Imagine You Are A Policy Analyst For One Of The Following Gr

Imagine You Are A Policy Analyst For One Of The Following Groups 1 E

Imagine you are a policy analyst for one of the following groups: 1) Education Advancement Today (“EAT”), which seeks to reduce student debt and the student cost of higher education, or 2) Help Investors Today (“HIT”), which seeks to eliminate regulations in the finance industry. Write a memo to either MOM’s or to HIT’s newly-hired director that:

1) Explains the meaning and policy implications of the terms: "event: occurrences with social consequences", "condition: situation accepted as inevitable or unchangeable", "problem: situations that people seek to change", and "public problem: situations people seek to have the government help to change";

2) Uses the above terms to develop a strategy to direct political and/or public attention to your issue;

3) Explains what a “problem broker” is—individual, group, and coalitions that seek to promote their policy objectives by directing political attention towards specific issues and controlling how those issues are viewed—and how they might promote your policy goals;

4) Considers whether this coming year will be a good year to advance your cause, and why or why not.

Paper For Above instruction

As a policy analyst for Education Advancement Today (EAT), my role entails examining critical concepts that influence policy formulation and advocacy, specifically within the context of higher education costs and student debt. Understanding the foundational terms—event, condition, problem, and public problem—is essential in shaping a strategic approach to influence policy decisions effectively.

Initially, an event refers to an occurrence with social consequences. In the context of higher education, an example might be the enactment of legislation that significantly increases student loan interest rates. Such events have ripple effects, impacting students' financial stability and the broader economy. Recognizing these events enables advocates to respond promptly and shape public discourse.

A condition signifies a situation accepted as inevitable or unchangeable. An example within higher education policy could be the rising cost of tuition, which many stakeholders perceive as an unalterable reality. Policies that accept these conditions often lead to inaction. Challenging this perception is crucial in advocating for reforms that make college more affordable.

A problem involves a situation that individuals or groups seek to change. For instance, the ballooning student debt crisis is a problem that students, families, and policymakers continually seek to address because it hampers economic mobility and creates financial insecurity. Framing the student debt issue as a problem that requires intervention is vital for mobilizing support.

A public problem is a problem that people expect the government to help resolve. In this scenario, the high student debt burden becomes a public problem when citizens demand federal and state interventions, such as loan forgiveness or caps on interest rates. Recognizing this helps align advocacy efforts with government action.

To develop a strategic approach, it is essential to link these terms conceptually. For example, policymakers might classify rising tuition as a condition perceived as unchangeable, but advocacy efforts can challenge this by framing affordability as a problem requiring government intervention—transforming it into a public problem. Framing the student debt crisis as a problem to be addressed publicly mobilizes political attention and resources.

A problem broker is an individual, group, or coalition seeking to promote policy objectives by guiding political attention towards specific issues and shaping how they are viewed. In the realm of higher education, coalition groups like student advocacy organizations, educational NGOs, or coalitions of alumni can act as problem brokers. They promote the narrative that college affordability is a critical issue and frame it as a pressing public problem.

For EAT’s policy goals, problem brokers can raise awareness through media campaigns, grassroots mobilization, or lobbying efforts to frame higher education costs as a public problem necessitating policy reform. They influence public perception and pressures on policymakers to act, such as advocating for legislation that caps tuition increases or increases funding for financial aid.

Considering the upcoming year, whether it is conducive to advancing our cause depends on several factors. If economic conditions worsen, with rising unemployment or inflation, public concern over student debt and college costs may heighten, making this a propitious time to mobilize advocacy efforts. Conversely, if competing policy priorities, such as health care reforms or emergency economic measures, dominate the legislative agenda, it may be challenging to secure attention for higher education issues.

In summary, understanding these concepts enables targeted strategic planning. By framing rising tuition and student debt as actual problems rather than inevitable conditions, mobilizing problem brokers to guide public and political attention, and choosing opportune moments, EAT can effectively promote policy changes that reduce financial burdens on students and improve access to higher education.

References

• Birkland, T. A. (2015). An Introduction to the Policy Process. Routledge.
• Hill, M. (2005). The policy process in the modern state. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Meguid, M., & Rich, R. (2009). Policy analysis: A political perspective. Routledge.
• Sabatier, P. A. (2019). Theories of the policy process. Westview Press.
• Howlett, M., Ramesh, M., & mukherjee, S. (2015). Studying Public Policy. Oxford University Press.
• Kingdon, J. W. (2011). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Longman.
• Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (2015). The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Problems. University of Chicago Press.
• Zahariadis, N. (201273). The multiple streams framework: Structure, limitations, prospects. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the Policy Process (pp. 65-92). Westview Press.
• Lindblom, C. E. (1990). The science of muddling through. Public Administration Review, 19(2), 79-88.
• Stone, D. (2012). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making. W. W. Norton & Company.