriate quantity of data used; Data chosen are consistently powerful; Interpretations are nuanced and insightful; Nuanced connection between data and policy
Quality of the data presentation in text, table, and chart
· Is the table/chart clear?
· Does the table/chart reflect the lazy reader principle?
· Are sources and definitions appropriately defined and explained?
· Are limitations of the data appropriately considered? / Missing labels or titles; Missing notes; Unclear use of jargon/column labels; No reference in the text / Clear labels or titles; Unclear or incomplete notes; Reference in the text may not clearly explain what I should be seeing; Limited understanding of limitations of the data presented / Clear labels or titles; Unclear or incomplete notes; Reference in the text may not clearly explain what I should be seeing; Limited understanding of limitations of the data presented / Insightful labels or titles; Clear and complete notes; Text clearly explains the important content of the chart/table; Complete consideration of limitations of the data presented
Attention to task and audience
· Does the paper provide useful information for making a policy decision?
· Do rhetorical choices reflect role and audience? / After reading brief, it is not clear how information would inform decision; no reflection of the status of the audience relative to writer / After reading brief, the relevance of some information is unclear but most is obvious; limited reflection of the status of the audience relative to writer / After reading brief, the relevance of information is clear; Status of the audience relative to writer is clear from rhetorical choices, but may be inconsistent / The brief provides insightful information for a decision maker; Rhetorical choices consistently show a graceful recognition of the relationship between author and audience
Comments: