C.2 Is the dimension of the Essentially no are presented. are succinctly and problem, e.g., the share of There seems to be an assumption effectively marshaled to children not attending classes, that everyone agrees that this is a document the problem. well-developed and based on problem and no further credible sources and explanation is needed. analysis? C.3 Are steps” defined, i.e., Essentially no recommendations The steps” are clearly “next “next now that the problem is are made or if they are they are stated and the sequencing defined, who should take not based on concrete makes sense. Sufficient responsibility for addressing information. information about them is it in some way? presented for the reader to believe he is making an informed opinion. C.4 Is the recommendation (C.3) They are missing or appear to be The steps are appropriate to the sensible and well-justified? merely the authors’ opinion. problem’s degree of urgency. D All Briefs D.1 Is the presentation engaging, Not at all. The document is The draws the reader’s i.e., is the reader motivated to poorly written and organized and attention from the outset and continue to read? it is a to read. maintains it. The language is lively and the layout engaging. D.2 Is the of presentation No. The discussion is too The document’s language and suitable for the policymaker technical. Statistical analysis is presentation is excellent. or layman”? discussed that is unlikely to be Jargon is minimized and all “intelligent understood by many. There is a terms are explained. Graphics lot of jargon. and tables are excellent. D.3 Is the presentation succinct, The brief is too long, too wordy The brief takes no more space closely reasoned, and of the and presents more information that is really needed. The appropriate length? (1-10) than is needed to make the argument is tight and the right argument. Reading it is difficult amount of information is and time consuming. provided. pleasure to read.” “A
C.2 Is the dimension of the problem, e.g., the share of children not attending classes, well-developed and based on credible sources and analysis? Essentially no are presented. There seems to be an assumption that everyone agrees that this is a problem and no further explanation is needed. are succinctly and effectively marshaled to document the problem. C.3 Are “next steps” defined, i.e., now that the problem is defined, who should take responsibility for addressing it in some way? Essentially no recommendations are made or if they are they are not based on concrete information. The “next steps” are clearly stated and the sequencing makes sense. Sufficient information about them is presented for the reader to believe he is making an informed opinion. C.4 Is the recommendation (C.3) sensible and well-justified? They are missing or appear to be merely the authors’ opinion. The steps are appropriate to the problem’s degree of urgency. D All Briefs D.1 Is the presentation engaging, i.e., is the reader motivated to continue to read? Not at all. The document is poorly written and organized and it is a to read. The draws the reader’s attention from the outset and maintains it. The language is lively and the layout engaging. D.2 Is the of presentation suitable for the policymaker or “intelligent layman”? No. The discussion is too technical. Statistical analysis is discussed that is unlikely to be understood by many. There is a lot of jargon. The document’s language and presentation is excellent. Jargon is minimized and all terms are explained. Graphics and tables are excellent. D.3 Is the presentation succinct, closely reasoned, and of the appropriate length? (1-10) The brief is too long, too wordy and presents more information than is needed to make the argument. Reading it is difficult and time consuming. The brief takes no more space that is really needed. The argument is tight and the right amount of information is provided. “A pleasure to read.”
ITTM_Annex-6-1.docx