University at Albany

School of Criminal Justice

RPAD 540, Public Policy Analysis
Spring 2015

Time and Place:

Meeting Info: Monday 5:45pm -8:35pm
Husted 219
Professor:
Shawn D. Bushway Ph.D.
220 Milne Hall
Wk (518) 591-8738
sbushway@albany.edu
The best way to contact me is via email. To ensure that I see your email, write PAD 540
in the subject line, and sign your full name.
Office Hours:
Monday 3:30-5pm and by appointment. I have found that students dont make use of regularly
scheduled office hours. However, I am in the office most days and I am willing to do whatever is
necessary to facilitate appointments.
Prerequisites:
RPAD 503 (Principles of Public Economics), RPAD 504 (Data, Models, and Decisions I), and
RPAD 505 (Data, Models, and Decisions II); or equivalent courses that cover introductory
microeconomics, introductory statistics, and basic quantitative analysis; or by permission.
Book:
Weimer, D.L. and A.R. Vining. (2010). Policy Analysis: Concepts and Practice (5th ed). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. ISBN-13: 978-0205781300
Gupta, D.K. (2010). Analyzing Public Policy: Concepts, Tools, and Techniques (2nd ed.).
Washington, DC: CQ Press. ISBN-13: 978-1604265705
Miscellaneous articles and chapters, posted to Blackboard.
Course Goals (With Credit to Erika Martin)
This course aims to strengthen analytic and professional writing skills in order to enhance your
understanding of the policy process and increase your ability to identify problems, enumerate
solutions, evaluate alternative policies, and communicate results.
Knowledge of Policy Analysis: Students will learn how policy issues get on the agenda, rationales
underlying policy interventions, different types of policy interventions, real-world political and
bureaucratic influences on decision-making and implementation, and various disciplines and
analytic tools used in policy analysis.
1

Skills of Policy Analysis: The class will help students improve the effectiveness of their
professional writing, including conveying complex ideas to general policy audiences; identify how
to measure policy problems, including the strengths and limitations of different approaches;
critically evaluate other policy analyses; evaluate the strengths and limitations of various technical
tools; and develop a research design plan, which includes defining a problem succinctly, choosing
appropriate analytic methods, and identifying data.
Thinking Like A Policy Analyst: Students will be encouraged to approach problems with the
mindset of a policy analyst, which includes anticipating how actors may define problems
differently; appreciating how problem definition influences data analysis; taking a holistic
approach to analysis, such as considering political obstacles and actors divergent goals and
perspectives; foreseeing challenges with technical tools; and critically evaluating numbers and
claims reported in the media and political debates.
Classroom Approach
This class uses a technique known as Team-Based Learning. Team-based Learning
(www.teambasedlearning.org) is a type of active learning approach to classroom teaching that is
part of the flipped classroom movement. The standard lecture class has teachers present material
in the class, and students do applications or learning exercises outside of class. In a flipped
classroom, students do much of the concept acquisition outside of class through reading or other
mixed media presentation, and then participate in applied learning activities in the classroom.
Team-based learning is distinguished from other flipped classroom techniques by two features.
First, team-based learning emphasized decision making during class time, in which students must
use key course concepts to make decisions about real-life problems. Second, students spend all of
their class time as members of permanent teams which facilitate decision making and ultimately,
learning. Team work is done almost exclusively in the classroom, and part of the course grade
comes from the team effort.
I first learned about Team-based Learning after arriving at UAlbany nine years ago. I have always
done a lot of application but I struggled to motivate UAlbany students to apply concepts in the
classroom. The technique has led to improved student outcomes (ie. student learning) in my
classrooms and I am a strong supporter of this approach both at UAlbany and at national
conferences. For more information about my journey towards TBL adoption, see
http://www.itlal.org/index.php?q=node/287
To see an academic article on Team Based Learning on which I am a co-author, please see the
following website: https://jstamatel.wordpress.com/courses/
Academic Honesty
The Universitys standards for integrity are at the website below:
http://www.albany.edu/graduatebulletin/requirements_degree.htm#standards_integrity
Avoid plagiarism by properly acknowledging material and ideas taken from other sources. The
University of Albany Library offers a useful tutorial on plagiarism and how to avoid it:
http://library.albany.edu/usered/plagiarism/index.html

Grading Requirements and Procedures

RATS and Projects:
There will be 5 short, multiple choice Readiness Assessment Tests (RATs) given during the course.
(The same RATs will be given to individuals and teams.) There will be written group proposal, and
three short policy papers (3-4 pages). On team exams and projects all team members will receive
the same score.
Grading Criteria:
The grades will be determined by scores in three major performance areas:
Individual Performance, Team Performance and Team Contribution.
Grade Weights and Percentages
Grade Weights
Within Area
Of Total
50%
30
20
25
25

1. Individual performance
Individual Readiness Assessment Tests
Assignment 1
Assignment 2
Assignment 3
2. Team Performance
Team Readiness Assessment Tests
In Class Team Exercises
Group Analysis Plan Project

40%
25
25
50

3. Team Contribution (Evaluated by Peers)

10%

Evaluating Team Contribution:

Each individual will rate the helpfulness all of the other members of their teams during the final
exam.
Individual Team Contribution scores will be the average of the points they receive from the
members of their team. Assuming arbitrarily that there six members in a team, an example of this
procedure would be as follows:
Each individual must assign a total of 25 points to the other five members in their team. Raters
must differentiate some in their ratings (This means that each rater would have to give at least one
score of 6 or higher and at least one score of 4 or lower). In a 5-member team, members would
assign 20 points. As a result, Team Contribution scores will produce differences in grades only
within teams. Consequently, team members cant help everyone in their team get an A by giving
them a high peer evaluation score. The only way for everyone in a team to earn an A is by doing an
outstanding job on the individual and team exams and projects.
Determination of Final Grades:
3

The final grades will be determined as follows:

1) A raw total score will be computed for each student in each major performance area (In the
individual performance area, this will be a weighted combination of the sum of the individual
Readiness Assessment Test scores and the final exam score, in the team performance area, this
will be the sum of the scores on each of the graded team assignments and the Team
Contribution score will be the average of the peer evaluations received from the other members
of his or her team.)
2) Students total scores will be computed by multiplying the raw scores in each area by the grade
weight (see above).
3) Course grades will be based on each individuals standing in the overall distribution of total
individual scores within the class. (Note: When this procedure is followed: a) the actual impact of
any score on an individual students final grade depends on both his or her actual score and
also how high or low he or she scores relative to other members of the class and, b) the
conventional practice of 90% is an A, 80% is a B, etc. simply does not apply.) I do not
anticipate giving grades of less than B-, unless a student has essentially made little or no effort in
class.
Students with Disabilities
If you have a documented disability and wish to discuss academic accommodations with me,
please contact me. All reasonable efforts will be made to accommodate your needs.
Schedule Please note this schedule is preliminary, and reading assignments may change.
The reading assignments are posted every week on Blackboard.
Date

Topic

Reading Assignment

1/26/15 Introduction To Class

2/2/15 What is Policy Analysis

RAT 1
1) Gupta Ch. 1. Reason, Rationality and Public Policy: The
Puzzle of Human Behavior
2) Gupta.Ch. 2 The Analysts: Their Role and Their Tools
3) Gupta Chapter 15: So You Want to be an Analyst
4) Weimer and Vining. Chapter 1, Salmon Fishery
5) Weimer and Vining. Chapter 2, What Is Policy Analysis?
6) Weimer and Vining. Ch. 3, Towards Professional Ethics

2/9/15 The Policy Process

RAT 2
1) Gupta Ch. 4 The Policy Process
2) Weimer and Vining Ch. 11 Adoption
3) Weimer and Vining Ch. 12 Implementation

2/16/15 Process Reform

1) Spohn (2009) How Do Judges Decide: The Search for

Fairness and Justice in Punishment . Second Edition.

Assignment 1 Due: An
Analysis of the Policy

2) http://www.vera.org/pubs/drug-law-reform-new-york-city

Process that led to NY Drug

Law Reform.
3) http://www.criminaljustice.ny.gov/drug-lawreform/index.html
5

2/23/15 Collecting Data

1) Gupta Ch. 8 Sources of Data

2) Race Matters: Why Gallop Poll Finds Less Support for
President Obama. Huffington Post June 17, 2012.
3) Becky Pettit: Invisible Men: Mass Incarceration and the Myth
of Black Progress (exerpts)
4) http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-andpublications/research-projects-and-surveys/surveys/19970314public-opinion-on-sentencing/JP_COVR.pdf

3/2/15 Competitive Markets and RAT 3

Market Failures
1) Gupta Ch. 3 Government and the Market
2) Weimer and Vining Ch. 4, Efficiency and the Idealized
Competitive Market
3) Weimer and Vining, Ch. 5 Rationales for Public Policy:
Market Failures
4) Weimer and Vining Ch. 6. Rationales for Public Policy: Other
Limitations for the Competitive Framework
5) Weimer and Vining, Ch. 7. Rationales for Public Policy:
Distributional and Other Goals
6) Weimer and Vining, Ch. 8. Limits to Public Intervention:
Government Failures
3/9/15 Policy Problems and
1) Weimer and Vining, Ch. 9. Policy Problems as Market and
Market Solutions
Government Failure: The Madison Taxicab Policy Analysis
Example
2) Weimer and Vining, Ch. 10. Correcting Market and
Government Failures: Generic Policies
Assignment 2 due, online
3) Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know.
submission, 3/13
2012 Caulkins, Hawken, Kilmer and Kleiman (excerpts)
Market Analysis of
4) Considering Marijuana Legalization:
Vermont MJ Legalization
Insights for Vermont and Other jurisdictions
by Jonathan P. Caulkins, Beau Kilmer, Mark A. R. Kleiman,
Robert J. MacCoun, Gregory Midgette, Pat Oglesby, Rosalie
Liccardo Pacula, Peter H. Reuter
http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR
800/RR864/RAND_RR864.pdf
3/16/15 Spring Break

3/23/15 Trends/Forecasting/Risk
Prediction

RAT 4
1) Gupta 10 Projection Techniques: When History is Inadequate
2) Gupta 11 Projection Techniques: Analysis of Historical Data
3) Gupta 12 Projection Techniques: The Methods of Simple and
Multiple Least Squares

3/30/15 Trends/Forecasting/Risk
Prediction

1) Tonry, Michael (2014) Why Crime Rates Are Falling

throughout the Western World
2) Pepper, John (2008) Forecasting Crime: A City-Level
Analysis
3)
http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/state
-sentencing-and-corrections-trends-2013-v2.pdf
4) http://www.vera.org/files/fsr-follow-the-evidence-april2011.pdf
5) Offender Risk Assessment in Virginia
A Three-Stage Evaluation: Process of Sentencing Reform,
Empirical Study of Diversion and Recidivism and Benefit-Cost
Analysis
http://vcsc.virginia.gov/risk_off_rpt.pdf
6) Bernard Harcourt, Against Prediction: Profiling , Policing and
Punishing the Actuarial Age (Exerpts)
7) EEOC April 2012 Guidance on Criminal Background Checks
http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/arrest_conviction.cfm

10

4/6/15 Presenting of Case for

Group Project

1) Kutateladzei, Andiloro, Johnson and Spohn (2014)

Cumulative Disadvantage: Examining Racial and Ethnic
Disparity in Prosecution and Sentencing. Criminology
2) Weimer and Vining. Chapter 15, Landing on Your Feet:
Organizing Your Policy Analysis, pp. 340-382.

11

Assignment 3 Due, Risk

Prediction in Sentencing in
NY
4/13/15 Simulations

12

4/17/15 Optional Virtual

Attendance At NY
Sentencing Commission
4/20/15 Cost Benefit Analysis

1) Sterman, J.D. (2000). Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking

and Modeling for a Complex World. McGraw Hill, pp. 3-39.
Chapter 1, Learning in and about Complex Systems, pp. 3-39.
3) Raphael, Steven, and Michael Stoll. 2009. Why are so many
Americans in prison? in Do Prisons Make Us Safer? The
Benefits and Costs of the Prison Boom, Pp. 27-72. edited by
Steven Raphael and Michael A. Stoll. New York: Russell Sage
Foundation.
4) Luallen, Jeremy, and Ryan Kling. 2014. "A Method for
Analyzing Changing Prison Populations Explaining the Growth
of the Elderly in Prison." Evaluation Review, 38, no. 6: 459-486.
5) Christensen (1967) Estimating Size of Criminal Population
6) Brame, Robert; Michael Turner, Raymond Paternoster and
Shawn Bushway. (2012). Cumulative Prevalence of Arrest from
Ages 8-23 in a National Sample. Pediatrics 129:1:21-27.

RAT 5
1) Gupta Ch. 14 Choosing the Best Alternative: Cost Benefit
Analysis
2) Weimer and Vining Ch. 16 Cost-Benefit Analysis: Assessing

Efficiency
13

4/27/15 To Be Determined -

14

5/4/15 Group Project

Presentations