No Time like the Present: Making Rule of Law and Constitutional Competence the Theoretical and Practical Foundation for Public Administration Graduate Education Curriculum

Moral education, Derek Bok (1990) reminds us, once occupied a central place in the intellectual life of students and professors. Strengthening or building the character of students was part and parcel of academe, at least until World War II. College presidents and professors believed that character building contributed to educated class committed to a principled life in the service of (Bok, 1990, 66). This view and practice, Bok contends, has been largely abandoned, having lost ground to logical positivists, the growth of big science, and the spectacular advances of technology. The secularization of society also took its toll on moral education in the halls of academe. In public administration, questions of morality and ethics became captives of the Wilsonian legacy of neutral competency, which found expression in the dominant operating philosophy of public managers to get the job done. Getting the job done right meant for all practical purposes doing what was right or ethical. Professionals in the pro-state tirelessly pursued the holy trilogy of efficiency, economy, and effectiveness (Stillman, 1991). In combination with a heavy dose of clientelism and paternalism, questions of morality and ethics were largely relegated to the sidelines in the teaching and practice of public administration, even though new public administration theorists made a determined effort to inject values into the life of the administrative state. Then came Watergate, the Iran-Contra affair, and the Wall Street-HUD-Capitol Hill scandals of the 1980s. The near impeachment and removal of a sitting president stirred the American soul and prompted renewed public interest in governmental ethics. Thus, in 1978 President Jimmy Carter signed into law the Ethics in Government Act, committing federal employees to standards of behavior believed to be in the best interests of the American public. Six years later, in 1984, the American Society for Public Administration (ASPA) adopted an ethics code designed to raise the ethical standards and practices of its members. And in the late 1980s, the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA) incorporated language into its curriculum standards that called for public administration programs to enhance the student's values, knowledge, and skills to act ethically and effectively. These laudable efforts -- federal legislation, ASPA's code of ethics, and NASPAA's new language -- were clear signals to the public and academe that ethical behavior is needed and expected of government officials. Moreover, the message sent to public administration graduate programs was unequivocal -- ethics education cannot and should not be relegated to the curriculum sidelines. Indeed, the evidence points to the fact that MPA programs have moved steadily over the past 25 years toward the incorporation of ethics instruction and courses in their curriculums. A 1995 survey of NASPAA-member schools found that about a dozen schools added ethics courses in the 1970s, with another ten schools added to the list in the early and mid-1980s (Menzel, forthcoming). The adoption curve increased sharply in the late 1980s and 1990s following NASPAA's change in the language of its accreditation standards. By the mid-1990s, 78 NASPAA-member, MPA-degree-granting schools offered an ethics course. Among these 78 schools, one of every four requires matriculating students to complete an ethics course (Menzel, forthcoming). The purpose of this article is to extend previous research in order to address what is probably the most important but least investigated question facing faculty and public administration programs that provide ethics instruction: Does ethics education make a difference? That is, does formal ethics instruction in graduate public affairs/administration (PA/A) schools help public service professionals resolve ethical dilemmas? Stated differently, does ethics pedagogy matter? …

Public administration scholars and practitioners have long been aware of the need for computer related education for students of public affairs and administration. Rufus Miles, in 1967, proposed that computer training become a basic component of graduate-level training in public administration.' In 1974, Roy G. Saltman called for an increased emphasis on science in public administration curricula and further proposed the establishment of a committee to recommend information systems course work for programs in public management.2 Most recently, the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA) Committee on Computers in Public Management Education has proposed course work for computer training for masters students of public administration.3 The present study details the current state of computer and information systems education in Master of Public Administration (MPA) programs. This research describes the extent of management information systems and computer applications course work in MPA programs and examines the extent to which hands-on computer training is integrated into MPA courses. Another important aspect of this investigation is an assessment of the course work and knowledge in information systems that public administration faculty believe should be required of all MPA students. This study also assesses the prospects for increasing information systems course work in MPA programs. Thus, data are provided concerning the possibilities of implementing the curriculum recommendations of the NASPAA Committee on Computers in Public Management Education.

Public Administration ReviewVolume 70, Issue 4 p. 634-636 Educating American Public Administrators: Texts for the Introductory Course Jane Beckett-Camarata, Corresponding Author Jane Beckett-Camarata Kent State University Jane Beckett-Camarata is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at Kent State University. She is past chair of the American Society for Public Administration's Section on Public Administration Education. Her research and teaching interests include state and local financial management, budgeting, revenue systems, financial emergencies, and debt markets.E-mail:jbecket1@kent.edu Larkin Dudley is an associate professor in the Center for Public Administration and Policy, School of Public and International Affairs at Virginia Tech. She is a past president of the American Society of Public Administration's Section on Public Administration Education. Her research and teaching interests include organization theory and behavior, policy design and analysis, privatization, and public participation.E-mail:dudleyl@vt.eduSearch for more papers by this authorLarkin Dudley, Corresponding Author Larkin Dudley Virginia Tech Jane Beckett-Camarata is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at Kent State University. She is past chair of the American Society for Public Administration's Section on Public Administration Education. Her research and teaching interests include state and local financial management, budgeting, revenue systems, financial emergencies, and debt markets.E-mail:jbecket1@kent.edu Larkin Dudley is an associate professor in the Center for Public Administration and Policy, School of Public and International Affairs at Virginia Tech. She is a past president of the American Society of Public Administration's Section on Public Administration Education. Her research and teaching interests include organization theory and behavior, policy design and analysis, privatization, and public participation.E-mail:dudleyl@vt.eduSearch for more papers by this author Jane Beckett-Camarata, Corresponding Author Jane Beckett-Camarata Kent State University Jane Beckett-Camarata is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at Kent State University. She is past chair of the American Society for Public Administration's Section on Public Administration Education. Her research and teaching interests include state and local financial management, budgeting, revenue systems, financial emergencies, and debt markets.E-mail:jbecket1@kent.edu Larkin Dudley is an associate professor in the Center for Public Administration and Policy, School of Public and International Affairs at Virginia Tech. She is a past president of the American Society of Public Administration's Section on Public Administration Education. Her research and teaching interests include organization theory and behavior, policy design and analysis, privatization, and public participation.E-mail:dudleyl@vt.eduSearch for more papers by this authorLarkin Dudley, Corresponding Author Larkin Dudley Virginia Tech Jane Beckett-Camarata is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at Kent State University. She is past chair of the American Society for Public Administration's Section on Public Administration Education. Her research and teaching interests include state and local financial management, budgeting, revenue systems, financial emergencies, and debt markets.E-mail:jbecket1@kent.edu Larkin Dudley is an associate professor in the Center for Public Administration and Policy, School of Public and International Affairs at Virginia Tech. She is a past president of the American Society of Public Administration's Section on Public Administration Education. Her research and teaching interests include organization theory and behavior, policy design and analysis, privatization, and public participation.E-mail:dudleyl@vt.eduSearch for more papers by this author First published: 06 July 2010 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02184.xCitations: 1Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume70, Issue4July/August 2010Pages 634-636 RelatedInformation

The debate over accreditation is far from over. Forty years ago, Fred Thayer feared that complying with the standards of the Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration (NASPAA) would rigidify and stultify academic training. Today the opposite threatens. Under mission-based standards, Master of Public Administration (MPA) programs can teach whatever they can justify, even if the content has little or no connection with public administration. The MPA is in jeopardy of becoming little more than a Master of Arts that teaches students about public service–minded values. We argue that standards for MPA programs should be sufficiently content-based that the degree represents a common understanding of career preparation. One way to expedite the return to the MPA’s roots is for NASPAA to link arms with the American Society for Public Administration (ASPA) to ensure that public administration education remains focused on advancing the enterprise of public administration.

Introduction The traditional view of doctoral education, borrowed from the social sciences, is the reproduction of the professoriate to ensure continued knowledge development through research and the dissemination of knowledge through teaching. In other words, the traditional purpose of doctoral education is the creation of a new generation of scholars who will pursue careers in academe. This is clearly not the reality of doctoral education in public administration as it has evolved. Consider the following facts based on more than ten years of research in the doctoral education field. 1. The vast majority of people obtaining the doctoral degree never publish anything that contributes to the knowledge base of the field. 2. Only a minority of doctoral graduates enters careers in academe. The majority of graduates appear to remain in professional positions. 3. The quality of dissertation research has been viewed as questionable by any standards of quantitative or qualitative research. 4. Many faculty positions are being filled by individuals trained in other fields. The Purpose of Doctoral Education in Public Administration What is the purpose of doctoral education in public administration? We can begin to answer this question by addressing the motives of students entering doctoral programs. Research suggests that only a handful of students are interested in traditional academic careers involving research, teaching, and service. On average, according to recent National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA) surveys, at least 250 students graduate each year with a doctoral degree in public administration or public affairs. While there certainly are not that many open faculty positions in any given year, we note that many programs are hiring faculty from other disciplines (e.g., political science, economics, policy studies, social work, business, management, etc.). These hires are not from the 250+ average number of public administration graduates. This disparity in hiring also suggests that public administration programs are not producing enough graduates who are competitive and interested in the academic marketplace. This seems ironic in light of our suspicion that there is indeed a demand for doctoral graduates in public administration, as evidenced by regular multiple listings in the Public Administration Times and the Political Science Recruiter. Indeed, some institutions have had considerable difficulty hiring qualified new faculty members in certain core subfields. We believe that the majority of doctoral students in public administration are the degree for nontraditional purposes. We can speculate on five of those purposes: 1) to enhance one's professional practice in administrative or policy settings; 2) to inflate one's ego; 3) to gain a promotion or be retained in a position; 4) to enhance the likelihood of getting consulting grants or contracts; 5) because it may be advantageous to say, very loosely, that one is a candidate for or is pursuing the doctoral degree, even while lacking sufficient motivation to ever complete the degree. The first purpose is certainly justified, and we suspect that many of our colleagues would agree (see: Clayton, 1995; Sherwood, 1996; and Hambrick, 1997). The other four purposes are, in our opinion, simply not legitimate and waste scarce educational resources. Indeed, the 10:1 ratio of doctoral enrollees to graduates argues, somewhat disturbingly, for the fifth possibility. Public administration at the doctoral level can be both an academic and a professional degree. It has served the purposes of future academicians and continuing professionals for many years. There is a rationale for serving the interests of continuing professionals, and by providing them with knowledge and skills beyond the Master's level we add some value to the practice of public administration. …

In order for public affairs and administration education programs to successfully prepare future public administrators, the link between public service values (PSVs), professionalism in the public sector, and information literacy (IL) needs to be acknowledged and elevated. Through the development of a Communications for Public Administrators course focused on IL with a public service perspective, the Master of Public Administration (MPA) program at West Chester University (WCU) is attempting to do just that. This article considers separately the role of PSVs, professionalism, and IL in the study and practice of public administration and discusses the rationale for linking the three concepts in public affairs and administration education programs. Recommendations for the institutionalization of the PSVs-professionalism-IL nexus are also considered. The article then describes a specific WCU MPA course used to explore the efficacy of integrating PSVs, professionalism, and IL into a graduate public affairs curriculum. The benefits of this approach and its applicability to other public administration, public policy, and public affairs graduate programs are discussed.

When the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA) became the official accrediting agency for academic programs in public administration in 1986, a substantial element of the public administration academic and practitioner community saw that as a significant step to consolidate and legitimate the field and to enhance the quality of public administration education. Yet, some feared that the accreditation process would be accompanied by a much more rigorous attention to standards than had characterized NASPAA's peer review process. Fears have tended to be more prominent among programs not associated with independent departments or schools of public affairs and administration, programs in unconventional institutional arrangements (e.g., nonindependent, nonpolitical science departments), and programs that are relatively new and small. Despite a policy allowing flexibility and innovation in curriculum design and means of delivery in master's degree programs, NASPAA's desire for public administration faculty and administrators to exercise initiative and substantial determining influence in such areas as the appointment, promotion, and tenuring of faculty and in the use of financial and other resources provides a sobering signal to Masters of Public Affairs or Administration (MPA) programs not housed within independent academic units. Although an element of academia may always question the biases of NASPAA, perhaps a more important question than whether NASPAA standards favor, encourage, or promote certain institutional arrangements is whether a variety of organizational arrangements can effectively deliver the desirable outcomes of MPA programs and whether NASPAA standards enhance the effectiveness of MPA programs. To explore these questions, the author conducted a survey in 1985-1986 of MPA program directors' perceptions of their programs' effectiveness. The survey allowed the author to compare the perceived effectiveness of MPA programs located within departments of political science, departments of public administration, combined departments, separate professional schools, and combined professional schools. I It also allowed the author to compare the perceived effectiveness of MPA programs on the basis of their broader disciplinary affiliations (i.e., colleges of arts and science, schools of public affairs and administration, and schools of business or business and public * This article reports the findings from a nationwide survey of MPA directors' perceptions of their programs' effectiveness. The survey explored the directors' general perceptions of their programs' effectiveness, perceptions of their programs' capacity to achieve 17 specific goals, and the characteristics of effective and ineffective MPA programs. The findings reflect most favorably on programs administered by schools of public affairs and administration and departments of public administration, but generally they indicate that school and departmental affiliations do not have a major impact on MPA program effectiveness. In contrast, NASPAA accreditation does seem to be related to MPA program effectiveness. The findings are discussed in relation to choosing a MPA program structure and NASPAA accreditation.

Kenneth Kernaghan and Canadian Public Administration: Editor's Note and Remembrances

Public administration programs are familiar and comfortable with the self-study and analysis that comes with the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA) accreditation process. NASPAA’s curriculum standards historically have focused on core competencies for all Master of Public Administration (MPA) students. There is a noticeable lack of guidance regarding what competencies are desirable for various specializations. No guidelines are available to benchmark the curriculum for the public budgeting and financial management specialization. This essay explicitly addresses the differences in the core skill sets necessary for public managers in general versus those necessary for managers who will be finance specialists, and offers a methodology to reformulate and refocus their fiscal administration core and specialty curricula.

Sex and gender are evolving identity categories with emergent public policy and administration needs. To respond to the diverse landscape of sex and gender issues in the public sector, greater competency is needed. This research will contribute to the body of work on sex and gender in public administration by asking the following questions: (a) what do graduate students in Master of Public Administration (MPA) programs know about gender competency, (b) have graduate students learned gender competency in their MPA coursework, and (c) how can gender competency in MPA education be further developed and promoted? This study provides a critical analysis of one MPA program, at John Jay College, City University of New York, to begin this line of research. Our e-survey results of a non-random sample of John Jay MPA students demonstrate that many students do not learn about gender competency through their MPA education and that gender competency skills otherwise obtained are limited. To address this, we emphasize the need for incorporating gender competency into MPA education as the first step in equipping future practitioners with skills to promote gender competency in public policy, administrative decision making, and workplace culture. We provide practical means of achieving greater gender competency in MPA curricula and programming and articulate the importance of expanding this research to other MPA programs, MPA faculty and directors, and geographic regions.

This study presents findings from a survey of leading Master of Public Administration (MPA) and Master of Public Policy (MPP) programs who were asked to provide copies of Graduate Record Examination (GRE) validation studies. We planned to examine these papers to determine common themes that might contribute to developing a theory of valid entrance standards for MPA/MPP students. In spite of an 89 percent (31/35) response rate, only four schools had GRE validity research available. Three programs sent written reports dated 1985, 1990, and 1994, respectively. A fourth school conducted annual validity studies but did not issue a written document. Based on this paucity of validity studies, the present discussion proposes that the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA) require all MPA schools to furnish GRE validation studies as a part of program accreditation. hope you have uncovered a good set of validation studies. I am our MPA director and it is obvious that we are making our admissions decisions in the midst of a fog of ignorance. (Survey Respondent)

This is the fourth volume of a four-volume encyclopaedia which combines public administration and policy, and contains approximately 900 articles by over 300 specialists. It covers all of the core concepts, terms and processes of applied behavioural science, budgeting, comparative public administration, development administration, industrial/organizational psychology, industrial policy, international trade, labour relations, management, non-profit management, organizational theory and behaviour, policy analysis, political economy, political science, public administration, public finance, public law, public management, public personnel administration, public policy, and taxation. There are also entries on individuals who made significant intellectual and technical contributions to the development of public policy and administration, such as Louis Brownlow, John Maynard Keynes and Leonard White; significant organizations such as the American Society for Public Administration, the International Institute of Administrative Sciences, and the National Academy of Public Administration; and historically important committees or commissions, such as the Fulton Committee in Great Britain and the Hoover Commission in the United States. Each article tackles its subject from a generic perspective, with examples from as wide a range of states as practical. Typically, an article deals with historical and theoretical developments, then explains how relevant concepts and practices are applied in varying cultures, such as the United States, Western Europe or Asia, and in varying regimes, such as presidential, parliamentary or monarchical. An underlying theme of the encyclopaedia is that the various aspects of public administration in all developed states are essentially the same. It is designed so that its contents - a combination of historical and descriptive articles, procedural presentations and interpretive essays - will be accessible to the general reader as well as of interest to the specialist.

Norma M. Riccucci was born in Torrington, Connecticut, and is currently a Distinguished Professor at Rutgers University, Newark, in the School of Public Affairs and Administration. Riccucci has published broadly in the areas of social equity, employment discrimination, diversity management, and human resource management. Some of her award-winning publications include: Public Administration: Traditions of Inquiry and Philosophies of Knowledge (American Society of Public Administration Research Section 2012 Best Book Award), and How Management Matters: Street-Level Bureaucrats and Welfare Reform (American Political Science Association Best Book Award 2009). She is the recipient of many honors and is a fellow of the National Academy of Public Administration. In 2005, she was inducted into Phi Beta Delta Honor Society for International Scholars and received the 2006 American Society for Public Administration's Charles H. Levine Award for Excellence in Public Administration Research, Teaching, and Service. She is also the recipient of the American Society of Public Administration Section on Women in Public Administration's Rita Mae Kelly Award for Research Excellence and served as the president of the Public Management Research Association from 2007 to 2009. Riccucci received her doctoral degree in public administration in 1984 from the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University and is a graduate of the University of Southern California (Master of Public Administration) and Florida International University (Bachelors of Arts in public administration).

Information technology (IT) is often less emphasized in coursework related to public administration education, despite the growing need for technological capabilities in those joining the public sector workforce. This coupled with a lesser emphasis on e-government/IT skills by accreditation standards adds to the widening gap between theory and practice in the field. This study examines the emphasis placed on e-government/IT concepts in Master of Public Administration (MPA) and Master of Public Policy (MPP) programs, either through complete course offerings or through related courses such as public management, strategic planning, performance measurement and organization theory. Based on a content analysis of their syllabi, the paper analyzes the extent to which the IT/e-government courses in MPA/Master of Public Policy programs address the Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration competency standards, and further discuss the orientation of the courses with two of the competencies: management and policy. Specifically, are e-government/IT courses more management-oriented or policy-oriented? Do public management, strategic planning, performance measurement, and organization theory courses address IT concerns?

Graduates of nonprofit management and public administration programs face a workplace increasingly dominated by complex relationships between government, nonprofit, and for-profit entities. Nonprofit organizations and public policy cannot be understood independently of one another. To assess the role of nonprofits in the policy curriculum, we reviewed 12 public policy textbooks and 143 syllabi from graduate-level public policy courses taught at Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration-accredited programs to assess the extent to which nonprofits are incorporated. Nonprofit organizations deserve full integration into the core curriculum of Master of Public Administration (MPA) and Master of Public Policy (MPP) programs as essential actors in public administration and the policy process. Their ubiquity as policy partners, from problem recognition and advocacy to policy formation, implementation, and evaluation makes understanding nonprofit organizations crucial to the study and practice of public policy and administration.