Answer the following questions about post-positivism and policy analysis
Using one of the case studies from Chapter 6 (Clemons and McBeth) or one from your own experience, answer the following questions about post-positivism and policy analysis. Some scholars argue that objectivity is a convenient fiction because every decision or analysis ultimately has a political perspective underlying it. Their argument is based upon the logic that it is not more possible to step away from our political selves than it is to set aside our social, psychological, economic, or cultural characteristics. In other words, being political is an inseparable aspect of being human.
The assigned reading for this week devotes a considerable amount of text to this issue. Using one of the case studies from Chapter 6 (Clemons and McBeth) or one from your own experience, answer the following questions about post-positivism and policy analysis.
•Do you agree or disagree with the argument that we can never separate ourselves from our political perspectives or interests? Use an example (from one of the case studies or your own life experiences) to explain your position.
•If no one could be impartial or objective, then would technical assessments like the techniques from Unit 6 still be useful in policy making? Why or why not?
•How do you see post-positivism changing the role of the policy analyst? That is, if an analyst cannot escape her/his own subjective viewpoint, how should you think about the analysis that s/he supplies to policy makers?
Answer preview for Answer the following questions about post-positivism and policy analysis
Access the full answer containing 279 words by clicking the below purchase button