ICS 139W Communications Skills for Computer Scientists

Peer Editing "Influencing Policy Letter"

Work in pairs, with someone you haven't worked with yet this quarter. As you read and comment on each other's papers, keep in mind the purpose and audience of the letter (that is, to convince a policy maker to support the author's point of view and to take some action in furtherance of that position).

The editor can mark-up the letter, and will also write comments on a separate sheet of paper (or on the back of one of the author's pages). Editors, make sure to write "Edited by" and your name at the top of both. Each author must turn in the editor's written comments along with the final version of the paper.

Procedure for Editors

  1. Read the syllogism-style outline, but not (yet) the letter itself.
    1. Does the outline provide a clear "mini-argument" in favor of a policy issue? Are there several supporting points that lead to the author's conclusion?
    2. Do you see any strong or obvious (to you) arguments for or against the author's point of view that are not in the outline? If so, note them on the same page.
  2. Now read the full letter and write answers to these questions:
    1. Is the letter's tone formal, business-like, rational, and convincing?
    2. Is the letter addressed to a person who is in a position to take the desired actions?
    3. Given that the proposal will be read by a policy maker who is probably not a scientist or intimately familiar with technical matters, does the author provide sufficient background for any technical issues? Does the author use any jargon that might not be known to non-specialists?
    4. Are there any mechanical errors (spelling, punctuation, grammar) that interfered with your reading of the letter?
    5. Is the overall structure of the letter easy to follow and understand? Does the first paragraph introduce the issue and the author's desired outcome? Does the final paragraph wrap up the letter and restate the author's major points?
  3. Now reread the outline and answer this questions:
    1. Is the outline a good summary of the entire letter? Can you suggest changes to the structure of the outline and the letter that would help make the arguments more effective?
  4. Review your comments with the author (and vice versa).