Algorithmic Policy & Governance · Capstone brief
POL-04 · Mock rulemaking
Run a mock comment period on a proposed AI school policy; produce the final rule and a comment/response summary that shows you actually changed something — or honestly explain why you did not.
The question
Run a mock comment period on a proposed AI school policy; produce the final rule and a comment/response summary that shows you actually changed something — or honestly explain why you did not.
Policy / materials
Draft policy text (student- or teacher-written) narrow enough to finish. At least eight substantive mock comments from classmates playing defined stakeholder roles. Comment/response template. Institutional owner named (school board, superintendent, or center director).
Expected failure modes
Ignoring hostile comments. Changing nothing and calling it deliberation. Writing an encyclopedia. No cost or enforcement section.
Done looks like
Final rule ≤3 pages; comment/response matrix; change log; enforcement and rough cost note; refusal list (what the rule will not claim to solve).
Five C's
CT: deliberation vs theater. CR: stakeholder roles in good faith. CO: commenters check they were answered. CM: board packet. CZ: students/families under the rule.
Mentor role
Government teacher or administrator reviews final packet. Standing instruction: reject a “hearing” with no change log. School-supervised.
Rubric calibration
R1: one policy, one owner. R2: matrix complete. R3: draft vs final compared. R4: enforcement gaps named. R5: packet usable. R6: refusal list present.
Two ways this goes wrong
(a) Comments filed, never answered. (b) Final rule with no cost or owner.
Checkpoint suggestions
- Week 1–2: Draft policy and stakeholder roles approved; comment period scheduled.
- Week 4–5: Comments collected; matrix drafted; at least one material change or documented non-change.
- Week 7–8: Final rule; cost/enforcement; mentor review.
Credit lane fit
Lane A immediately (gov, leadership, mock trial crossover). No verified credit claim.