The Draft Cycle

At Seoul Student Policy Institute, we use a draft cycle in order to organize and manage our blogs and papers. Through a structured process, we hope to produce quality policy papers that have been reviewed by numerous different members at our organization. Here is a detailed explanation of our draft cycle system:

Each policy paper is consisted of four main sections explained below.

  1. Introduction/Background: This section introduces the problem/topic that is being analyzed. It identifies a specific issue and articulates why it is important. It also establishes a set criteria on how to resolve the issue.
  2. Historical Context: This section focuses on previous efforts to resolve/address the issue, policy-wise. Additionally, the section evaluates and analyzes these efforts–were these measures successful? If so/if not, why, and what can we learn from the past? 
  3. Policy Recommendations: This section takes the lessons learned from the ‘Historical Context’ analysis and applies them to original policy solutions developed by the student himself/herself. Furthermore, this section provides detailed explanations for each policy recommendation.
  4. Policy Evaluations: In this section, the student evaluates the policy recommendations outlined in the previous section and explains why they would be successful in achieving what previous measures have failed to do so. Using the set criteria established in the first section, this section also provides an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of these policy recommendations. Finally, the student will select a policy recommendation that he/she believes best resolves the issue at hand.

The process for developing policy papers is a 8-week draft cycle outlined below.

Step 1: Research topics/questions

Step 2: Outline of research topic with sources

Step 3: Contemporary Background

Step 4: Historical Background

Step 5: Policy Suggestions

Step 6: Policy Evaluation

Step 7: Formation of a singular, coherent paper

Step 8: Application of final edits/comments

Papers written by members are edited by the executive member for that respective department. Papers written by executives are edited through a peer-review system among the executive members.