I have attached all other documents for this assignment in the attachment. I have attached a sample for you to follow. Please follow sample format.
My topic is Canadian Trade diversification and sanctions
Canadian Trade diversification and sanctions
Students should write a 5-page, double-spaced Policy Brief that is addressed to the current Prime Minister of Canada on one of the topics listed above.
The Policy Brief must include:
1) an executive summary that flags one policy option as the preferred option for action/enactment;
2) a clear and succinct overview of the problem to be addressed;
3) a clear outline of 3 policy options;
4) an insightful policy recommendation that responds to the problem; and,
5) a well supported rationale for making the recommendation, which includes reference to at least 5 of any of the following:
_g_o_v_e_r_n_m_e_n_t_ _a_n_d_/_o_r_ _i_n_t_e_r_n_a_t_i_o_n_a_l_ _o_r_g_a_n_i_z_a_t_i_o_n_ _d_o_c_u_m_e_n_t_s_ _a_n_d_ _w_e_b_s_i_t_e_s_;_ _
_academic journal articles; or,
_b_o_o_k_s_ _o_r_ _b_o_o_k_ _c_h_a_p_t_e_r_s_._ _
The Policy Brief must be submitted through the class OWL site.
All Briefs must be typed using a standard 12-point Times New Roman/Bookman or Arial/Helvetica/Verdana. Use sub-headings for each section (Executive Summary, Option 1, Option 2, and Option 3, Recommended Option) and Chicago (17th ed.) citation style for referencing.
You will be evaluated on the following criteria:
1. Whether the argument in favour of one policy option is stated clearly in the Executive Summary of the paper.
2. Whether you demonstrate understanding of the problem and provide a succinct overview of the policy problem to be addressed.
3. How well you used sources, evidence, examples and illustrations to support the points made in the Policy Brief, and whether the points are sophisticated and persuasive.
4. Whether you demonstrate significant research effort beyond class material.
5. Whether your Policy Brief is well organized and the ideas you are advancing are easy to follow.
6. Whether your analysis moves beyond description to include a critical appraisal of the issues.
7. Whether your Policy Brief is clearly written, and free of spelling, style, or grammatical errors.
Students often ask how to write an A-range paper. We offer the following as some guidance but this should not take the place of meeting with the Instructor and/or TA to discuss drafts of your essay. Generally speaking, to be an excellent paper three things need to be done:
1. Students must provide a well-developed and explicit argument supported by logical and explicitly stated points and structure or roadmap. In other words, there must be a central claim around which to build a coherent argument.
2. A superior engagement with at least five sources. Students should draw upon a range of opinions, including those that are critical of the central argument advanced in the paper.
3. There needed to be zero (or quite near) citation problems and errors in formal presentation. Overall, an excellent policy brief needs to be a very polished work. A-range papers require several drafts and proofreading.
A Excellent in all or nearly all aspects of the assignment. Demonstrates well-developed critical reading skills and a precise and thorough understanding of the research topic. The brief is specific, clearly written, and well-organized. Student demonstrates superior analytical skills, assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the various sources and placing them in their proper context with specific and effective references to other sources. Student clearly and confidently articulates their own position and provides clear and convincing evidence to substantiate this position. Student paraphrases well, direct-quotations are used precisely and with discrimination, and citations are precise, and follow the Chicago Style (16th edition) format (https://www.lib.uwo.ca/files/styleguides/Chicago.pdf). Paper is written with clarity, sophistication, and good organization; it is free of minor and major errors. A bibliography is included.
B Meets, and at times exceeds, the basic requirements of the assignment. Student demonstrates a good, if not always precise, understanding of the topic. Student demonstrates skill in assessing the strengths and weaknesses of different arguments and attempts to place them in their proper context with several sound references to other sources. There might, however, be minor errors in content and argumentation or problems with clarity, specificity, and/or organization. Student advances his/her own scholarly position and provides evidence (even if problematic) to substantiate this position. Student paraphrases well, direct-quotations are used precisely and sparingly, and citations are correct and in the following format Chicago Style. A bibliography is included. Paper is free of major errors.
C Meets the basic requirements of the assignment. In the introduction, student demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic. Student attempts to use 5 sources but engagement with the arguments are basic. Student attempts to advance his/her own position, even if this is vague, problematic and/or weakly substantiated by evidence, examples and illustrations. Writing lacks clarity and/or is somewhat problematic/awkward. Too many direct quotations, at the expense of student voice, are used, but citations are correct. A bibliography is included.
D Does meet some, but not all, of the basic requirements of the assignment. Student does not demonstrate a basic understanding of the topic. Minimal attempt is made to engage scholarly sources. There is also minimal attempt to advance his/her own position. Minimal attempt is made to provide a complete overview of the topic and rarely moves beyond description. Paper is poorly organized, too short, and/or the writing is very problematic. Paper contains numerous errors. A bibliography is not included.F Does not meet the basic requirements of the assignment. Student does not demonstrate a basic understanding of research topic. No attempt is made to engage sources and/or numerous errors in using sources. There is little or no attempt to advance his/her own position. Writing is poorly organized and incomprehensible. Paper significantly too short. A bib