Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
analysis.
Methodology is a system of standards, rules and
procedures for creating, critically assessing, and
communicating policy-relevant knowledge.
relevance.
Knowledge that assists in formulating and
solving problems, as these problems are
experienced by policymakers and citizens on
whom the policies have an impact, including
the disenfranchised.
critical multiplism.
Multiple operationalism.
The use of multiple measures of policy constructs.
Multimethod research.
The use of multiple methods to observe policy processes and
outcomes.
Multivariate analysis.
The inclusion of multiple variables in policy models.
Multimedia communications.
The use by policy analysts of multiple communications media
is essential for ensuring that knowledge is policy relevant.
Policy-Relevant Information
The methodology of policy analysis designed to
Policy-Relevant Information
The methodology of policy analysis
POLICY
OUTCOMES
POLICY
PROBLEMS
POLICY
ACTIONS
POLICY
FUTURES
Policy-Analytic Procedures
Methodology of policy analysis incorporates
problem solving:
Definition
Prediction
Prescription
Description
Evaluation
Policy-Analytic Procedures
Five procedures as applied to policy analysis:
Problem structuring (definition)
Yields information about the conditions giving rise to a policy
problem.
Forecasting (prediction)
Supplies information about future consequences of acting on
policy alternatives, including doing nothing.
Recommendation (prescription)
Provides information about the relative value or worth of these
future consequences in solving or alleviating the problem.
Policy-Analytic Procedures
Monitoring (description)
Yields information about the present or past
consequences of acting on policy alternatives.
Evaluation (evaluation)
Provides information about the value or worth of
these consequences in solving or alleviating the
problem.
Policy-Analytic Procedures
The five procedures serve as the means of
Forecasting
Evaluation
Problem
Structuring
Problem
Structuring
Problem
Structuring
Problem
Structuring
Monitoring
Recommendation
Evaluation
Problem
Structuring
POLICY
OUTCOMES
POLICY
PROBLEMS
Problem
Structuring
Problem
Structuring
POLICY
FUTURES
Problem
Structuring
Monitoring
Recommendation
POLICY
ACTIONS
CHARACTERISTICS
ILLUSTRATION
AGENDA SETTING
POLICY
FORMULATION
POLICY ADOPTION
POLICY
IMPLEMENTATION
POLICY
ASSESSMENT
Forecasting
Recommendation
AGENDA SETTING
POLICY
FORMULATION
POLICY ADOPTION
Monitoring
POLICY
IMPLEMENTATION
Evaluation
POLICY
ASSESSMENT
Problem Structuring
Problem structuring can supply policy-relevant
Forecasting
Forecasting can provide policy-relevant knowledge
Recommendation
Recommendation yields policy-relevant
Monitoring
Monitoring provides policy-relevant knowledge
Evaluation
Evaluation yields policy-relevant knowledge
Introduction
Policy argumentation is central to policy
information.
Policy-relevant information does not fully determine
the conclusions of policy arguments. Information does
not speak for itself.
Identical information can and often does lead to
different conclusions, which we call policy claims to
emphasize the fallible and indeterminate character of
arguments.
Ethical Argumentation
Systems of Argumentation
Completeness. Elements of an argument should
Systems of Argumentation
Consonance. Elements of an argument
Systems of Argumentation
Cohesiveness. Elements of an argument
Systems of Argumentation
Functional regularity. Elements of an argument
PROBLEM
SITUATION
Problem
Structuring
Problem
Dissolving
POLICY
PROBLEM
NO
Problem
Unsolving
RIGHT
PROBLEM?
YES
Problem
Solving
POLICY
SOLUTION
YES
POLICY
SOLUTION?
Problem
Resolving
Characteristics of problems.
Interdependence of policy problems (policy messes).
Analytic versus holistic approaches.
Secondary Issues
Functional Issues
Minor Issues
Secondary issues.
Located at the level of agency programs at the
federal, state, and local levels.
The setting of program priorities and the definition
of target groups and beneficiaries.
Minor issues.
Located at the level of specific projects.
Involve questions of personnel, staffing, employee
benefits, vacation times, working hours, and
standard operating procedures.
Moderately structured.
Prototype: prisoners dilemma.
Ill-structured.
Prototype: most important problems.
ELEMENT
Well structured
Ill Structured
Decision maker(s)
One or few
One or few
Many
Alternatives
Limited
Limited
Unlimited
Utilities (values)
Consensus
Consensus
Conflict
Outcomes
Certainty or risk
Uncertainty
Unknown
Probabilities
Calculable
Incalculable
Incalculable
Problem
Search
PROBLEM
SITUATION
SUBSTANTIVE
PROBLEM
Problem
Sensing
Problem
Specification
FORMAL PROBLEM
Types of errors.
Type I rejecting the null hypothesis when it is true.
Type II accepting the null hypothesis when it is false.
Type III solving the wrong problem.
Descriptive models.
The purpose of descriptive models is to explain
and/or predict the causes and consequences of
policy choices.
Used to monitor the outcomes of policy actions and
to forecast performance.
S n (1 r ) S 0
n
Y a bX
40000
30000
20000
10000
Rsq = 0.6369
0.0
.1
.2
.3
.4
.5
.6
.7
.8
.9
1.0
metaproblem).
Saturation sampling.
Elicitation of problem representations.
Boundary estimation.
Classificational analysis.
Uses logical division and logical classification.
Criteria.
Substantive relevance.
Exhaustiveness.
Disjointness.
Consistency.
Hierarchical distinctiveness.
Dimensions of fragmentation.
Separation of powers.
Division of powers (federalism).
Congress
President
Courts
Legislative
Make laws
Review laws to
determine legislative
intent, new
interpretations
Executive
Override vetoes;
legislative vetoes of
regulations
Judicial
Pardon criminals,
nominate judges
Interpret laws.
Note: The primary function of each branch is indicated in the boxes with the diagonal lines.
Prediction.
A forecast based on explicit theoretical assumptions.
Conjecture.
A forecast based on informed or expert judgments about future
states of society.
Comparative yield.
Both simple and complex theoretical models have been no
more accurate than simple extrapolative models and informed
expert judgment.
Context.
Institutional (nonprofit more accurate than business and
government).
Temporal (long-term less accurate than short-term).
Historical (modern complexity reduces accuracy).
Assumption drag.
Plausible futures.
Future states that, on the basis of assumptions about causation
in nature and society, are believed to be likely if policymakers
do not intervene to redirect the course of events.
Normative futures.
Potential and plausible futures which are consistent with an
analysts conception of future needs, values, and opportunities.
The specification of normative futures narrows the range of
potential and plausible futures, thus linking forecasts to
specific goals and objectives.
GOALS
OBJECTIVES
Broadly stated (. . . To
upgrade the quality of
health care)
Concrete (. . . Increase
the number of physicians
by 10 percent)
Definition of terms
Operational ( . . . The
quality of health care
refers to the number of
physicians per 100,000
persons . . .)
Time period
Unspecified ( . . . In the
future)
Specified ( . . . In the
period 2006-2016)
Nonquantitative
(adequate health care
insurance)
Frequently quantitative
( . . . The number persons
covered per 1,000
persons)
Broadly defined ( . . .
People in need of care)
Specifically defined ( . . .
Families with incomes
below $19,000)
Specification of purposes
Measurement procedure
Approaches to Forecasting
Approaches to forecasting.
Decide what to forecast, or determine the object
of the forecast.
Decide how to make the forecast, or select one
or more bases for the forecast.
Choose techniques that are most appropriate for
the object and base selected.
Approaches to Forecasting
Objects.
The object of a forecast is the point of reference
of a projection, prediction, or conjecture.
Objects of forecasting.
Approaches to Forecasting
Bases.
The basis of a forecast is the set of assumptions
or data used to establish the plausibility of
estimates of consequences of existing or new
policies, the content of new policies, or the
behavior of policy stakeholders.
Approaches to Forecasting
Bases (contd.).
Bases for forecasts.
Trend extrapolation (projection).
The extension into the future of trends observed in the
past.
Based on inductive logic.
Theoretical assumptions (prediction).
Systematically structured and empirically testable sets of
laws or propositions that make predictions about the
occurrence of one event based on another.
Based on deductive logic.
Informed judgments (conjecture).
Knowledge based on experience and insight, rather than
inductive or deductive reasoning.
Based on retroductive logic.
BASIS
APPROPRIATE
TECHNIQUES
PRODUCT
Extrapolative
forecasting
Trend extrapolation
Projections
Theoretical forecasting
Theory
Theory mapping
Causal modeling
Regression analysis
Point and interval estimation
Correlational analysis
Predictions
Judgmental forecasting
Informed judgment
Conventional Delphi
Policy Delphi
Cross-impact analysis
Feasibility assessment
Conjectures
Secular trend.
Seasonal variation.
Cyclical fluctuations.
Irregular movements.
Oscillations.
Cycles.
Growth curves.
Decline curves.
Catastrophes.
and Clark-Daniels.
http://www.csub.edu/~rdaniels/Pages%20from
%20DanielsClarkDanielsIJMED.pdf
.
Selective anonymity.
Iteration.
Informed multiple advocacy.
Polarized statistical response.
Structured conflict.
Computer conferencing.
Introduction
Political science traditions.
Institutionalism focus on texts of constitutions, laws,
and other written statements of policies and the
relationships between formal government institutions.
Behaviorism focus on political motivations of
individuals, acting singly and in groups, often through
polling, game theory, and statistical techniques.
Neo-institutionalism focus on organizations and
systems in which individuals interact and achieve
political and policy goals through explicit or implicit
rules and operating procedures.
Introduction
Main categories of actors in the policy
process.
Official actors statutory or constitutional
responsibilities.
Legislative, executive, and judiciary.
Legislatures
First listed branch in the federal and most
state constitutions.
Source of considerable research.
Legislatures
Jurisdiction
House or
Assembly
Bills
House or
Assembly
Concurrent
Resolution
s
House or
Assembly
Joint
Resolution
s
Senate
Bills
Senate
Concurrent
Resolution
s
Senate
Joint
Resolution
s
U.S.
Congress
(20012002)
5,767
521
125
3,181
160
53
California
Legislature
(20012002)
3.283
264
66
2,277
114
56
Legislatures
Burden eased by staff.
Bills sifted by committee structure at both
Legislatures
Other critical functions performed by legislators
Legislative Organization
Legislative Organization
California process.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/bil2lawx.html.
Legislative Organization
Most of the critical work on public policy is done
especially Congress.
Committees and subcommittees.
Decentralization and centralization of party leadership.
Issue networks and policy subsystems.
Veto power.
Unitary branch of government.
Media and public attention.
Informational advantage over the legislature.
The Courts
The ability to interpret legislative and
Voting cues.
Transmission of political preferences.
Creation of packages of policy ideas.
Organization of the legislative branch.
Medias primary function in policy process is agendasetting. Media coverage correlates with institutional
attention.
Focusing events.
Social movements and mobilization.
Exploiting the decentralization of American government.
Going public.
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
The policy-analytic procedure of
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
The procedure of recommendation involves
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
Characteristics of advocative claims.
Actionable: Advocative claims focus on actions that
make be taken to resolve a policy problem.
Prospective: Advocative claims occur prior to the time
that actions are taken.
Value laden: Advocative claims require both that
actions have the predicted consequences, but also that
those consequences have value for society.
Ethically complex: Advocative claims can be intrinsic
(valued as ends in themselves) or extrinsic (valued
because they will produce some other value).
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
Simple model of choice.
Advocative claims are only possible when the
analyst is confronted by a situation of choice
between two or more alternatives.
Simple model.
The definition of a problem requiring action.
The comparison of consequences of two or more
alternatives to resolve the problem.
The recommendation of the alternative that will
result in a preferred outcome.
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
Simple model of choice.
A1
O1
A2
O2
O1
>
O2
A1
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
Complex model of choice.
Conditions.
Multiple stakeholders.
Uncertainty about outcomes.
The passage of time between actions and
consequences.
Results.
Intransitivity of choice.
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
Forms of rationality.
Given the conditions of complex choice, there
are multiple forms of rationality.
Technical rationality.
Economic rationality.
Legal rationality.
Social rationality.
Substantive rationality.
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
Rational-comprehensive theory.
An individual or collective decision-maker must
identify a policy problem on which there is a consensus
among all relevant stakeholders.
An individual or collective decision-maker must define
and consistently rank all goals and objectives whose
attainment would represent a resolution of the problem.
An individual or collective decision-maker must
identify all policy alternatives that may contribute to
the attainment of each goal and objective.
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
Rational-comprehensive theory.
An individual or collective decision-maker must
forecast all consequences that will result from the
selection of each alternative.
An individual or collective decision-maker must
compare each alternative in terms of its consequences
for the attainment of each goal and objective.
An individual or collective decision-maker must choose
that alternative that maximizes the attainment of
objectives.
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
Disjointed incremental theory.
Consider only those objectives that differ incrementally
from the status quo.
Limit the number of consequences forecast for each
alternative.
Make mutual adjustments in goals and objectives, on
the one hand, and alternatives on the other.
Continuously reformulate problems and hence goals,
objectives, and alternatives in the course of acquiring
new information.
Introduction
The consequences of policy actions are
functions:
functions:
Reliable.
Observations precise and dependable.
Valid.
Information about policy outcomes should measure what
we think it is measuring.
Current Opinion
Social Indicators
Congressional Quarterly
Law Digest
Populations:
Target groups individuals, communities, or organizations on
whom policies and programs are designed to have an effect.
Beneficiaries groups for whom the effects of policies are
beneficial or valuable.
POLICY OUTCOMES
ISSUE AREA
Inputs
Processes
Outputs
Impacts
Criminal Justice.
Dollar
expenditures for
salaries,
equipment,
maintenance.
Illegal arrests as
percentages of
total arrests.
Criminals arrested
per 100,000
known crimes.
Criminals
convicted per
100,000 known
crimes.
Municipal
Services.
Dollar
expenditures for
sanitation workers
and equipment.
Morale among
workers.
Total residences
served.
Cleanliness of
streets.
Social welfare.
Number of social
workers.
Rapport with
welfare recipients.
Standard of living
of dependent
children.
Approaches to Monitoring
APPROACH
TYPES OF
CONTROL
TYPE OF
INFORMATION
REQUIRED
Quantitative
Social experimentation
New information
Social auditing
Quantitative and/or
qualitative
New information
Quantitative and/or
qualitative
Available information
Approaches to Monitoring
MANIPULABLE ACTIONS
POLICY
INPUTS
POLICY
PROCESSES
CONTROLLED OUTCOMES
POLICY
OUTPUTS
POLICY
IMPACTS
In1
P1
O1
Im1
In2
.
.
.
Ini
P2
.
.
.
Pj
O2
.
.
.
Om
Im2
.
.
.
Imn
PC1
E1
SES 1
PC2
.
.
.
PCp
E2
.
.
.
Eq
SES 2
.
.
.
SES r
PRECONDITIONS
UNFORESEEN
EVENTS
UNMANIPULABLE CAUSES
SIDE-EFFECTS
AND
SPILLOVERS
UNCONTROLLED EFFECTS
INDICATOR
Public safety
Education
Employment
Income
Housing
Population
Social mobility
Physical environment
Scientific discoveries
Coefficientsa
Breaks in
disaster patterns
1950 - 1971
Model
1
1972 - 1988
1989 - 2006
(Constant)
Number of years
(Constant)
Number of years
(Constant)
Number of years
Unstandardized
Coefficients
B
Std. Error
13.516
2.561
.340
.243
71.419
11.060
-1.551
.403
-6.745
22.133
1.218
.494
Standardized
Coefficients
Beta
.322
-.705
.525
t
5.277
1.400
6.458
-3.849
-.305
2.465
Sig.
.000
.179
.000
.002
.764
.025
Social Experimentation
Use of social indicators often leads to
Social Experimentation
Characteristics and procedures.
Direct control of experimental treatment.
Comparison (control) groups.
Random assignment.
Goal: internal validity the capacity of
Social Experimentation
Threats to internal validity.
History.
Maturation.
Instability.
Instrumentation and testing.
Mortality.
Selection.
Regression artifacts.
Social Experimentation
Social experimentation is weakest in the
Total Sample
Total Sample
Social Auditing
One of the limitations of social systems
Social Auditing
Social auditing explicitly monitors relations
Social Auditing
Processes monitored of two main types:
Resource diversion (from target or beneficiary
groups).
Resource transformation (changes in meaning
of policy actions from administrator to
recipient).
analysis
Link household data with information from
public services
Analyze findings in a way that points to action
Take findings back to the communities for their
views about how to improve the situation
Bring community members into discussion of
evidence with service providers/planners.
public accountability
Work-shopping
Communication strategy
Evidence-based training of planners and service
providers
Media training
Partnerships with civil society
Program Evaluation
Source
Basic Guide to Program Evaluation
Written by
Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD, Authenticity Co
nsulting, LLC
. Copyright 1997-2006.
Adapted from the
Field Guide to Nonprofit Program Design, Mark
eting and Evaluation
.
Programs
Inputs are the various resources needed to
Programs
The outputs are the units of service, e.g., number
Key Considerations
For what purposes is the evaluation being
Key Considerations
What kinds of information are needed to make the
Key Considerations
From what sources should the information be
Key Considerations
When is the information needed (so, by
Goals-Based Evaluation
1. How were the program goals (and objectives, is
Goals-Based Evaluation
5. How should priorities be changed to put more focus on
Process-Based Evaluations
1. On what basis do employees and/or the
Process-Based Evaluations
3. How are employees trained about how to
Process-Based Evaluations
7. What is the general process that
Process-Based Evaluations
11. What do employees and/or customers
Outcome-Based Evaluations
Identify the major outcomes that you want to
Outcome-Based Evaluations
Specify a "target" goal of clients, i.e., with
3.
4.
5.
Interpreting Information:
1. Attempt to put the information in perspective.
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Pitfalls to Avoid
1. Don't balk at evaluation because it seems far too
Pitfalls to Avoid
3. Work hard to include some interviews in your evaluation
discussed.
2006 by the Association for Public Policy
Analysis and Management
INDEX
NUMBERS
INTERRUPTED
TIMESERIES
ANALYSIS
CONTROLSERIES
ANALYSIS
REGRESSION DISCONTINUITY
ANALYSIS
APPROACH
GRAPHIC
DISPLAYS
Social systems
accounting
Social auditing
Social
experimentation
Research and
practice
synthesis
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
Disjointed incremental theory.
Analyze and evaluate alternatives in a sequence of
steps, such that choices are continuously amended over
time, rather than made at a single point in time.
Continuously remedy existing social problems, rather
than solve problems completely at one point in time.
Share responsibilities for analysis and evaluation with
many groups in society, so that the process of making
choices is fragmented or disjointed.
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
Arrows impossibility theorem.
It is impossible for democratic decision makers
in a democratic society to meet conditions of
the rational comprehensive model.
Individual choices cannot be aggregated through
majority voting procedures to create a collective
decision that will produce a single best solution for
all parties.
PREFERENCE
A (solar) preferred to B (coal)
B (coal) preferred to C (nuclear)
A (solar preferred to C (nuclear)
B preferred to C
C preferred to A
B preferred to A
C preferred to A
A preferred to B
C preferred to B
A preferred to B
B preferred to C
C preferred to A
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
Arrows impossibility theorem.
Reasonable conditions for democratic decision
procedures.
Nonrestriction of choices.
Nonperversity of collective choice.
Independence of irrelevant alternatives.
Citizens sovereignty.
Nondictatorship.
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
Bounded rationality.
Decision makers engage in satisficing behavior
(identify courses of action that are good
enough.).
Consider the most evident alternatives that produce
a reasonable increase in benefits.
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
Criteria for policy recommendation.
Effectiveness does a given alternative result in the
achievement of a valued outcome (technical
rationality).
Efficiency the amount of effort needed to produce a
given level of effectiveness (economic rationality).
Adequacy the extent to which any given level of
effectiveness satisfies the needs, values, or
opportunities that gave rise to the problem.
Fixed costs and variable effectiveness (type I, maximize
effectiveness).
Fixed effectiveness and variable costs (type II, minimize
costs).
Variable costs and variable effectiveness (type III, efficiency).
Fixed costs and fixed effectiveness (type IV, do nothing).
Recommendation in Policy
Analysis
Criteria for policy recommendation.
Equity the distribution of effects and effort among
different groups in society (legal and social rationality).
Approaches to Recommendation
Public versus private choice.
Nature of public policy processes.
Numerous stakeholders with conflicting values.
Approaches to Recommendation
Public choice.
Problems with supply demand models of
public policy.
Approaches to Recommendation
Benefit-cost analysis.
Characteristics.
Measure all costs and benefits to society of a program
including intangibles.
Traditional benefit-cost analysis emphasizes economic
rationality: net benefits are greater than zero and higher than
alternative uses.
Traditional benefit-cost analysis uses the private marketplace
as the point of departure in recommending programs.
Social benefit-cost analysis also measures redistributional
benefits.
Approaches to Recommendation
Types of costs and benefits.
Inside versus outside costs and benefits.
Tangible versus intangible costs and benefits.
Direct versus indirect costs and benefits.
Net efficiency versus redistributional benefits.
Approaches to Recommendation
Tasks in benefit-cost analysis.
Problem structuring.
Specification of objectives.
Identification of alternative solutions.
Information search, analysis, and interpretation.
Identification of target groups and beneficiaries.
Estimation of costs and benefits.
Discounting of costs and benefits.
Estimation of risk and uncertainty.
Choice of decision criterion.
Recommendation.
R&D
Capital
O&M
Total
Benefits
$1500
$2000
$0
$3500
$0
500
2000
2000
4500
3500
2000
2500
4500
5500
2000
3000
5000
6500
2000
3500
5500
8500
$10000
$11000
$23000
$24000
Totals
Year
$2000
Benefit-Costs
($3500)
($3500)
(1000)
(909)
1000
826
1500
1127
3000
2049
$1000
($407)
Totals
C
B
C
B
C
NPV B y1 C y1
...
2
1 r
(1 r )
(1 r ) x 1
R&D
Capital
$500
O&M
Total
Benefits
$400
$4500
$5400
$9000
400
5000
5400
8500
400
6000
6400
8500
400
7500
7900
8000
10
400
8000
8400
7500
$2000
$31000
$33500
$41500
Totals
Year
$500
Benefit-Costs
$3600
3600
3100
2818
2100
1736
100
75
(900)
(615)
$8000
$7614
10
Totals
similarities.
Similarities alternative uses for funds, onetime costs, recurring costs, land, labor, capital.
Differences.
Distributional considerations.
Spillovers.
Indicator
Measure
Dollar value
Assumptions
Indicator
Measure
Dollar value
Assumptions
Real
Direct
Tangible
Intangible
Indirect
Tangible
Intangible
Cost
Real
Direct
Tangible
Intangible
analysis.
Nature of Benefit/Cost
Direct
Tangible
Intangible
Indirect
Tangible
Intangible
Real Costs
Direct
Tangible
Construction material, labor, operations and maintenance, direct program supervision by agency
Intangible
Indirect
Tangible
Intangible
Transfers
Measuring Benefits
Evaluation problem difficult for
Measuring Benefits
Sources of data.
Existing records and statistics kept by agency.
Feedback from clients.
Ratings by trained observers.
Experience of other governments or private or
nonprofit corporations.
Special data gathering.
Whenever possible analyst should use
Measuring Benefits
Valuing benefits.
Cost savings.
Time saved.
Lives saved.
Increased productivity or wages.
Recreational benefits.
Land values.
Alternatives to market prices.
See handout.
Measuring Costs
Cost categories.
One-time, fixed, or up-front costs.
Ongoing investment costs.
Recurring costs.
Compliance costs.
Mitigation measures.
Measuring Costs
Valuing indirect costs.
Flat overhead figure.
Does the project actually costs increased administrative
burden?
Introduction
Goal:
To speak authoritatively and to answer
questions responsively in public deliberation.
Objective:
Skill of writing speakable text, skill of speaking
easily from written text, and readiness to
answer anticipated and unanticipated questions.
Introduction
Scope:
Pinpointed topic pertinent to hearings purpose and the
witnesss role.
Product:
Two expected communication products:
Short oral summary.
Full written statement.
Strategy:
Confident and useful public testimony resulting from
advance preparation.
Introduction
Goal:
Recognition of meaningful information in a mass of details
and representation highlighting the significance of
information for a user.
Objective:
Skills of distilling, listening, recording, observing,
evaluating sources, relating details to context, interpreting
details accurately in context, and selecting details according
to relevance; capability of stating informed opinion that is
aware of and responsive to other opinions.