How to Study for a Law School Exam

In most instances, your grade in a course will depend entirely on one law school exam. If that sounds like a lot of pressure, well, quite frankly, it is, but theres good news! Some people in your class have to get As, so you might as well be one of them. The following five steps will help you ace any law school exam: Difficulty: Hard Time Required: Three months Heres How: Study all semester long.Be a diligent student throughout the semester by doing all the assigned reading, taking great notes, reviewing them after each week, and participating in class discussions. Law professors love to talk about seeing the forest for the trees; at this point you should focus on those trees, the main concepts your professor is covering. You can place them in the forest later.Join a study group.A great way to be sure youre understanding key concepts throughout the semester is to go over the readings and lectures with other law students. Through study groups, you can prepare for future classes by discussing assignments and fill in gaps in your notes from past lectures. It may take you a little while to find fellow students you click with, but its worth the effort. Not only will you be more prepared for the exam, youll also get used to talking out loud about cases and concepts--particularly great if your professor uses the Socratic Method.Outline.Leading up to the read ing period, you should have a good grasp of major concepts, so now its time to pull them all together into the forest, if you will, in course outlines. Organize your outline based on the syllabus or your casebooks table of contents and fill in blanks with information from your notes. If you dont want to leave this until just before the exam, do it gradually throughout the semester; start a document with the major concepts, leaving large blank areas that you can fill in with information as you review it from your notes at the end of each week.Use past exams of professors to prepare.Many professors put past exams (sometimes with model answers) on file in the library; if your professor does so, be sure to take advantage. Past exams tell you what your professor considers the most important concepts in the course, and if a sample answer is included, be sure to study the format and copy it as best you can when you attempt other practice questions. If your professor offers review sessions or office hours, be sure to come prepared with a good understanding of past exams, which are also great for study group discussion.Improve your test-taking skills by learning from your past exams.If youve already been through a semester or more of law school exams, one of the best ways to improve your performance is by studying your past performances. If you can get copies of your exams, look at your answers and the model answers carefully. Note where you lost points, where you did the best, and also think back to how and when you prepared--what worked and what may have been a waste of your time. Also be sure to analyze your exam-taking techniques as well, for example, did you use your time wisely during the test? What You Need: CasebookNotesOutlineTime

Framing Energy Security between Russia and South Korea by She Hyun Ahn Article

Essays on Framing Energy Security between Russia and South Korea by She Hyun Ahn Article The paper "Framing Energy Security between Russia and South Korea by She Hyun Ahn" is an outstanding example of an article on politics. For several years, South Korea and Russia have been involved in fuel and energy projects having Russia as the producer and South Korea, the consumer and distributor.One of the biggest projects was the Kovykta PNG project which started in December 1997. The original plan was to build pipelines and deliver natural gas from Eastern Siberia to the participating countries: Japan, China, Mongolia, and South Korea who proposed North Korea to be also part of the project. Although this has been a very promising project, the hopes of providing one-third of South Korea’s annual fuel demand in 30 years was suspended. This was because of the new nationalist views that Russia should prioritize Russian consumers and protect its natural resources. The Kovykta project with South Korea was discontinued (Ahn 593).The Sakhalin gas project has been the first succe ssful energy project between Russia and South Korea. Sakhalin has produced 60M barrels of oil that were exported to seven countries. In a signed contract, Sakhalin Energy has agreed to provide 1.5 metric tons of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to South Korea. It is now the closest source of LNG, taking only two to three days for delivery. Because of the good quality of Sakhalin’s crude oil, South Korea has also been importing this for the production of diesel and kerosene (595).Other projects between South Korea and Russia included: (i) a $38B project between LG (South Korea) and Tafnet (Russia) to construct an oil refinery in Tatarstan; (ii) a $50M deal by Vneshtong bank to finance acquisition of Korean equipment by Russian companies, and; (iii) a $250M agreement between Rosnef and Korea for the exploration of West Kamchatka and Sakhalin Island for oil reserves (595).Despite these projects and agreements, bilateral energy security between the two nations is still being stagnant of the lack of government policies regarding the energy market infrastructure. For example, projects located in the trans-border will not materialize if the states around the border will not cooperate. Also, there is a lack of mutual trust between the two countries. South Korea has a few energy specialists that are capable of solving government-related issues. Thus, the Korean policymakers had only been occupied with short-term projects instead of eyeing for longer terms. South Korean investors were also doubtful in investing in Russia’s fuel supply because the other side had failed to provide legal and infrastructural evidence to attract investors (603).Providing gas and oil to South Korea would promote growth to Russia’s economy. On the other hand, Russia’s resources would provide answers to South Korea’s energy shortage. However, in order to create a functional oil and gas pipeline, a multilateral instead of bilateral energy cooperation project should take place between Japan, China, Korea and Russia (606). Discussion Questions:1. Why was the Kovykta project discontinued?2. What project was the most successful between South Korea and Russia?3. What are the other deals signed between South Korea and Russia?4. What are the problems of a bilateral energy cooperation project?5. How can a gas and oil pipeline be a plausible system?

Engineering Marvel for Hadron Collider- MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about theEngineering Marvel for Large Hadron Collider. Answer: Introduction Large Hadron Collider as the name suggests is the world's largest and the most powerful particle accelerator. Initiated on 10 September 2008, the large hadron collider is still in regularly developing stage and is the latest addition to the CERN's (European Organization for Nuclear Research) accelerator campus which is located on France- Switzerland border near Geneva. The LHC is made up of a 27 kilometer ring which comprises of superconducting magnets along with powerful particle accelerators which helps to boost the energy of particles along the way. The working of LHC is complex yet the methodology is simple. In the LHC, two energy particle beams are made to travel at the speed of light and then they are made to collide. These energy particles travel in opposite directions in two separate pipes which are ultrahigh vacuumed to avoid any kind of resistance to the particles. These particles are guided by a strong magnetic field which is ensured by superconducting electromagnets. These particles travel in the accelerator ring. The electromagnets are built from electric cables which are made from special coils. For these magnets to work efficiently and conduct electricity without any loss of energy, these agents are chilled to the temperature of -271.3 oC which is even colder than outer space. The chilling of these magnets is done by using liquid helium, which not only cools magnets but also other parts of the mega machine. In LHC thousands of magnets of varied sizes are used to direct the particles. The large hadron collider compris es of 1232 dipole magnets of 15 meters which are used to bend the beam and 392 quadrupole magnets each of 5-7 meters of length which are used to focus the beams. Just before the collision another set of magnets is used to squeeze the particles so that the chances of collision may increase. Colliding a particle in the LHC is like firing two needles in opposite directions from 10 kilometers apart and that too with such precision that they both meet halfway. All the technicalities, controls, services of the LHC are housed under one roof i.e. the control room at CERN. Controlled from here the beams are made to collide at four locations inside the accelerator ring. These four particle detectors are ATLAS, CMS, ALICE and LHCb. Inside the accelerator around 3000 bunches of particles are accelerated which contains as many as 100 billion particles. These particles are so insignificant in the terms of size that colliding them is a very cumbersome task and even the chances are low. At the time when these particles cross each other, only 40 collisions take place between 200 billion particles. These bunches crosses each other 30 million times in a second! The LHC thus collides around 1 billion particles per second (CERN, 2017; CERN, 2017). Technological Significance The LHC has many benefits which includes Technological development, Workforce development and the Core science. The benefits derived from the research at LHC are discussed below in details: (CERN, 2017) Technology Development: Apart from space exploration and solving the mysteries of outer space, the research conducted at LHC can give the answer to many unsolved theories and questions which haven't been answered before. Followings are the examples of how development of this technology has benefitted the technological development: Cancer therapy- The accelerator physics has been able to develop the concept of high energy physics in which the particles can now be focused to a small area and they will interact only at the desired location instead of the entire path which helps to determine the area of cancer increase the effectiveness of the treatment. The advanced treatment of cancer lies in acceleration physics so the technology and the method used in LHC has given an answer to treat the disease in a better way. Manufacturing processes- The technology of accelerator physics has also helped in cleaning the process of manufacturing of materials. For ex. The process of tire manufacturing requires vulcanization of rubber which was earlier done through using chemicals but now with the help of accelerator physics the process of vulcanization has become cleaner with minimum or no use of chemicals. Medical and industrial imaging- The cameras used in the process of body and material imaging is the same used in the particle accelerator but the advancement of the technology in used in LHC has helped to make the process easier and better. Pattern Recognition- The first pattern recognition algorithms were developed to recognize the tracks of particle in the form of images of interactions. The process has developed its own importance in the years but the basics of the methods have been derived from particle physics. Grid/cloud computing- The researchers working at LHC and those who worked at Tevatron (the predecessor the LHC) have contributed significantly to cloud/grid computing. The experiments conducted at LHC require huge amour of space to be stores as the information is plenty. The information is produced at LHC is around tens of petabytes annually. This information is stored, processed and distributed by the means of grid computing. The world wide web- Before the development of the web page, the internet was only composed of email, ftp servers and usenets. The web page was developed and was first introduced by CERN so that the researchers were able to share the information about high energy physics. Workforce Development The challenges which were faced by the scientists at the LHC campus were not ordinary and required an entirely unique set of skills and techniques of problem solving by the workers. Cultivated by core science, this technical mindset and expertise can be a valuable skillset to the field of particle acceleration and many other research fields. Additionally it was not possible to develop the LHC if it wasn't for the workers who left their industry job and contributed in the development of the technology (BBC News, 2015). The Core Science The benefits of technology and workforce are of short term and are achieved by the pursuit of problem finding will to the questions remained unanswered. So the funding of such projects depends on the perceived scientific benefits. The concept and the theoretical assumptions of LHC will not only help us to get to know universe but it will also increase our understanding about nuclear physics and quantum technology by accelerating the particles at speed which has never been done yet. Following are the aims of Large Hadron Collider: To search for the Higgs Boson particle this is predicted by the Standard model. This particle helps the other particle to acquire mass. To search the answer to the inconsistency of the particle based on the standard model. To search for the sources of dark matter. To search for the mystery of matter-antimatter asymmetry in the universe. To measure the size and structure of proton. To be able to understand the nature of cosmic rays and how they interact with our atmosphere. To confirm the existence of quark-gluon plasma and to know about its properties. The research conducted at CERN will also help to know about the concept of anti-gravity drives i.e. the ability to fold space which is just a speculative assumption for now. The practical benefits of LHC are still unknown so we will refer to the historical examples instead. From what is known is that the understating the theories like quantum field theory have generated many practical benefits in the past which are stated below: Developed about a century ago, initially the quantum mechanics was just another theory filled with puzzles and unanswered questions with no practical application. Around 50 years age a transistor was developed which helped us to understand the concept of quantum theory and quantum mechanics. The transistor comprised of the core of many computer chips. Without this transistor, the computers will still be made of vacuum tubes and would occupy large space. This led to the development of personal computer, laptops, smart phones etc. Studies related to atom have helped to develop the concept and working of nuclear power and nuclear bombs. Though the process of development of this technology has been long and frustrating the study has helped to generate the clean and safe source of power. The only drawback of this research is that the negative effects and uses of technology are more than positive effects. If fallen into wrong hands, this technology can have devastating effects. Another major research conducted around 150 years ago was the study of fundamental electromagnetism which shares it fundamental concepts with particle physics. The benefits yielded from this research is used by electrical engineers which has allowed them to create radios, batteries, the mathematically modeled effects of interference in circuits and many other. The specialty of LHC is that it squeezes the energy of collision in a space million times smaller. The particles when collide produces the energy around 14V, but in LHC the researchers have been able to reach the level of 1150V which is higher than ever recorded in history. We can compare this achievement by taking an example from daily routine; the energy produced while we clap our hands is much more than what was achieved at CERN but it is evenly distributed around our palm. The achievement of LHC is that it has been able to produce the same level of energy but at a million times smaller space(CERN, 2017). Discussion of Challenges A structure like LHC is not possible to build without facing any challenges. The development of LHC faced engineering challenges across every virtual engineering discipline. The major challenge was placing and maintaining magnets and cryogenics which are discussed below (Collier, 2015; Schmidt Vergara, 2002; Alonso, 2015): Magnets- In an electromagnet which is used in particle accelerator, the current flowing through the coils generates field. In an ordinary electromagnet this field can be limited by using iron yoke through which the coil passes whose closeness to the beam pipe determines the quality and strength of the field. This type of magnet is limited by the saturation of the iron yoke to a central field produced around. In a superconducting magnet, the field is generated directly by suitable distribution of the current arranged properly around the beam pipe. Placing magnets accurately was the most difficult challenge faced by the engineers. These magnets are used to direct the beam around the accelerator. The cumbersome task was placing these magnets precisely so that the particles could collide. If any one of these magnets was placed incorrectly the consequences could be life threatening also the collision wont take place. This could also damage the whole machine. Another problem with the magne tic placement was that all these magnets were electromagnets and they tend to lose their strength and potency from time-to-time. Many incidents have been reported where magnets have failed catastrophically which led to failure of tests. The constant failures were another challenge faced by the machine as it wasted a lot of energy. The working of LHC required the energy in huge units and this energy was needed regularly. Energy requirements of the Large Hadron Collider are incredibly high because the machine cant be stopped. Searching for a stable source of energy to electrify magnets was another challenge faced by the engineers. Cryogenics- This was the biggest challenge faced by the engineers working at CERN on the LHC. The aim was to increase the potency of the electromagnets which regularly gets used up during the process and lose its strength. Another issue was to cool down the 27 km long setup which gets immensely used up because of working at high energy levels. The answers to the questions were many but the most promising was liquid helium. The problem now the scientists faced was the cost of the machine was already touching roof and this was another expensive addition to the system. Acquiring liquid helium was not tough but it was very expensive and it was required in huge amount. Another complication was the maintenance required by this substance. Liquid helium requires high maintenance to maintain its temperature so it was stored in special containers which would keep the substance safe from the affects of the particle beam. The electromagnets were immersed in the substance so that its strength was maintained which helped it to reach the chilling temperature of 271.3 o This issue was though solved by the engineers but maintenance and procurement of liquid helium still remains a costly task and researchers are regularly working on procuring a better and inexpensive substance which will be the essence of the cryogenic system of LHC. Societal Challenges- The social challenges faced by the LHC were less and were answered by the researchers so that people may feel safe. Yet the major issue LHC faced was the high energy requirements. The machine used to work for 10 days just for a single operation because the rates of collisions were less. Such huge machines are also hard to start and even this process can take many days. The high energy requirements for such operations were becoming an issue as it was constantly using up valuable resources and that too in huge amounts. Apart from this many people also feared that the working of machine would re-create a parallel universe which may give rise to the sources of dark energy such as black hole. A black hole is so powerful that it can even suck planets and stars in it. But this concern of people was answered by scientists because even if any black hole will form it will be of very small size and would disappear instantly without causing any damage(The Telegraph, 2010). Conclusion After 25 years of hard work the LHC was commissioned at intermediate energy and performed well during the early stage of its operations. Even in the early stage, the machine was able to provide data which helped the scientists to discover and know the properties of the God Particle i.ee Higgs Boson. During the period of operations the machine also went under a two year shutdown period from 2013-2015. The machine is now in operational mode and the next shutdown will take place halfway in 2018. This period of operations has been very exciting and is expected to provide more specific data and answers to many questions. So it can be concluded that throughout its operational period the Large Hadron Collider has confronted many technical, engineering, operational and social challenges and has been successful in helping us to get to know the universe. This scientific invention can thus be stated as an engineering marvel which is expected to give many other insights in the future. References Alonso, I. B. (2015). HL-LHC challenges and impact in a nutshell. Hi Lumi HL-LHC Project. BBC News. (2015, March 28). What is the point of large Hadron Collider? Retrieved 2017, from Bbc.com: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-32087787 CERN. (2017). CERN-Brochure. Retrieved from Cds.cern.ch: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2255762/files/CERN-Brochure-2017-002-Eng.pdf CERN. (2017). The Large Hadron Collider. Retrieved from Home.cern: https://home.cern/topics/large-hadron-collider Collier, P. (2015). The technical challenges of the Large Hadron Collider. Philosophical Transaction A Royal Society. Schmidt, R., Vergara, A. (2002). Machine Protection and Interlock System for the LHC. Grenoble. The Telegraph. (2010, March 30). Large Hadron Collider hits problems as scientists bid to start high energy collissions. Retrieved 2017, from Telegraph.co.uk: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/large-hadron-collider/7537355/Large-Hadron-Collider-hits-problems-as-scientists-bid-to-start-high-energy-collisions.html

Rational Choice, Pluralist and Marxist Theories Contributions to the Study of Public Policy

Introduction Making of Public policies can be theorised in a number of way among them rational theory, Marxists theory and pluralist theory. With regard to Cope and Goodship, the drafting of a public policy is not just a task of the government.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Rational Choice, Pluralist and Marxist Theories’ Contributions to the Study of Public Policy specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Instead, it should be viewed as a complicated process that requires the input of political leaders and the diverse society (1999, p.9). These forces have the capacity to impact and affect the outputs of policies. Hills defines public policy as â€Å"the product of political influence, determining, and setting limits to what a state does† (1993, p.47). The definition broadly sets the guidelines for realising certain state-driven goals coupled with aspirations in the future (Toke Marsh 2003, p.229). Despi te the presence of the many differing theories for explaining the process of making public policies, all of them use a similar definition of a policy. Public administrations scholars have both theorised and broadly described the process of making public policies. For instance, Edward (1992) claims that public policy can be understood better by taking it as a set of interlinked process (p.39). The claim follows since policymaking requires the contributions of all sections of an organisation and not just one section or level that is mostly the top staff members (Gilliat 1984, p.345). Other public administration scholars see it as a single process that is defined by differing phases. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast contributions of the rational theory, Marxists theory, and pluralist theory to the study of public policy. The paper is organised into two sections. The definition of theories is considered first under the description section followed by comparison and c ontrasting of the theories. The question of how they contribute to the public policy study follows later in the analysis section. In conclusion, from the paradigms of rational theory, public policies are guided by mythological individualism and self-interested maximisation behaviours of people.Advertising Looking for essay on political sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Description Defining Rational Theory Rational theory has its roots anchored in the work of Adams Smith, Wealth of Nations, which was first published in 1776. This work also forms the foundation of theory of neoclassical economics. As revealed by Smith, individuals who work to fulfil their personal desires can yield some collective gains to the community following some concealed forces (Frederickson et al. 2012, p.193). For people to fully meet their egocentric interests, there must be a continuous state of competition, which often leads to production of goods of better quality, which would benefit everybody besides being sold at low prices in the end. In making of public policy, rational theory forms the basis of decision making in the sense that the most appropriate policies are the ones, which deliver more and higher quality public good. Such a scenario cannot exist in an unregulated market. Frederickson et al. (2012) note that factors such as the egocentric party, rivalry witnessed in producers, and the unorganised markets are all indicative of neoclassical economics (p.183). Since rational theory rests on the platforms of neoclassical economics, these elements are also definitive of rational choice theory. From this context, rational choice theory entangles a theoretical construct for modelling and understating various economic and social behaviours. In theory, the term rational is applied to refer to the behaviour of people to constantly want more as opposed to less of any public good. Defining Marxism Theory Marxism sees the process of making public policies as the interplay of political power and economic class. Marxist theory is composed of a number of doctrines. Marxist theory has been strongly upheld by many people based on the wide range of sentiments within an analytical model that undermines the ‘capitalist’ society (Burnham 1994, p.73). From the paradigms of Marxist theory, policies are made to fulfil the function of the state. One function of the state is to make improvement of various conditions that foster accumulation of capital. This means that the state makes policies that will ensure that industries are able to make optimal profits. The second function of the state encompasses legitimisation of the resulting capitalistic system. This is accomplished through the introduction of myriads of policies such as welfare policies, health services, and pension policies among others.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Rational Choice, Pluralist and Marxist Theoriesâ €™ Contributions to the Study of Public Policy specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More These policies are formulated such that people will not reject them and hence embrace the capitalist system (Hill 2005, p.23). Even if Marxist theory is supported by some public administration scholars as one of the mechanisms of effective allocation of limited public resources, it faces some drawbacks that are akin to the description of the concept of capitalism. For instance, based on Bonefield’s (1996) findings, Marxist theory approach in making of public policies faces an objection since it depicts societal authority as one that has divisions with no specific ownership (p.115). It says that nations that uphold the wellbeing of their people do so out of their heart and will rather than mere pretence or forces of circumstances. Another challenge is that the need to reflect the concepts of legitimisation and accumulation of capital in the publi c policies are contradictory. Often, the costs associated with the legitimisation process have the repercussion of creating a legitimisation crisis. Defining Pluralism Theory Classical pluralism theory for making public policies sees decision making in the formulation of public policies as being centrally located in the government’s frameworks although numerous nongovernmental groups utilise their resources to influence the process of making public policies. The main interrogative that is addressed by pluralism theory is how power is distributed across a political process of making public policies. From the contexts of this theory, in making public polices, â€Å"lines of conflict are multiple and shifting as power is a continuous bargaining process between competing groups† (Ackers 2002, p.8). While formulating public policies, inequalities are often created in terms of participation in the policy ideation process. However, the inequalities are distributed and evened out through adoption of various mechanisms of resource distribution within the unequal population. The theory puts an emphasis that the power to make public policies does not amount to a physical entity, which people have or do not have. The power spreads from varying sources. Analysis: Comparing and Contrasting the Three Theories The development of differing theoretical paradigms that provide insights to the process of making public policies is owned to the contribution made by various theories among them being Marxist, Pluralist, and rational choice theory.Advertising Looking for essay on political sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More In this section, these theories are compared and contrasted in terms of the contribution they have made in guiding the manner in which public policymakers view the purpose and function of the polices they formulate and then later to be implemented by a bureaucratic system either from an approach of ‘top’ or ‘bottom’ or top-bottom Marxist theory sees public polices as serving the purpose of creating conflicts between the economic classes in a society. These policies favour the Bourgeoisie, who is a composed person who owns all the production means (Konings 2010, p.175). In fact, the policies led to exploitation of the Proletariat, which is composed of the working class. In particular, the Marxist analysis of the wellbeing of people focuses much on its connection with the people’s exercise of authority (Jessop 2002, p.105). From the paradigms of Marxist theory, this means that the state is an instrument of ruling people belonging to the capitalist clas s (Bourgeoisie) through formulation and implementation of appropriate public policies. Alternatively, a state is a complicated combination of systems that reveal the many differences that the larger society has of which the state itself is a subset (Duncan Goodwin 1982, p.158). Marxism theory contributes to the study of public policy by introduction a theoretical paradigm for interpreting the process of making public policies by maintaining that policies that develop welfare to the society are the ones advocating for strengthening of the Proletariat via making them resist exploitation. Opposed to Marxism theory, public policies under pluralism theory are not made to satisfy the quests of one principle group of people within a society. Instead, it sees public policy making process as being well comprehended based on the extrapolation that authority is relatively wide and unevenly shared among the various more or less coordinated groups in the society that rival each other in an effo rt to get hold of public policy (Dowding 1995, p.143). Some specific groups dominate in some arena or areas of public policy struggles while others are concerned with some different public policy areas. The Marxism theory maintains that the capitalistic group is favoured by the policies so that it can continue to support the economy through increased productivity and hence profitability. Through such policies, the Bourgeoisie is able to influence the Proletariat. Comparatively, the pluralism theory differs from this view by revealing how there is an insignificant intersection between the leaders who take part in a certain section of policy and the ones who take part in other sections of the same policy making process (Grillo1998, p.45). The two theories are similar in that they present the process of making public policies as entangling friction between various parties. Some parties are composed of the policy makers while others are composed of those people to whom the policies will apply. Somewhat different from the concerns of the both the above two theories in the making of public policies, rational theory holds that self interest among policy making stakeholders acts as the drive for determining the manner in which policies are formulated. It upholds the notion that the key conduct hypothesis of the neoclassical economic image is cosmopolitan. It points out people’s decisions and conducts, for instance, buying a house, making elections decisions, and or deciding on what and when to budget for are controlled by their ego (Frederickson et al. 2012, p.194). This means that public policies need to be made in a manner that fits the demands of the people to whom they should apply. The producers of the public goods are required to competitively respond to the needs of consumers in a manner that is consistent with their self-interest. Hence, policies should be made in a manner that makes it possible for the organisations, which are guided by self-interest, to deliver services and public goods that satisfy the utility of the consumers. For instance, in the healthcare setting, accessibility of quality healthcare is public good. From the paradigms of rational theory, organisations that are charged with the noble roles of ensuring the public has access to quality healthcare, for instance, a health insurance organisation must be favoured by the policies in the health care sector such that they will be able to deliver quality healthcare. From the context of this example, rational theory differs from Marxist theory in the formulation of public policies because Marxism theory would call for a free operation of market forces to determine the delivery of quality healthcare. It will not impose regulations to control the organisations such as the insurance companies in facilitation of delivery of quality healthcare as public good. From the approach of pluralism theory, there will be people of diverse settings, scopes, and their mode or way of inp ut to the larger community who are fighting for authority (Howlett 2002, p.237) to determine the appropriate mechanism of formulating a policy that will ensure accessibility of quality healthcare. The government or the state would play only the roles of mediation by shifting and balancing the interests of various interest groups as opposed to playing active roles in imposition and active innovation of various policies that would ensure accessibility of quality healthcare. Marxist theory suggests that persons whose voices are likely to be heard and taken into consideration in the formulation of public policies are those who are economically endowed, being also the people who control the factors of production. This means that Marxism theory contributes to the study of public policy in that economic power has the potential to translate into political power because policy formulation and implementation are inseparable from political influences (Toke Marsh 2003, p.234). Therefore, the p olitical power, which plays active roles in the process of making public policies, is a function of the economic power. Hence, the economic class is the one that makes policies indirectly. This argument forms the point of departure between the proponents of classical Marxism and neo Marxism. Classical Marxism sees the government as serving the roles of ruling the economic class while neo-Marxism contends that the government has a proportional liberty from capital (McLellan 1999, p.83). It does not then principally serves as an economic class-ruling agent. Pluralism approach to making of public policies sees power as not being centralised to the state. It views people as the carriers of power because they are in charge of most of the public resources (Ackers 2002, p.9). The resources are the tools that are used by people to compel others to do what they want them to. Politicians are then able to push through the process of making public policies since they have the capacity of comman ding various resources, which people feared, want, or even respect. There are two main important approaches to public policy from the paradigms of pluralism theory. Firstly, one needs to view resources as being everywhere in the society (Ackers 2002, p.12). Secondly, all the resources are almost available to almost every person. Since the degree to which people have accessibility of resources determines the extent to which people possess the power to influence the process of making public policies, making of public policies from the contexts of pluralism is a function of many actors. This implies that power is also distributed across many actors with the state only taking passive roles in the making of the policies. Policymaking is thus a procedure that is free and competitive (Dowding 1995, p.142). From the perspective of neo-pluralism, rather than power being distributed across all people, it is seen as only distributed in significant magnitudes across the key actors in the proces s of making public policies. Such actors include professionals who evaluate the policies and the businesspersons who are often impacted by the policies in terms of performance of their business activities. Since these key actors are incorporated in policymaking process, policymaking with regard to the neo-pluralism theory is a negotiated and an interdependent process (Ackers 2002, p.17). Pluralism is then a reflection of liberal thinking and contextualisation of democratic societal ideals for legitimisation of inequalities and power structures coupled with the contribution of the democratic society in influencing the process of formulation and implementation of public policies. The pluralism theory reinforces societal collectivism with regard to public policies. This contrasts the concern of rational theory, which reinforces self-centred maximisation conduct (Frederickson et al. 2012, p.195) and methodological individualism. A decision maker guided by rational theoretical paradigms while making policy encounters several chances and possibilities in the course of happenings (Ostrom Ostrom 1971, p.205). However, a similar decision maker guided by pluralism will pursue possibility and opportunities that deliver societal good. The difference between the two approaches is that the pluralism approach will not give rise to bureaucratic self-maximising individual in charge of making policies. Theorists who subscribe to rational theory as the best mechanism of making public policies consider the collective action advocated for by pluralism as problematic. Often, they deploy game theory to illustrate these problems. They employ simplistic models to make sense of deployment of rational theory in making of policies. Some critics of this theory see it as inappropriate for making public policies that would influence well all the stakeholders. However, in case a government utilises rational choices theory as the model for making public policies, the assumption made particul arly with regard to human behaviours end up as being self-fulfilling. Conclusion Decisions taken by governments to resolve certain challenges that constitute social problems through deployment of specific strategies designed for planning and implementation of a proposed action make up a public policy. Depending on the theory deployed in explaining the making of public policies, different scholars provide differing contribution to the advisement of the discipline of public policy administration. From this perspective, the paper compared and contrasted rational choice, Marxist, and pluralism theories’ contributions in the study of public policy. Marxist theory presents the process of making public policies as the interplay of the economic power and political power. The economic class is the owner of the factors of production. Policies made tend to favour this group of people as opposed to the working class. From a different angle, rational theory sees the making of public polic ies as being guided by self-interested maximisation behaviour of people and methodological individualism. This often leads to bureaucratic systems for the formulation and implementation of public policies. Lastly, the pluralism theory sees the procedure of making public policies as a process that is competitive and open to a variety of actors. The government or the state acts as the moderator that only plays passive roles. References Ackers, P 2002, ‘Reframing Employment Relations: The case for Neo-Pluralism’, Industrial Relations Journal, vol.33 no.1, pp. 2-19. Bonefield, W 1996, ‘Reformulation of State Theory’, Capital and Class, vol.11 no. 3, pp. 96-127. Burnham, P 1994, ‘The Organisational View of State’, Politics, vol. 154, no.4, pp. 59-86. Cope, S Goodship, J 1999, ‘Regulating Collaborative Government: Towards Joined-Up Government?’, Public Policy and Administration, vol. 14 no.2, pp. 3-16. Dowding, K 1995, ‘Model or M etaphor? A Critical Review of the Policy Network Approach’, Political Studies, vol. 45 no.1, pp. 136-158. Duncan, S Goodwin, M 1982, ‘The local state and restructuring social relations’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 6 no.3, pp. 157-186. Edward, C 1992, Political Authority and Bureaucratic Power, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, NJ. Frederickson, G et al. 2012, Public Administration Theory Primer, Westview Press, Boulder, Col. Gilliat, S 1984, ‘Public Policy Analysis and Conceptual Conservatism’, Policy and Politics, vol.12 no.4, pp. 345-367. Grillo, D 1998, Pluralism and the Politics of Difference, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Hill, M 2005, The Public Policy Process, Policy Press, New York. Hill, M 1993, The Policy Process: A Reader, Harvester Wheatsheaf, London. Howlett, M 2002, ‘Do networks matter? Linking policy network structure to policy outcomes: evidence from four Canadian policy sectors 1990-2000’, Ca nadian Journal of Political Science, vol. 35 no.2, pp. 235-267. Jessop, B 2002, The Future of the Capitalist State: Jessop State Theory 1990, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, NJ. Konings, M 2010, ‘Renewing state theory’, Politics, vol. 30 no.3, pp. 174-182. McLellan D 1999, Marx and Marxism Political Studies, SAGE, Beverly Hills, Calif. Ostrom, V Ostrom, E 1971, ‘Public choice: a different approach to the study of public administration’, Public Administration Review, vol. 31 no.2, pp. 203-216. Toke, D Marsh, D 2003, ‘Policy Networks and the GM Crop Issue: Assessing the Utility of Dialectical Model of Policy Networks’, Public Administration, vol. 81 no.2, pp. 229-251. This essay on Rational Choice, Pluralist and Marxist Theories’ Contributions to the Study of Public Policy was written and submitted by user Porter G. to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.