Jpaejournal of Public Affairs Education

JOURNAL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS EDUCATION VOLUME 19 NUMBER 2

National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration 1029 Vermont Avenue NW, Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20005-3517 202-628-8965 U fax 202-626-4978 U www.naspaa.org JPAEJOURNAL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS EDUCATION

The Journal of Public Affairs Education (JPAE) is the ﬂ agship journal of the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA). Founded in 1970, NASPAA serves as a national and international resource for the promotion of excellence in education for the public service. Its institutional membership includes more than 250 university programs in the United States in public administration, policy, and management. It accomplishes its purposes through direct services to its member institutions and by

U Developing and administering appropriate standards for educational programs in public affairs through its Executive Council and its Commission on Peer Review and Accreditation;

U Representing to governments and other institutions the objectives and needs of education for public affairs and administration;

U Encouraging curriculum development and innovation and providing a forum for publication and discussion of education scholarship, practices, and issues;

U Undertaking surveys that provide members and the public with information on key educational issues;

U Meeting with employers to promote internship and employment opportunities for students and graduates;

U Undertaking joint educational projects with practitioner professional organizations; and

U Collaborating with institutes and schools of public administration in other countries through conferences, consortia, and joint projects.

NASPAA provides opportunities for international engagement for NASPAA members, placing a global emphasis on educational quality and quality assurance through a series of networked international initiatives, in

particular the Network of Institutes and Schools of Public Administration in Central and Eastern Europe SPRING 2013 VOLUME 19 NO. 2 (NISPAcee), the Inter-American Network of Public Administration Education (INPAE), and the Georgian Institute of Public Affairs (GIPA). It is also involved locally; for instance, directing the Small Communities Outreach Project for Environmental Issues, which networks public affairs schools and local governments around environmental regulation policy issues, with support from the Environmental Protection Agency.

NASPAA’s twofold mission is to ensure excellence in education and training for public service and to promote the ideal of public service. Consistent with NASPAA’s mission, JPAE is dedicated to advancing teaching and learning in public affairs, deﬁ ned to include the ﬁ elds of policy analysis, public administration, public management, and public policy. Published quarterly by NASPAA, the journal features commentaries, announcements, symposia, book reviews, and peer-reviewed scholarly articles on pedagogical, curricular, and accreditation issues pertaining to public affairs education.

JPAE was founded in 1995 by a consortium from the University of Kansas and the University of Akron and was originally published as the Journal of Public Administration Education. H. George Frederickson was the journal’s founding editor. In addition to serving as NASPAA’s journal of record, JPAE is afﬁ liated with the Flagship journal of the National Association of Schools of Public A! airs and Administration Section on Public Administration Education of the American Society for Public Administration. SPRING 2013

JPAE 19_02 041713 cover.indd 1 4/17/13 11:42 AM National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA) >`>Ê,ÕL>]Ê*ÀiÃìÌ Jack Knott, Vice President Frances S. Berry, Immediate Past President Information for Contributors Laurel McFarland, Executive Director JPAE Oversight Committee: The Journal of Public Affairs Education (JPAE) is the fl agship journal of the National Association of Andrew Ewoh, Greg Lindsey & Amy Donahue Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA). JPAE is dedicated to advancing teaching and learning in public affairs broadly defi ned, which includes the fi elds of policy analysis, public administration, public management, public policy, nonprofi t administration, and their subfi elds. David Schultz, Editor in Chief, Hamline University Kristen Norman-Major, Managing Editor, Hamline University Advancing teaching and learning includes not only the improvement of specifi c courses and teaching Iris Geva-May, Associate Editor for International and Comparative Education, Simon Fraser University methods but also the improvement of public affairs program design and management. The goal Lisa Dejoras, Editorial Assistant, Hamline University of JPAE is to publish articles that are useful to those participating in the public affairs education Copy Editor: Chris Thillen Layout and Cover Design: Val Escher enterprise, not only in the United States, but throughout the world. In service to this goal, articles EDITOR’S COUNCIL should be clear, accessible to those in the public affairs fi elds and subfi elds, and generalizable. The new H. George Frederickson, Founding Editor, University of Kansas James L. Perry, Indiana University, Bloomington editorial team is particularly interested in articles that (1) use rigorous methods to analyze the relative Danny L. Balfour, Grand Valley State University Mario A. Rivera, University of New Mexico effectiveness of different teaching methods, and (2) have international and/or comparativecomponents Marc Holzer]Ê,ÕÌ}iÀÃÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ Heather E. Campbell, Claremont Graduate University Edward T. Jennings, University of Kentucky or consider the effect of country setting. Articles submitted for publication in JPAE should not already BOARD OF EDITORS be published or in submission elsewhere. Articles that have been presented at conferences are welcome. Muhittin Acar, Hacettepe University, Turkey Kristina Lambright, Binghamton University, Generally, manuscripts should conform to the JPAE style sheet available at www.naspaa.org/JPAE/ Mohamad Alkadry, Florida International University State University of New York stylesheet.pdf. Specifi cally, they should: Burt Barnow, George Washington University Laura Langbein, American University Peter J. Bergerson, Florida Gulf Coast University Scott Lazenby, City of Sandy, Oregon UÊ iÊÌÞ«i`ÊÊ>ÊÃÌ>`>À`Ê£Ó«ÌÊÃiÀvÊvÌÊÃÕV Ê>ÃÊ/iÃÊ iÜÊ,>®]Ê`ÕLiÊÃ«>Vi`]ÊÜÌ Ê Rajade Berry-James, North Carolina State University Deanna Malatesta, Indiana University-Purdue margins of no less than one inch on all sides. John Bohte, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee University Indianapolis Espiridion Borrego, University of Texas Pan American Steven R. Maxwell, Florida Gulf Coast University UÊ1ÃiÊ*ÃÌÞiÊÌiÝÌÊVÌ>ÌÃÊ>`ÊÀiviÀiViÃ°Ê ÀiÊvÀ>ÌÊÊ*ÊÃÌÞiÊV>ÊLiÊvÕ`Ê John M. Bryson, University of Minnesota Barbara McCabe, University of Texas at http://www.apastyle.org/. Lysa Burnier, Ohio University Juliet Musso, University of Southern California N. Joseph Cayer, Arizona State University Michael O’Hare, University of California, Berkeley UÊ ÌÊVÕìÊ>ÕÌ ÀÃ®Ê>iÃÊiÌ iÀÊÊÌÌiÊ«>}iÊÀÊÊL`ÞÊvÊÌ iÊ>ÕÃVÀ«ÌÊÊÀìÀÊÌÊ Heather Campbell, Claremont Graduate University Michael Popejoy, Florida International University allow for anonymous peer review. Barbara Crosby, University of Minnesota David Powell, California State University, Long Beach Robert B. Cunningham, University of Tennessee, Knoxville David Reingold, Indiana University UÊ ÌÊiÝVii`ÊÎäÊ«>}iÃÊÊi}Ì ]ÊVÕ`}ÊÌiÃ]ÊÀiviÀiViÃ]Ê>`ÊÌ>LiÃ° Dwight Denison, University of Kentucky Dahlia Remler, Baruch College CUNY UÊVÕìÊi`ÌiÃÊÌ >ÌÊ>ÀiÊÌÊiLi`ì`ÊÌ ÀÕ} ÊÌ iÊÜÀ`Ê«ÀViÃÃÀ° Anand Desai, Ohio State University R. Karl Rethemeyer, University at Albany SUNY James W. Douglas, University of North Carolina at Charlotte Michelle Saint-Germain, California State University, Long Beach UÊ ÌÊÕÃiÊ>ÕÌ>Ìi`ÊLL}À>« ÞÊÌÃÊ `Ìi]Ê,ivÜÀÃ]ÊÀÊÌ iÊÌÊÊ7À`®° Robert Durant, American University Jodi Sandfort, University of Minnesota Jo Ann G. Ewalt, Eastern Kentucky University Robert A. Schuhmann, University of Wyoming Submissions should be made online at http://www.edmgr.com/jpae. At the site, you will be instructed to Susan Gooden, Virginia Commonwealth University Patricia M. Shields, Texas State University create an account if you have not already done so or to log in under your existing account. Cynthia Jackson-Elmoore, Michigan State University Robert Smith, Kennesaw State University Meagan Jordan]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊÀ>Ã>ÃÊ>ÌÊÌÌiÊ,V Jessica Sowa, University of Colorado Submitting authors will be asked for contact information, names of any additional authors, up to three Edward Kellough, University of Georgia Kendra Stewart, University of Charleston ÃÕLiVÌÊV>ÃÃwÊV>ÌÃÊÌÊÜ V ÊÌ iÊ>ÕÃVÀ«ÌÊÀi>ÌiÃ]Ê>`Ê>Ê>LÃÌÀ>VÌÊvÊ>««ÀÝ>ÌiÞÊ£xäÊÜÀ`Ã°Ê Don Kettl, University of Maryland, College Park Giovanni Valotti, Università Bocconi Additional instructions for registration in this system and submission of manuscripts can be found at John Kiefer, University of New Orleans David Van Slyke, Syracuse University http://www.edmgr.com/jpae or the JPAE website at www.naspaa.org/jpae. Authors should expect to William Earle Klay, Florida State University Karel Van der Molen, Stellenbosch University, South Africa Chris Koliba, University of Vermont Howard Whitton, Griffi th University receive acknowledgment of receipt of the manuscript and can follow its progress through the review Blue Wooldridge, Virginia Commonwealth University process at the www.edmgr.com/jpae site. Firuz Demir Yasamıs, American University in the Emirates All articles are given an initial review by the editorial team. Articles must meet basic criteria including CORRESPONDENTS writing quality, reasonable conformity with these guidelines, and interest to JPAE readers before they Khalid Al-Yahya, Dubai School of Government Charlene M. L. Roach, University of the West Indies, are submitted for external, double-blind peer review. If accepted for publication, manuscripts cannot Edgar Ramirez Delacruz]Ê iÌiÀÊvÀÊ,iÃi>ÀV Ê>` St. Augustine Campus be published until they conform to APA style and all of the authors have provided copyright transfer Teaching in Economics (CIDE), Mexico authority, full contact information, and short biographies (of about 5 lines). Journal of Public Affairs Education is published quarterly by the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration. Claims for missing numbers should be made within the month following the regular month of publication. The publishers expect to Any questions about the manuscript submission, review, and publication process can be addressed to supply missing numbers free only when losses have been sustained in transit and when the reserve stock will permit. Subscription Rates: the editorial team at [email protected]. ÃÌÌÕÌ]Êf£ÓxÆÊ`Û`Õ>]ÊfxäÆÊ-ÌÕìÌ]Êf{äÆÊ 1°-°]Ê>``ÊfÓäÊÌÊ>««V>LiÊÀ>Ìi°Ê iVÌÀVÊJPAE articles can be accessed at www. naspaa.org/JPAEMessenger. Change of Address: Please notify us and your local postmaster immediately of both old and new addresses. Because of its mission, the Journal of Public Affairs Education allows educators to reproduce any Please allow four weeks for the change. Postmaster: Send address changes to JPAE, National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and `ÃÌÀ>Ì]Ê£äÓÊ6iÀÌÊÛi°Ê 7]Ê-ÕÌiÊ££ää]Ê7>Ã }Ì]Ê ° °]ÊÓäääxÎx£Ç°ÊEducators and Copy Centers:Ê «ÞÀ} ÌÊÓä£ä°Ê JPAE material for classroom use, and authors may reproduce their own articles without written National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration. All rights reserved. Educators may reproduce any material for permission. Written permission is required to reproduce any part of JPAE in all other instances. classroom use only and authors may reproduce their articles without written permission. Written permission is required to reproduce JPAE in >ÊÌ iÀÊÃÌ>ViÃ°Ê*i>ÃiÊVÌ>VÌÊ>VµÕiiÊiÜÃ]Ê -*]Ê£äÓÊ6iÀÌÊÛi°Ê 7]Ê-ÕÌiÊ££ää]Ê7>Ã }Ì]Ê ° °]ÊÓäääxÎx£Ç]Ê« i\Ê ÓäÓÈÓnnÈx]Êv>Ý\ÊÓäÓÈÓÈ{Çn]Êi>\ÊiÜÃJ>Ã«>>°À}°Ê/ iÊ«>«iÀÊÕÃi`ÊÊÌ ÃÊ«ÕLV>ÌÊiiÌÃÊÌ iÊÕÊÀiµÕÀiiÌÃÊvÊ iÀV>Ê >Ì>Ê-Ì>`>À`ÊvÀÊvÀ>ÌÊ-ViViÃp*iÀ>iViÊvÊ*>«iÀÊvÀÊ*ÀÌi`ÊLÀ>ÀÞÊ >ÌiÀ>Ã]Ê -Ê<Î°{n£n{°ÊJPAE is >LÃÌÀ>VÌi`ÊÀÊìÝi`ÊÊ-/",]Ê - "]Ê}iÊ-V >À]Ê>`Ê `ÕV>ÌÊÕÊ/iÝÌÊìÝ°Ê-- Ê£xÓÎÈnäÎÊvÀiÀÞÊ£änÇqÇÇn®°

JPAE 19_02 041713 cover.indd 2 4/17/13 11:42 AM Journal of Public Affairs Education

Spring 2013 Volume 19, No. 2

From the Editor—Public Affairs Education and the Failed Business Model of Higher Education David Schultz...... ii Teaching Public Administration Conference HIGHLIGHTS Teaching Public Administration Conference Update Leland Coxe ...... 197 Comparing the Effectiveness of Classroom and Online Learning: Teaching Research Methods Anna Ya Ni ...... 199 Delivering an MPA Emphasis in Local Governance and Community Development Through Service Learning and Action Research Margaret Stout...... 217 ARTICLES OF CURRENT INTEREST Departments of Public Administration and Colleges of Business Administration: Allies or Aliens? Lauren N. Bowman and James R. Thompson...... 239 Public Affairs Programs and the Changing Political Economy of Higher Education Daniel Rich...... 263 Collaborative Partnerships: The Case of the Executive Master of Public Governance Program in Copenhagen, Denmark Carsten Greve...... 285 A Public Service Education: A Review of Undergraduate Programs with a Community and Service Focus Tony Carrizales and Lamar Vernon Bennett...... 309 Internships Adrift? Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration Abraham D. Benavides, Lisa A. Dicke, and Amy C. Holt...... 325 MPA Program Partnerships With Nonprofit Organizations: Benefits to MPA Pro- grams, MPA Students and Graduates, Nonprofit Organizations, and Communities Christopher A. Simon, Melissa Yack, J. Steven Ott...... 355 BOOK REVIEWS Review of The Art & Craft of Case Writing, Third Edition Cynthia Jackson-Elmoore...... 375 Review of Cultural Competency for Public Administrators Christopher Koliba...... 377 Information for Contributors...... Inside back cover

Cover design by Val Escher. Cover design property of NASPAA. Cover photo: Harvard University. From the Editor— Public Affairs Education and the Failed Business Model of Higher Education

The dominant business model for American higher education has collapsed. This collapsed business plan portends enormous challenges to public affairs programs as they move forward, forcing them to look to alternative ways to deliver curriculum and finance their programs. Understanding the new political economy of higher education and its impact on public affairs education is the subject of this issue. Since the end of World War II, two business models have defined the operations of American higher education. The first model began with the return of military veterans after 1945, and it lasted though the matriculation of the baby boomers from college in the 1970s. This model produced an ever-expanding number of colleges for a growing population seeking to secure a college degree. It was a model that coincided with the height of the Cold War, when public funding for state schools was regarded as part of an important effort to achieve technological and political supremacy over communism. It also represented the expansion of more and more middle- and working-class students entering college. This was higher education’s greatest moment. It was the democratization of college, made possible by expansion of inexpensive public universities, generous grants and scholarships, and low-interest loans. Public institutions were vital to this model, but private institutions also had an important role. Public institutions were public in the sense that they received most if not all of their money either from tax dollars to subsidize tuition and costs or federal money in terms of research grants for faculty. The business model then involved simply public tax dollars, federal aid, and an expanding population of often first-generation students attending public institutions at low tuition in state institutions. The model also included generous student aid and funding for private schools. Let us call this the Dewey business model, named after John Dewey, whose theories on education emphasized the democratic functions of education and sought to inculcate citizenship values though schools. Yet the Dewey model began to collapse in middle of the 1970s. Perhaps it was the retrenchment of the SUNY and CUNY systems in New York under Governor Hugh Carey in 1976 that foretold the end of the democratic university. What caused its retrenchment was the fiscal crisis of the 1970s. The fiscal crisis of the 1970s was born of numerous problems. Inflationary pressures caused by Vietnam and the energy embargoes of the 1970s, and recessionary forces from relative declines in American economic productivity, engendered significant economic shocks—including to the public sector, where many state and local governments edged toward bankruptcy. ii Journal of Public Affairs Education From the Editor

Efforts to relieve declining corporate profits and productivity initiated efforts to restructure the economy, including cutting back on government services. The response, first in England under Margaret Thatcher and then in the United States under Ronald Reagan, was an effort to retrench the state by a package that included decreases in government expenditures for social welfare programs, cutbacks on business regulations, resistance to labor rights, and tax cuts. Collectively these proposals, known as neoliberalism, sought to restore profitability and autonomy to free markets. The belief was that unfettered by the government, they would restore productivity. Neoliberalism had a major impact on higher education. First beginning under President Carter and then more so under Ronald Reagan, the federal and state governments cut taxes and public expenditures. The combination of the two meant a halt to the Dewey business model: Support for public institutions decreased and federal money dried up, even for students attending private schools. From a high in the 1960s and early ’70s, when states and the federal government provided generous funding to expand their public systems to educate the baby boomers, state universities now receive only a small percentage of their money from the government. In 2004, the State of New York constituted only 29% of SUNY’s funding and 31% for CUNY. As of 1998, New York spent more on its prisons than on higher education. In 1991, 74% of the funding for public universities came from states; in 2004, it was down to 64%, and state systems in Illinois, Michigan, and Virginia were down to 25%, 18%, and 8% respectively. Since then, the percentages have shrunk even more, rendering state universities as public institutions more in name than in funding. Higher education under neoliberalism needed a new business model, and it found one in the corporate university. In the corporate university, colleges increasingly use corporate structures and management styles to run the university. This approach includes abandoning the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) shared governance model, where faculty had an equal voice in running the school, including designing curriculum; selecting department chairs, deans, and presidents; and determining many other policies affecting the academy. The corporate university replaced the shared governance model with one more typical of a business corporation. The corporate university took control of the curriculum in several ways in order to generate revenue. The new business model found its most powerful income stream in professional education. Professional education, such as in public or business administration, or in law school, became the cash cow of colleges and universities. This was especially true with MBA and, to a lesser extent, public affairs programs. Universities, including traditional ones that once offered only undergraduate programs, saw that there was an appetite for graduate programs. The number of these programs rapidly expanded with high-priced tuition. These graduate and professional programs were sold to applicants by saying that the price would more than be made up in terms of future income earnings by graduates.

Journal of Public Affairs Education iii From the Editor

This business model thus used tuition from graduate professional programs to finance the rest of the university. Students either were able to secure government or market loans or those from their educational institution to finance their training. Further, the business model relied heavily on attracting foreign students, returning older baby boom students in need of additional credentials, and recent graduates part of the baby boomlet seeking professional degrees as a shortcut to advancement. This model accelerated with the emergence of the Internet and was especially perfected with the proprietary for-profit schools. To promote the expansion of online programs over the Web or Internet, a specialist designs the curriculum for courses, sells it to the school, and then the university hires adjuncts to deliver the canned class. Here, the costs of offering a class are reduced, potential class size is maximized, and if and when the curriculum needs to be changed to reflect new market needs or preferences, it is simple to accomplish. Traditional schools, seeing this model flourish, began emulating it. They expanded their online programs, often with minimal investments in faculty. Overall, the new business model relied heavily on the expansion of pricy professional programs sold to traditional and nontraditional students who financed their education with student loans. This model took off with the Internet and was facilitated by a management structure and partnering that drew higher education into closer collaboration and dependence on corporate America. The corporate business model worked—until 2008, when it died along with the neoliberal economic policies that had nourished it since the late 1970s. The global economic collapse produced even more pressures on the government to shrink educational expenditures. But the high and persistent unemployment also yielded something not previously seen: the decline of students seeking more education. The decline came for two major reasons. First, baby boomers were aging out into retirement and no longer needed educational training. With that, the baby boomlet had run its peak as the American pool of potential students rapidly decreased. In effect, the demand for education had dropped. Second, traditionally professional degrees flourished in tough economic times, when individuals used their unemployment as the opportunity to get retrained. But since 2008 that has not happened, in part thanks to the persistent high unemployment and rise of consumer and student debt. Unlike previous post–World War II recessions, the most recent one has dramatically wiped out consumer wealth—some $13 trillion in wealth was lost—and consumer debt has skyrocketed. Student loan debt has also ballooned and is now greater than personal consumer debt. The average student loan debt for a graduate of the class of 2010 exceeds $25,000. In effect, potential students are tapped out. They have no money to finance further education, they see that companies are not hiring, and overall, they find little incentive to take on debt for jobs that may not exist. The result? A crash in applications to graduate professional programs. The corporate business model has crashed. It was a bubble that burst, much like the real estate bubble in 2008. But in actually, it was a model waiting to go iv Journal of Public Affairs Education From the Editor bust. The corporate business model functioned like an education Ponzi scheme. Higher education paid for programs by raking in dollars from rapidly expanding professional programs and selling degrees on the promise that high tuition costs would be worth it to students. But all Ponzi schemes soon collapse, and that is what higher education is now experiencing. Now throw in sequestration. Already since the crash of 2008, tens if not hundreds of thousands of public sector jobs have been lost. The best estimates are that in the future, even more will fade due to sequestration or austerity programs to reduce federal spending. Federal and state budgetary trends will place increased pressure on public affairs programs to innovate, justify their existence, and develop alternative ways to educate. Public affairs programs too will need a new business model. The scholarship of this JPAE Spring issue begins an exploration of this new model. Leland Coxe serves as guest editor for the mini-symposium that reviews the highlights of the Teaching Public Administration Conference. Besides providing an overview of TPAC, he introduces two of the more notable papers from it: “Comparing the Effectiveness of Classroom and Online Learning: Teaching Research Methods,” by Anna Ya Ni, and “Delivering an MPA Emphasis in Local Governance and Community Development Through Service Learning and Action Research,” by Margaret Stout. Both of these articles explore two of the most recent trends in delivering curriculum and asking good questions about quality. The Spring 2013 issue also is richly graced with other articles and book reviews. First, in “Departments of Public Administration and Colleges of Business Admini- stration: Allies or Aliens?” Lauren N. Bowman and James R. Thompson examine the repercussions of one trend that public administration programs face in tough economic times—being merged into schools of business. In efforts to save money, to address dwindling enrollments, or in the belief that public and business administration programs share many affinities, universities are putting the two under the same roof. But how compatible are the two programs and what happens to public administration when it is merged into business? Bowman and Thompson deliver important insights into how well the marriage of these two programs works. Higher education is at a crossroads. Enrollments, especially for many professional degrees, are down dramatically; student debt is at record highs; and public support for colleges and universities is shrinking. All of this threatens the quality and viability of American higher education. In “Public Affairs Programs and the Changing Political Economy of Higher Education,” Daniel Rich describes this new reality. His piece is a sober reminder of the problems faced by American higher education and how they affect the delivery of public affairs programs. Rich describes a trend that is not going to change soon, if at all, and suggests that in this age of sequestration, the halcyon days of public affairs education are behind us. In “Collaborative Partnerships: The Case of the Executive Master of Public Governance Program in Copenhagen, Denmark,” Carsten Greve looks at another facet of how business and public affairs programs work together. Here, the author

Journal of Public Affairs Education v From the Editor presents a case study of the Executive Master of Public Governance degree program in Copenhagen, Denmark. This program was a joint effort by the University of Copenhagen and Copenhagen Business School, aided by Aalborg University. It was initiated by the Danish Parliament as a means of fostering quality control and assurance. In 2012, the program had enrolled more than 600 public managers from Denmark; their average age was 47. Greve details how the joint effort worked and then offers four lessons learned regarding how to make these types of multi- sector collaborative projects thrive. Community service and learning is increasingly a major focus and component of many public affairs programs. Tony Carrizales and Lamar Vernon Bennett explore the pedagogy and trends in undergraduate training in “Public Service Education: A Review of Undergraduate Programs with a Community and Service Focus.” The strength of their article is providing an exhaustive review of NASPAA schools offering or emphasizing public service education. Their piece is absolutely terrific information for those wanting a better understanding of who is doing what, and why this type of educational training is a welcome alternative or addition to many curriculums. Internships are another popular educational option in many public affairs programs. They supposedly offer “real-world” experiences and on-site opportunities to develop skills ordinarily not well developed in the classroom. They purport to serve as bridges that link theory to practice. But what do we know about internships in terms of what makes for a successful experience? Exploring this question is the subject of “Internships Adrift? Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration,” by Abraham D. Benavides, Lisa A. Dicke, and Amy C. Holt. These authors provide a succinct history of internships. Then they review the educational philosophy of such programs, along with a model for how they should be structured. The article concludes with a survey of department chairs regarding their internship programs. Christopher A. Simon, Melissa Yack, and J. Steven Ott continue the dialogue on community learning in “MPA Program Partnerships With Nonprofit Organi- zations: Benefits to MPA Programs, MPA Students and Graduates, Nonprofit Organizations, and Communities.” The authors note the historic importance of community service to American democracy. They then highlight the University of Utah’s MPA program, which has established partnerships with many community organizations and nonprofits. They describe the benefits of these collaborations to the students, the community, and the university as well as the barriers that often threaten successful long-term working relationships and integration of the partnerships into the curriculum. The Spring 2013 issue concludes with two book reviews. First is a review by Cynthia Jackson-Elmoore of The Art & Craft of Case Writing (3rd ed.), authored by William Naumes and Margaret Naumes. Second is a review of Cultural Competency for Public Administrators, edited by Kristen Norman-Major and Susan T. Gooden and reviewed by Christopher Koliba. Both reviews examine texts—one a classic and one a new entrant—that explore important skills or trends in public affairs education. vi Journal of Public Affairs Education From the Editor

A final note: Have you authored or edited a new or revised book or read a new book that you think should be reviewed in JPAE? We are looking for books of interest to our readers. If you know of such a book, please contact me. If I agree it is appropriate for JPAE, we will arrange to secure a copy for you to review.

— David Schultz Editor in Chief Hamline University [email protected]

David Schultz is a Hamline University professor in the School of Business and School of Law. Professor Schultz is a two-time Fulbright Scholar and the author of more than 25 books and 90+ articles on various aspects of American politics, election law, and the media and politics, and he is regularly interviewed and quoted on these subjects in the local, national, and international media, including the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, the Economist, and National Public Radio. His most recent book, American Politics in the Age of Ignorance: Why Lawmakers Choose Belief Over Research, was published in 2012 by Palgrave Macmillan.

Journal of Public Affairs Education vii viii Journal of Public Affairs Education Teaching Public Administration Conference Update

Leland Coxe University of Texas at Brownsville

The 35th Annual Teaching Public Administration Conference (TPAC) was held May 21–23, 2012 at the Isla Grand Beach Resort Hotel on South Padre Island, Texas. This event was sponsored by the University of Texas at Brownsville, an institution that serves one of America’s most impoverished regions, the Rio Grande Valley. UTB’s student body is 93% Hispanic, and promoting civic engagement has been a major priority of UTB’s president, Dr. Juliet Garcia. The Annual TPAC Conference offers the opportunity for professors, practitioners, and community leaders to share experiences while learning about ongoing research and activity. For academics, this event allows for approaching teaching, service, and scholarship as an integrated whole rather than as three separate aspects of their careers. The exchange of information and insights between academics and professionals can inform the policy process, enhance policy implementation, and generate opportunities for collaboration across academic institutions and community agencies. The theme of TPAC 2012 was “Diversity and Civic Engagement in Teaching Public Administration,” two important matters that are frequently treated as separate if not conflicting considerations. The importance of increasing civic engagement in the Rio Grande Valley is pointed out by voter turnout that is consistently below average for both the State of Texas and the United States. UTB’s efforts in this area have been recognized through its designation by the Carnegie Foundation as a community-engaged campus. The issues of diversity are also quite important for a university with a majority-minority student population. A number of presentations addressed how to create civic engagement in diverse settings, and the capacity of service learning to connect faculty and students to the larger community was examined both in papers and panel discussions. Cultural competence was the topic for several papers and panels, and Dr. John Cook of the University of Texas at Brownsville presented his experiences with the “Difficult Dialogues” initiative that has promoted civil discussion of divisive subjects as the keynote address. Two presentations for TPAC 2012 have developed into articles that are included in the current edition of JPAE. Dr. Margaret Stout outlines an integrated model for connecting academia with the larger community in “Delivering an MPA

JPAE 19(2), 197–198 Journal of Public Affairs Education 197 L. Coxe

Emphasis in Local Governance and Community Development Through Service Learning and Action Research.” Dr. Stout’s paper describes how a series of four courses provide community outreach for the university while offering students the opportunity to develop and exercise practical skills that relate the academic coursework to real situations experienced by organizations. Dr. Anna Ya Ni addresses the important consideration of the impacts of teaching technology in “Comparing the Effectiveness of Classroom and Online Learning: Teaching Research Methods.” This paper compares the results for measures of student performance and assessments of learning experiences for students enrolled in graduate research methods courses taught by the same instructor for both online and conventional classes. It was my honor to serve as chair of TPAC 2012, and I wish to thank all who participated for making this event informative, interesting, and engaging. My special thanks to JPAE for supporting TPAC and providing a forum for the publication of the outstanding papers from the conference. The 36th TPAC will be held June 3–5, 2013, at the Hotel Kabuki in Japantown, San Francisco. TPAC 2013 is being hosted by the University of San Francisco and Presidio Graduate School and is sponsored by the American Society for Public Administration (ASPA) Section on Public Administration Education (SPAE). The theme for TPAC 2013 is “Pedagogical Strategies of Building 21st-Century Competencies,” and this conference promises to offer a wide discussion of the impacts of social and technological change upon higher education. SPAE chair, Margaret Stout, encourages all who wish to pursue excellence in teaching and curriculum-driven research and service to attend.

Dr. Leland M. Coxe, Assistant Professor of Government for the University of Texas at Brownsville, served as the Chair for the 2012 Teaching Public Admini- stration Conference (TPAC). Dr. Coxe holds a Ph.D in Public Administration and Policy from Portland State University, and MPA from California State University - Long Beach, and a BA from Louisiana State University.

198 Journal of Public Affairs Education Comparing the Effectiveness of Classroom and Online Learning: Teaching Research Methods

Anna Ya Ni California State University–San Bernardino

Abstract As public administration programs extend their online education offerings to reach more time- and place-bound students, and as accredited institutions become interested in documenting teaching and learning effectiveness, the degree to which online students are successful as compared to their classroom counterparts is of interest to teaching faculty and others charged with assessment. By comparing student performance measures and assessments of learning experience from both online and traditional sections of a required graduate public administration research methods course taught by the same instructor, this paper provides evidence that student performance as measured by grade is independent of the mode of instruction. Persistence in an online environment may be more challenging in research methods classes than in other public administration classes. Furthermore, participation may be less intimidating, and the quality and quantity of interaction may be increased in online classes.

Two trends have recently converged in teaching public administration. As access to the Internet and World Wide Web has continued to grow, public administration programs have increasingly adopted Web-based instructional mechanisms. In the mid-1990s, the National Association of Schools and Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA) noted that only eight member MPA/MPP programs offered online courses, but the number almost doubled to 15 by 2003 (Ginn & Hammond, 2012). As of June 2012, the NASPAA website listed 39 member schools offering online MPA and related degrees, graduate certificates, and courses. A recent survey of 96 NASPAA-affiliated institutions indicates that around 40% of them offered hybrid or online courses, and about 24% had programs offering fully online courses (Ginn & Hammond, 2012). Nationwide,

Keywords: learning effectiveness, online teaching, online interaction, persistence

JPAE 19(2), 199–215 Journal of Public Affairs Education 199 A. Ya Ni online enrollment rates are expanding at much faster rates than traditional classroom enrollment growth; specifically, in higher education, online enrollments have grown 21%, whereas growth for traditional classroom instruction registers only 2% since 2002 (Allen & Seaman, 2007). Concurrent with the expansion of online education, higher education programs today are wrestling with how to respond to ever-increasing accountability demands. This issue includes the federal government’s concern with accrediting bodies producing evidence that students reach articulated learning goals (Suskie, 2004). Public administration programs are no exception. In 2009, NASPAA adopted new accreditation standards, demanding performance measurement throughout the public administration curriculum. For example, newly embraced standards now require programs to “engage in ongoing assessment of student learning for all universal required competencies, all mission-specific required competencies, and all elective (option, track, specialization, or concentration) competencies” (NASPAA, 2012, p. 30). As a consequence, these widespread interests and pressures push instructors to document learning effectiveness as well as to maintain their efforts at continuous improvement of learning outcomes. The development of these two trends merging in the contemporary education setting raises a question about the effectiveness of online courses, particularly as compared to traditional classroom learning and in relation to individual student needs, perceptions, and learning outcomes. This research explores the key issues of online, as compared to classroom, learning and compares the major dimensions of learning effectiveness of the two cases. This study focuses on the multisection experience of one instructor in a research methods course in a public administration program. In the following pages, the article reviews the literature addressing the impact of the learning environment and examines past studies on online learning effectiveness. The author then describes the research setting and methodology. Finally, results and discussion are presented following the investigation, drawing conclusions as to critical issues and presenting lessons learned and directions for future research.

Online vs. Classroom Learning Environment The impact of learning environments in relation to learning outcomes has constantly been explored by researchers of education. For example, Ramsden and Entwistle (1981) empirically identified a relationship between approaches to learning and perceived characteristics of the academic environment. Haertela, Walberg, and Haertela (1981) found correlations between student perceptions of social psychological environments of their classes and learning outcomes. Web-based technology has noticeably transformed the learning and teaching environment. Proponents of online learning have seen that it can be effective in potentially eliminating barriers while providing increased convenience, flexibility, currency of material, customized learning, and feedback over a traditional face-to-face

200 Journal of Public Affairs Education Comparing the Effectiveness of Classroom and Online Learning experience (Hackbarth, 1996; Harasim, 1990; Kiser, 1999; Matthews, 1999; Swan et al., 2000). Opponents, however, are concerned that students in an online environment may feel isolated (Brown, 1996), confused, and frustrated (Hara & Kling, 2000) and that student’s interest in the subject and learning effectiveness may be reduced (R. Maki, W. Maki, Patterson, & Whittaker, 2000). The following section examines two key differences of learning effectiveness— interaction and student performance—between the online and classroom learning environments.

Interaction An important component of classroom learning is the social and communicative interactions between student and teacher, and student and student. A student’s ability to ask a question, to share an opinion, or to disagree with a point of view are fundamental learning activities. It is often through conversation, discourse, discussion, and debate among students and between instructors and students that a new concept is clarified, an old assumption is challenged, a skill is practiced, an original idea is formed and encouraged, and ultimately, a learning objective is achieved. Online learning requires adjustments by instructors as well as students for successful interactions to occur. Online courses often substitute classroom interaction with discussion boards, synchronous chat, electronic bulletin boards, and e-mails. The effectiveness of such a virtual interactive venue is not without debate. Student-to-instructor and student-to-student interactions are important elements in the design of a Web-based course (Fulford & Zhang, 1993; Kumari, 2001; Sherry, 1996) because learners can experience a “sense of community,” enjoy mutual interdependence, build a “sense of trust,” and have shared goals and values (Davies & Graff, 2005; Rovai, 2002). Some scholars suggest that interaction in an online environment promotes student-centered learning, encourages wider student participation, and produces more in-depth and reasoned discussions than a traditional classroom setting does (e.g., Karayan & Crowe, 1997; D. Smith & Hardaker, 2000). Interaction in an online environment is less intimidating between individuals and also has less time pressure on students than does interaction in a face-to-face setting (Warschauer, 1997). Online discussions also can encourage more reticent students to participate to a greater extent (Citera, 1988). However, the advantage of online interaction may not be realized if close connection among the learners is absent. Haythornthwaite and colleagues (2000) found that students who failed to make online connections with other learners in their group reported feeling isolated and more stressed. McConnell (2000) provides a comprehensive comparison of the differences between online and face-to-face learning. Important differences related to interaction in the two modes of instruction are adapted in Table 1.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 201 A. Ya Ni

Table 1. Comparison of Interaction Between Online and Face-to-Face Settings

Online Face-to-Face Mode Discussions through text only; Verbal discussions: a more common Can be structured; mode, but impermanent Dense; permanent; limited; stark Sense of Less sense of instructor control; More sense of leadership from instructor; Instructor Easier for participants to ignore instructor Not so easy to ignore instructor Control Discussion Group contact continually maintained; Little group contact between meetings; Depth of analysis often increased; Analysis varies, dependent on time available; Discussion often stops for periods of time, Discussions occur within a set of time frame; then is picked up and restarted; Often little time for reflection Level of reflection is high; during meetings; Able to reshape conversation on basis of Conversations are less likely being shaped ongoing understandings and reflection during meeting Group Less sense of anxiety; Anxiety at beginning/during meetings; Dynamics More equal participation; Participation unequal; Less hierarchies; More chance of hierarchies; Dynamics are ‘hidden’ but traceable; Dynamics evident but lost after the event; No breaks, constantly in the meeting; Breaks between meetings; Can be active listening without participation; Listening without participation may be Medium (technology) has an impact; frowned upon; Different expectation about participation; Medium (room) may have less impact; Slower, time delays in interactions Certain expectations about participation; or discussions Quicker, immediacy of interactions or discussions Rejoining High psychological/emotional stress Stress of rejoining not so high of rejoining Feedback Feedback on each individual’s piece of Less likely to cover as much detail, often work very detailed and focused; more general discussion; Whole group can see and read each Group hears feedback; other’s feedback; Verbal/visual feedback; Textual feedback only; Possible to “free-ride” and avoid No one can “hide” and not give feedback; giving feedback; Permanent record of feedback obtained No permanent record of feedback; by all; Immediate reactions to feedback possible; Delayed reactions to feedback; Usually some discussion after feedback, Sometimes little discussion after feedback; looking at wider issues; Group looks at all participants’ work at Group looks at one participant’s work same time at a time Divergence Loose-bound nature encourages divergent More tightly bound, requiring adherence /Choice talk and adventitious learning; to accepted protocols; Level Medium frees the sender but may restrict Uncertainty less likely due to common the other participants (receivers) by understandings about how to take part increasing their uncertainty in discussions

Source. Adapted from McConnell (2000).

202 Journal of Public Affairs Education Comparing the Effectiveness of Classroom and Online Learning

Researchers also attempt to identify the link between online interaction and student performance. For example, Davies and Graff (2005) found that greater online interaction was not significantly associated with higher performance for students achieving passing grades; however, students who failed in their online classes tended to interact less frequently.

Student Performance Student performance is a multidimensional concept; successful completion of a course, course withdrawals, grades, added knowledge, and skill building are among some of the aspects. Nevertheless, researchers have been interested in differences in performance between the two modes of instruction. McLaren (2004) found significant differences in persistence between the two instructional modes, though no significant performance difference was noted as measured by the final grade. Carr (2000) reported dropout rates as high as 80% in online classes and suggested a rule of thumb that course completion rates are often 10 to 20% higher in traditional courses. This result can be attributed to the demographic that distance education students are frequently older and have more life obligations. It also can be attributed to the mode of instruction itself, because online classes are often viewed as easier to drift away from or sever ties with. Comparable performance findings were identified in different academic curriculums. Moore and Thompson (1990, 1997) reviewed much of this type of research from the 1980s through the 1990s and concluded that distance education was effective in terms of achievement of learning, attitudes expressed by students and teachers, and return on investment (1997). Harrington (1999) compared classroom and online statistics instruction for master’s-level social work students and suggested that students who previously have been successful academically can do just as well with a distance learning approach as can students in a traditional classroom course. Thirunarayanan and Perez-Prad (2001), in their study of education programs, found that although the online group scored slightly better than the campus group on the class post-test, the difference in performance was not statistically significant. L. Smith (2001) compared instruction in an MBA marketing planning course, providing descriptions of the differences needed in the two environments to achieve the same learning objectives. McLaren (2004), in comparing performance measures of an undergraduate business statistics course, provided evidence that the final grade for students who successfully completed the course is independent of the mode of instruction. Despite the proliferation of literature, performance measurement for online instruction is quite difficult and often problematic. For example, Brown and Wack (1999) point out the difficulty of applying a clinical experimental design to educational research and suggest the efforts to compare distance and conventional courses and programs are problematic, especially as distance and campus programs and populations are increasingly integrated. Within the limited amount of original

Journal of Public Affairs Education 203 A. Ya Ni research, three broad measures of the effectiveness of online education are usually examined: (a) student outcomes, such as grades and test scores; (b) student attitudes about learning through distance education; and (c) overall student satisfaction toward distance learning. Such research studies have often demonstrated weak designs, especially in control of the populations under comparison, the treatment being given, and the statistical techniques being applied (Moore & Thompson, 1990). A study by Phipps and Merisotis (1999) found that several key shortcomings are inherent within the original research on the effectiveness of online learning, including no control for extraneous variables (and therefore no demonstrable illus- tration of cause and effect), lack of randomization for sample selection, weak validity and reliability of measuring instruments, and no control for any “reactive effects.” It is important to note that, despite the proliferation of literature on online learning, there is a relative scarcity of true, original research dedicated to examining online learning effectiveness in the field of public administration.

Research Method The purpose of this study is to compare student performance in online and face-to-face classes in terms of interaction and efficacy in a public administration class. The study compares learning effectiveness in six (three online and three face-to-face) research methods classes taught by the same instructor in the MPA program at the California State University–San Bernardino from the fall academic quarter of 2010 to the spring quarter of 2012. The university offers a fully online program that parallels the traditional MPA program. Each of the nine required core courses is offered in two modes. The program requires all online courses to be comparable to their in-class counterparts. MPA students, based on their own needs, have the option to enroll in a course either online or face-to-face. They may complete the program with all online courses or all face-to-face classes; or they may take some classes online and others face-to-face. The Research Methods in Administration course is one of the required introductory classes in the program. Most students would take the class during the first quarter of their MPA program, and most of them have neither online learning experience nor experience with the program. A student may choose between online or face-to-face classes based on commuting distance, working schedule (for students in employment), and tuition difference (due to an additional fee for online classes) instead of previous performance in a different learning environment. This study uses student performance records from the six classes as well as student survey responses from two (one online and one face-to-face) of the six classes. Students’ participation in the survey was anonymous and voluntary. To provide comparable learning experiences across the two modes of teaching, the content and structure of the two types of classes were designed to be as similar as possible. Table 2 compares the content delivery mechanisms between the two instructional modes. Students in both online and face-to-face classes were given access to the Blackboard system. In the online classes, all course materials and

204 Journal of Public Affairs Education Comparing the Effectiveness of Classroom and Online Learning

Table 2. Comparison of Content Delivery

Mode of Teaching Online Face-to-Face

Readings other than textbook Online Online Multimedia resources Online Online Lectures Narrative PowerPoint Instructor and PowerPoint Discussions Discussion board Classroom interaction Group projects Online group setting Face-to-face groups Assignments submitted Online Online Quizzes Online Classroom Feedback to student work Online Online activities were delivered via Blackboard. In the face-to-face classes, required readings other than the textbook and multimedia resources (mainly video cases for discussion) were made accessible online. In addition, the instructor also requires the students to use the assignment function on Blackboard to submit assignments and retrieve feedback. Otherwise, classroom activities such as lectures, discussions, and group projects were carried out in the classroom. The main difference between the two types of class is the mode of interaction between instructor and students as well as that among students. This research explores two hypotheses: H0: There is no significant difference in learning effectiveness between online and face-to-face classes. H1: Online class differs from face-to-face class in learning effectiveness. The research attempts to assess the dependent variable—learning effectiveness— with multiple measures, including grades, self-evaluation of achieving learning objectives, and student assessment of online interaction.

Results Table 3 presents the grade distribution of the six classes under study. The observed and expected frequencies for student grades are shown in Table 4. The single student with a grade of Incomplete in the face-to-face class of spring 2012 has been eliminated from this analysis. A chi-square test of independence leads to a statistic of 8.16 (p-value .32). A separate chi-square test of independence by eliminating the grade F generates a statistic of 6.51 (p-value .37). Therefore, we cannot reject the null hypothesis: Learning effectiveness as measured by student grades is independent of the mode of instruction.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 205 A. Ya Ni

Table 3. Grades Comparison Between Online and Face-to-Face Classes

Online Classroom

Winter Winter Fall Spring Spring Fall Grade Value 2012 2011 2010 2012 2011 2010 N = 26 N = 28 N = 27 N = 19 N = 28 N = 24 A 4 6 5 4 4 3 3 A– 3.67 10 13 9 7 9 10 B+ 3.33 4 5 3 3 9 5 B 3 2 3 5 1 5 5 B– 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 C+ 2.33 1 D 1 1 1 Incomplete 1 F 0 3 1 4 1 1 1 Failing rate 12% 4% 15% 4% 4% 4% Average 3.52 3.49 3.22 3.55 3.42 3.49 without F Average 3.12 3.37 2.74 3.35 3.30 3.35

Two of the online classes have higher failure rates as compared to face-to-face classes (see Table 3). Ten percent of students failed in online classes, whereas only 4% did in classroom sessions among the six classes under study (see Table 5). Students who failed the class were often those who discontinued their study. This result is in agreement with findings from previous research results that the online classroom experiences a higher dropout rate as compared to face-to-face classroom (McLaren, 2004; Carr, 2000). Table 5 compares the failure rates of the research methods classes under study to that of the same classes taught by all instructors as well as to that of other public administration courses during the same period of time, from winter quarter of 2010 to spring quarter of 2012. The failure rate is calculated by including the withdrawals, by which students discontinue the class with legitimate reasons after the census. The results indicate that failure rate is consistently higher in online research methods classes no matter who teaches the class: 8% of students fail in online class as compared to 3% in face-to-face class in general. The discrepancy does not exist in a similar introductory course

206 Journal of Public Affairs Education Comparing the Effectiveness of Classroom and Online Learning

Table 4. Chi-square Test of Student Grades: Classroom vs. Online

Grade Classroom Online Total

A 10 15 25 11.66 13.34 A– 26 32 58 27.04 30.96 B+ 17 12 29 13.52 15.48 B 11 10 21 9.79 11.21 B– 1 0 1 0.47 0.53 C+ 1 0 1 0.47 0.53 D 0 2 2 0.93 1.07 F 3 8 11 5.13 5.87 Total 69 79 148

Notes. The grade of incomplete is eliminated from the test. Chi-square = 8.16; d.f. = 7; p-value = .32.

(Public Administration Theory and Practice), in which 8% of students failed in online classes as compared to 10% in face-to-face classes. The difference in failure rate is also not obvious in all other public administration core courses (including Public Administration Theory and Practice, Public Financial Management, Public Management Information Systems, Human Resource Management, Public Budgeting and Finance, Management of Public Organizations, Administrative Regulation, and Public Policy Analysis); these courses have an average failing rate of 5% in online classes and 4% in face-to-face classes. It seems that students are more likely to fail in online research methods classes. To obtain the student’s self-assessment of teaching objectives and evaluation of online interaction, a survey was distributed in two classes, one in the winter (online) and one in the spring (classroom) of 2012. Based on voluntary participation,

Journal of Public Affairs Education 207 A. Ya Ni the response rate is 58% for the online classroom and 53% for the traditional classroom section, respectively. Demographic information shows that online students are slightly older and more likely to have full-time employment (see Table 6).

Table 5. Comparison of Fails/Withdraws Between Online and Face-to-Face Class Across Curriculum From Winter 2010 to Spring 2012

Course Online Face-to-Face Research Methods courses Number of students 81 71 by one instructor Number of fails/withdraws 8 3 Percentage of fail/withdraw 10% 4% Research Methods courses Number of students 185 103 by all instructors Number of fails/withdraws 14 3 Percentage of fail/withdraw 8% 3% PA Introduction courses by Number of students 135 135 all instructors Number of fails/withdraws 11 13 Percentage of fail/withdraw 8% 10% All Other PA core courses by Number of students 745 924 all instructors Number of fails/withdraws 35 40 Percentage of fail/withdraw 5% 4%

Table 6. Comparison of Survey Samples

Online (Winter 2012) Classroom (Spring 2012) Class 26 19 Sample size 15 10 Gender Male 40% 50% Female 60% 50% Average 32.07 29.3 Full-time employment 93% 70%

208 Journal of Public Affairs Education Comparing the Effectiveness of Classroom and Online Learning

The Research Methods in Administration class has a set of instructor predeter- mined teaching objectives, such as • Intellectual level: Able to identify and read academic research and articulate theoretical orientations • Analytical skill: Able to explore/describe/explain social problems • Critical thinking skill: Able to critique research design and evaluate research results • Communication skill: Able to debate/discuss/present and write in academic and administrative style • Research ethics: Understand and able to practice researcher’s code of conduct The teaching objectives were communicated to the students both via the course syllabus and during the lectures. The survey asked the students to assess the effectiveness of the class in achieving the objectives on a scale of 1 (poor), 2 (fair), 3 (good), 4 (very good), and 5 (excellent) and then rank the importance of these objectives on a scale of 1 (very unimportant), 2 (unimportant), 3 (neither important nor unimportant), 4 (important), and 5 (very important). The result is presented in Table 7. Classroom students tended to evaluate and rank the five teaching objectives as more important than the online students did, but they assessed the effectiveness in achieving the five objectives lower than the online students did. The largest discrepancy occurs in the assessment on the effectiveness of improving writing skills. An explanation for this discrepancy is that online students are required to write more than classroom students, because most communication in the online environment is carried out by writing and then posting that writing. However, all classroom students considered that the learning experience was successful, whereas only 87% of the online students did so.

Table 7. Comparison of Student Evaluation of Learning Effectiveness

Online Classroom Learning Objectives Effectiveness Importance Effectiveness Importance Mean Mean Mean Mean Improving my intellectual level 3.47 3.67 3.20 3.78 Improving my analytical skill 3.60 3.47 3.30 3.78 Improving my critical thinking skill 3.67 3.53 3.30 4.11 Improving my writing skill 3.20 3.27 2.60 3.56 Improving my awareness of ethical issues 3.47 3.07 3.03 4.11 The learning experience was successful 87% 100%

Journal of Public Affairs Education 209 A. Ya Ni

A few design flaws in the research may explain the disparity of findings. First, though the learning objectives were embedded in course material, the instructor noted and emphasized the teaching objectives during the lectures from time to time in the classroom. Second, whereas the survey administered to the online class was distributed at the end of the quarter, the face-to-face class survey was distributed 3 weeks before the end of the quarter. Students at that time may not feel they have accomplished all the learning objectives. Third, the online section has a higher failing rate (12%) than the face-to-face section (4%). Students who failed the class may be predisposed to think that the learning experience was not successful. However, since the survey was anonymous and the research could not link the grades to the survey responses, the conjecture cannot be proved. To compare the effectiveness of interaction, the online students also were asked to evaluate the different aspects of interaction as compared to their previous classroom experience. Although most of them perceived no change regarding the different aspects of interaction and learning experience, more students concluded that the online experience was better than that of the traditional classroom instruction. The evaluation regarding the quality of interaction with other students had the most divergent results. Whereas some students commented in the survey that they were pleased or encouraged by other student’s responses to their discussion,

Table 8. Assessment of Online Interaction

In comparison to traditional Definitely Somewhat No Somewhat Definitely Mean classroom instruction, in this Decreased Decreased Change Increased Increased N = 15 online course The quality of my 1 2 6 2 4 3.40 learning experience The intensity of my 1 1 6 4 3 3.47 learning experience The amount of interaction 1 2 6 3 3 3.33 with other students The quality of interaction 1 4 5 2 3 3.13 with other students The quality of interaction 1 1 8 2 3 3.33 with the instructor The quantity of interaction 1 1 8 2 3 3.33 with the instructor My motivation to participate 1 2 6 2 4 3.40 in class activities My comfort level of partici- 1 1 4 5 4 3.67 pating in class activities

210 Journal of Public Affairs Education Comparing the Effectiveness of Classroom and Online Learning a few of them expressed frustrations about nonresponsive group members in the group project setting. The most significant affirmation about online interaction is regarding the comfort level of participation. Most of the respondents (60%) reported that the comfort level of participation increased in online class work (see Table 8). This result is in agreement with previous findings that the online environment is less intimidating and may encourage student participation (Citera, 1988; Warschauer, 1997).

Discussion Given that knowledge of online learning effectiveness in public administration education is very limited, this research intends to explore the critical issues related to online learning effectiveness rather than to provide strong empirical evidence supporting theoretical arguments. Although the study uses a sample from a single MPA program, since most MPA—and most master’s-level—programs include research methods in their curriculums, the study may offer some insights to similar classes and similar programs. The study controls some critical factors relevant to learning effectiveness, such as course content and instructor, but fails to control students’ personal traits and other exogenous factors. Despite the limitations, this study points to a number of critical issues about online learning and raises questions for further study. First, learning effectiveness is a complex concept with multiple dimensions; it should be assessed with multiple measures. Even though student grade distribution does not present significant differences between online and face-to-face classes in this study, the nuanced differences in student’s persistence rate and assessment of interaction demonstrate that the two instructional modes are not equal. It is necessary to direct more carefully delineated research efforts to explore the various aspects of learning effectiveness that can be affected by the online instructional mode. Second, the low persistence rate of online students in research methods class raises the question: Would online teaching be equally effective in different course? Some educational programs may simply not fit into an online setting (e.g., medical, physical education). Designers of online programs should take into consideration that online environment may have different effects on student learning in different courses. The low persistence rate also points to several research questions: What are the specific issues in methodology classes (i.e., theoretical concepts, specialized notations) that may affect student’s learning in an online environment? What courses in the public administration curriculum may be a better fit for online rather than face-to-face classes, and vice versa? How could we improve the design of an online course to be effective, especially for some topics that are more challenging in the online environment? The result also points to the importance of pre-enrollment counseling and post-enrollment advising. Pre-enrollment counseling may be used to eliminate students who may not persist through the program. The counseling may design a module to allow students to self-assess their likelihood of finishing the program

Journal of Public Affairs Education 211 A. Ya Ni by providing a clearer picture of the estimated time commitment and intensity of the program. Once students are enrolled, it is also important to retain them in the program through additional or continued advising. Advising programs may consider inviting student feedback for improvement, sharing successful student stories, teaching time management skills, and establishing student-to-student or faculty-to-student connections to eliminate the feeling of isolation in the online environment. For example, Frankola (2001) suggests that motivation, realistic expectations, highly integrated live sessions, and application of advanced technologies contribute to persistence in both the academic and corporate distance learning environment. More important, counseling and advising may put more emphasis on those courses that present more challenges to students to succeed. Third, the less intimidating virtual space may be used by traditional classroom sections to enhance participation. Most students nowadays are part of the so-called Net Generation that grew up with the Internet. Virtual space has been an integral part of their daily life. Face-to-face classes may exploit this venue to accommodate students who feel intimidated about participating in the classroom. Instructors may design supplemental online discussion modules (e.g., by using Blackboard discussion boards) to extend participation opportunities to those who may not open up as readily in the classroom. This approach may also enhance the quality of participation, because past studies show that an online setting may encourage in-depth and reasoned discussion (Karayan & Crowe, 1997; Smith & Hardaker, 2000). Last but not least, the difficulties in controlling exogenous factors make the learning effectiveness comparison between online and face-to-face classes a challenging task, calling for a more concerted research effort. Though this research has attempted to control several of those factors encountered—such as instructor, course content, and assignments—some exogenous factors, such as different levels of emphasis in course content and teaching objectives, could have biased the students’ self-evaluation of learning effectiveness. Carefully designed and implemented research may discover the nuanced differences in learning effectiveness between the two instructional modes.

Conclusion This study compares the effectiveness of online and classroom learning, attempting to go beyond grades and to include a logical assessment of interaction, effectiveness in achieving learning objectives, and student persistence. The results of this study indicate that although student performance is independent of the mode of instruction, certain courses (such as Research Methods in Administration) are more challenging to students who persist in the virtual environment than in the classroom. Furthermore, participation may be less intimidating and the quality and quantity of interaction may be increased in online classes. The findings have several implications for student learning, course development, and curriculum design. Online interaction can be used to enhance learning, especially for students who tend to be reserved in the classroom setting. In developing

212 Journal of Public Affairs Education Comparing the Effectiveness of Classroom and Online Learning online courses, we should realize that some courses may be more challenging to students who persist in the online environment. Course developers of such courses need to carefully analyze what are the specific subjects that may hinder persistence and supplement instruction with face-to-face consulting, advising, or tutoring. Although an online class offers a comparably effective learning alternative, we should recognize that online learning has its unique advantages and disadvantages. In curriculum design, we need to consider how to exploit and integrate the comparative advantages of different modes of instruction to specific courses by offering not only fully face-to-face or online but also hybrid classes to overcome the constraints of time, place, and resources. The implications also extend into the research and practice of measuring online learning outcomes. This research effort shows that we can constantly determine— through observations, surveys, interviews, and analyses of student demography and course design—what leads to a greater, more effective learning outcome. This approach, in turn, will contribute to the training of online instructors in methods and the designing of educational support programs that allow students to succeed in the online environment. As we continue to assess, improve, and therefore accumulate knowledge of teaching and learning effectiveness in an online environment, we hope that students, too, will achieve a greater understanding of and enjoy greater benefits from this new mode of instruction.

References Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2007). Online nation: Five years of growth in online learning. Needham, MA: Sloan Consortium. Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/pdf/ online_nation.pdf

Brown, G., & Wack, M. (1999). The difference frenzy and matching buckshot with buckshot. The Technology Source. Retrieved from http://technologysource.org/?view=article&id=320

Brown, K. M. (1996). The role of internal and external factors in the discontinuation of off-campus students. Distance Education, 17, 14–71.

Carr, S. (2000). As distance education comes of age, the challenge is keeping the students. Chronicle of Higher Education, Information Technology Section. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/free/v46/ i23/23a00101.htm

Citera, M. (1988). Distributed teamwork: The impact of communication media on influence and decision quality. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(9), 792–800.

Davies, J., & Graff, M. (2005). Performance in e-learning: Online participation and student grades. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(4), 657–663.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 213 A. Ya Ni

Frankola, K. (2001). Why online learners drop out. Workforce, 80(10), 52–60.

Fulford, C. P., & Zhang, S. (1993). Perceptions of interaction: The critical predictor in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 7(3), 8–21.

Ginn, M. H., & Hammond, A. (2012). Online education in public affairs: Current state and emerging issues. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 18(2), 247–270.

Hackbarth, S. (1996). The educational technology handbook: A comprehensive guide. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

Haertela, G. D., Walberg, H. J., & Haertela, E. H. (1981). Socio‐psychological environments and learning: A quantitative synthesis. British Educational Research Journal, 7(1), 27–36.

Hara, N., & Kling, R. (2000). Students’ distress with a web-based distance education course: An ethno- graphic study of participants’ experiences. Information, Communication, and Society, 3, 557–579.

Harasim, L. M. (1990). Online education: Perspectives on a new environment. New York: Praeger.

Harrington, D. (1999). Teaching statistics: A comparison of traditional classroom and programmed instruction/distance learning approaches. Journal of Social Work Education, 35(3), 343.

Haythornthwaite, C., Kazmer, M., Robins, J., & Shoemaker, S. (2000). Community development among distance learners: Temporal and technological dimensions. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 6(1). Retrieved from: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol6/issue1/haythornthwaite.html.

Karayan, S., & Crowe, J. (1997). Student perspectives of electronic discussion groups. THE Journal: Technological Horizons in Education, 24(9), 69–71.

Kiser, K. (1999). 10 things we know so far about online training. Training, 36, 66–74.

Kumari, D. S. (2001). Connecting graduate students to virtual guests through asynchronous discussions: Analysis of an experience. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 53–63.

Maki, R. H., Maki W. S., Patterson, M., & Whittaker, P. D. (2000). Evaluation of a web-based introductory psychology course: I. Learning and satisfaction in on-line versus lecture courses. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 32, 230–239.

Matthews, D. (1999). The origins of distance education and its use in the United States. THE Journal, 27(2), 54–66.

McConnell, D. (2000). Implementing computer supported cooperative learning. London: Kogan Page Limited.

McLaren, C. H. (2004). A comparison of student persistence and performance in online and classroom business statistics experiences. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 2(1), 1–10.

Moore, M. G., & Thompson, M. M. (1990). The effects of distance learning: A summary of literature. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 330 321.

Moore, M. G., & Thompson, M. M. (1997). The effects of distance learning (Rev. ed. ACSDE Research Monograph No. 15). University Park, PA: American Center for the Study of Distance Education, Pennsylvania State University.

214 Journal of Public Affairs Education Comparing the Effectiveness of Classroom and Online Learning

National Association of Schools and Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA). (2012). Self-Study Instruction. Retrieved from http://www.naspaa.org/accreditation/NS/selfstudyinstruction.asp

Phipps, R. A., & Merisotis, J. P. (1999). What’s the difference: A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. Washington, DC: The Institute for Higher Education Policy. Retrieved from http://www.ihep.org/Publications/publications-detail. cfm?id=88

Ramsden, P., & Entwistle, N. (1981). Effects of academic departments on students’ approaches to studying. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 368–383.

Rovai, A. P. (2002). Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks. Internet and Higher Education, 5, 319–332.

Sherry, L. (1996). Issues in distance learning. International Journal of Distance Education, 1(4), 337–365.

Smith, D., & Hardaker, G. (2000). e-Learning innovation through the implementation of an Internet supported learning environment. Educational Technology and Society, 3, 1–16.

Smith, L. (2001). Content and delivery: A comparison and contrast of electronic and traditional MBA marketing planning courses. Journal of Marketing Education, 21(1), 35–44.

Suskie, L. (2004). Assessing student learning: A common sense guide. Bolton, MA: Anker.

Swan, K., Shea, P., Frederickson, E., Pickett, A. Pelz, W., & Maher, G. (2000). Building knowledge- building communities: Consistency, contact, and communication in the virtual classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(4), 389–413.

Thirunarayanan, M., & Perez-Prad, A. (2001). Comparing web-based and classroom-based learning: A quantitative study. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 34(2), 131–137.

Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: theory and practice. Modern Language Journal, 8(4), 470–481.

Anna Ya Ni is an assistant professor of Public Administration at California State University San Bernardino. Her research focuses on e-government, information assurance, public–private partnership, organization performance, and learning effectiveness.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 215 216 Journal of Public Affairs Education Delivering an MPA Emphasis in Local Governance and Community Development Through Service Learning and Action Research

Margaret Stout West Virginia University

Abstract This paper describes an action-based model for a Master of Public Administration emphasis in Local Governance and Community Development, along with preliminary observations during pilot implementation. This series of four courses delivers substantive and sustained community outreach in a proven developmental process while providing students hands-on learning opportunities that build core professional competencies by putting theory into practice in a real-time, reflective manner. Students who complete all four courses are uniquely prepared to step into local governance activities that build community capacity and engage community stakeholders in collaborative planning and action. Readers are encouraged to adapt and adopt this integrated outreach, service learning, and action research model to most effectively meet these dual technical assistance and learning objectives.

This paper describes an action-based model for a Master of Public Administration emphasis in Local Governance and Community Development, along with preliminary observations during pilot implementation. This series of four courses delivers substantive and sustained community outreach in a proven developmental process while providing students hands-on learning opportunities that build core professional competencies by putting theory into practice in a real-time, reflective manner. Students who complete all four courses are uniquely prepared to step into local governance activities that build community capacity and engage community stakeholders in collaborative planning and action. The paper provides an orientation to service learning and action research, explains how curricular and community goals can be strategically matched, describes the

Keywords: service learning, action research, local governance, community development

JPAE 19(2), 217–238 Journal of Public Affairs Education 217 M. Stout model and its pilot, and draws conclusions about the model’s usefulness and the potential for replication in other place-based (as opposed to online) MPA programs. Based on the unique fit between community and student needs, the paper argues that MPA programs wishing to develop local governance specializations should consider adapting and adopting this integrated outreach, service learning, and action research model to most effectively meet these dual technical assistance and learning objectives.

An Evolving Approach to Service Learning and Action Research Community outreach from institutions of higher education began in large part with the federal land grant mission. When originally established by the Morrill Act of 1862, land grant institutions were charged with teaching, research, and outreach missions that focused on traditional disciplines (humanities, social science, and natural sciences) or agricultural and industrial development (Brown, Pendleton- Jullian, & Adler, 2010). Today, land grant universities are challenged to transform outreach and extension programs to fit conditions in which “the needs of the people in the workplace, the community and the home” have dramatically changed (Brannon, Morgan Dean, & Morgan Dean, 2002, p. 1). Therefore, contemporary extension services commonly offer programs in areas such as community engagement, technology innovation, and community, economic, and workforce development (Cote & Cote, 1993). To expand these evolving approaches, institutions of higher learning more generally are urged to “embrace new forms of learning and interdisciplinary inquiry that respond to the needs of the 21st century” (Brown et al., 2010, p. 10). Rather than relying on traditional extension programs, service learning and action research have become platforms for institutional outreach meant to have environmental, community, or organizational impact. Activities are designed to simultaneously produce curriculum driven learning outcomes, applied research knowledge, or both. In terms of learning, rather than stand-alone student or faculty engagement in outreach efforts, the emerging approach is to integrate service into course curriculum, moving the classroom into the community (Kellogg Commission, 1999b). In terms of inquiry, applied and action research are becoming more widely accepted academic purposes and methods, and they are increasingly integrated into both service learning and more traditional outreach efforts (Spainer, 1999). Such holistic approaches “strengthen the link between discovery and learning by providing more opportunities for hands-on learning, including undergraduate research” (Kellogg Commission, 1997, p. ix). They also produce stronger abilities to link theory to practice (Lambright, 2008). Taken together, the contemporary understanding of service learning is an “approach that integrates community service with academic study to enrich learning, teach civic responsibility, and strengthen communities” (Service-Learning, 2002, p. 15). The learning approach, whether called experiential, project-based, client-based,

218 Journal of Public Affairs Education Local Governance and Community Development or hands-on learning, has proven effective with students at all levels, from preschool through graduate school. Successful service learning establishes clear educational goals that require the application of concepts, content, and skills from the academic discipline at hand to relevant, current issues. Through application, students construct their own knowledge by using an experiential, inductive form of inquiry. Analytical reflection on those experiences fosters critical thinking and the linkage of theory and practice (Collier & Williams, 2005). This step has been noted as a crucial element of any experiential learning process (Cunningham, 1997), particularly for service learning (Imperial, Perry, & Katula, 2007). Service learning builds the ethic of public service and a habit of civic engagement that extends beyond academic and professional life (D’Agostino, 2008). As Madeline Kunin, former Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education said, “Service learning resurrects idealism, compassion, and altruism” (Service learning, 2002, p. 38). Thus service learning promotes skill development in what has been called emotional intelligence or humanistic caring (Killian, 2004; Kramer, 2007). When activities are targeted toward real-life problems and opportunities, students become engaged in and concerned about the policy issues most in need of active participation. Developing this interest and passion can countervail the shrinking of social capital that society is experiencing due to the loss of active citizenship (Putnam, 2000). It also stands to reclaim the public purpose of educa tion—to develop citizens, not just workers (Service-Learning, 2002). Perhaps for these reasons, federal policies like the National and Community Service Act of 1990 and the National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993 promote service learning at all levels of education and in community-based settings. These approaches to service learning and action research have been adapted and adopted at all levels of education and by both public and private institutions. Indeed, they have become the hallmark of a growing trend in higher education, and the university is now recognized as a key player in fostering civic engagement (D’Agostino, 2008). For example, many campuses have a community engagement office or Campus Compact office, which is a national coalition of more than 1,100 college and university presidents who are committed to fulfilling the civic purposes of higher education (Compact, 2011). Founded in 1985, the coalition has offices in 35 states with staff who promote public and community service that develops students’ citizenship skills, helps campuses forge effective community partnerships, and provides resources and training for faculty seeking to integrate civic and community-based learning into the curriculum. Programs like Campus Compact recognize that successful service learning requires collaboration not just among university participants, but between the university and the communities it serves. Traditional outreach approaches place the university in a reactive, therapeutic role—experts respond to problems or requests for assistance in a top-down, one-way fashion (Kellogg Commission, 1999b). In the worst-case scenario, experts select “target populations” that may

Journal of Public Affairs Education 219 M. Stout not even want intervention. In the contemporary approach, this role has been reconceived as one of social leadership and innovation for community and cultural change (Stephenson, 2011). As an initiator, the expert makes an invitation to the community to collaborate. One leading strategy is to increase connections among academic programs, commercial enterprises, government agencies, and nonprofit organizations in structured encounters for collaborative learning, planning, and implementation (Brown et al., 2010). However, the key to success and sustainability of such efforts is to employ facilitative leadership styles in which experts are on tap, not on top. As with all service learning, activities should be in response to genuine needs seen as important to the community (Service-Learning, 2002). The engagement process needs to be reciprocal: “two-way streets designed by mutual respect among partners for what each brings to the table” (Kellogg Commission, 1999b, p. 9). Providing outreach through action research and service learning activities helps everyone involved maintain this learning orientation, generating contexts that enable faculty, students, and community members to learn in a mutual, shared manner. This collaborative philosophy is congruent with the engagement purpose of creating a “learning society” (Kellogg Commission, 1999a). Furthermore, these community service purposes are well fitted to public administration curriculum.

Targeting Community Capacity The integrated model for outreach, service learning, and action research described herein focuses on building community capacity in tandem with an MPA emphasis in Local Governance and Community Development. It is critical that service learning objectives match associated learning outcomes (Dicke, Dowden, & Torres, 2004; Imperial et al., 2007) and community capacity building is a highly fruitful activity for building core public administration competencies. The activities involved in building governance capacity, engaging cross-sector stakeholders in collaborative planning, and community development action build competencies across all five domains required for accreditation (NASPAA, 2009). To fully illustrate, it is necessary to provide some background on the purpose of community capacity building. This section considers community capacity in three stages: nurturing readiness, building capacity, and harnessing capacity.

Nurturing Readiness The term community capacity refers to a community’s collective ability to foster and sustain positive change. The “collective” includes both individual and group units of analysis, including informal groups, organizations, networks, and geographic areas (Chaskin, Brown, Venkatesh, & Vidal, 2001). In sum, these units are the community’s assets (Kretzmann & McKnight, 1993). The factors that contribute to capacity are framed in the community development literature as community capitals, including natural environment, cultural, human, social (bonding and bridging forms), political, financial, and built environment types (Flora & Flora,

220 Journal of Public Affairs Education Local Governance and Community Development

2007). All of these capitals are interrelated and boundaries are not always clear, but when they are mutually supportive, all elements of community sustainability— environmental, economic, and social vitality—are fostered (Fey, Bregendahl, & Flora, 2006). For this reason, community capacity is often understood as resilience (Perrings, 1998). Community capacity must be understood both as a potential for positive change and the effect of its application. In other words, owing to the dual nature of community capacity, when it is measured in relation to community interventions makes a difference in how it is analyzed. For example, capacity as a potential means the abilities, commitment, and resources needed to take any type of community building action. It is described by concepts like conditioning influences (Chaskin et al., 2001), orientation (Denhardt & Glaser, 1999), or preparedness (Perry & Lindell, 2003). This readiness aspect of capacity has been explored most fully in the risk and prevention arenas (Donnermeyer, Plested, Edwards, Oetting, & Littethunder, 1997; Edwards, Jumper-Thurman, Plested, Oetting, & Swanson, 2000; Norris, Stevens, Pfefferbaum, Wyche, & Pfefferbaum, 2008) but is being explored in other types of community development and resiliency work as well (Chazdon & Lott, 2010; Foster-Fishman, Cantillon, Pierce, & Van Egeren, 2007; Miller, 1990). In short, if a community lacks sufficient capacity to take advantage of outside assistance, the investment will likely fall short of desired outcomes. In this sense, capacity is an independent variable. Thus community capacity is first measured through needs and assets assessment (pre-test) to determine baseline conditions and readiness for action. Various methods have proven fruitful in research based on the community capitals model (Emery & Flora, 2009; Fey et al., 2006; Marré & Weber, 2010). Student engagement in these activities builds competencies in contributing to the policy process, in addition to the analytical and critical thinking skills necessary for public problem solving. It is quite common that communities lack the human, social, and political capitals necessary to make the most of their natural, cultural, financial, and built capitals. Therefore, community development efforts typically begin with building those capacities to increase readiness for development activities.

Building Capacity Historically, a wide range of activities have been used to develop community capacity, including leadership training, community organizing, organizational development, organizational collaboration, and physical and economic development (Chaskin et al., 2001; Chrislip, 2002; Nozick, 1999). Virtually all of the initiatives undertaken by university outreach programs fall into these categories of activity. However, successful community and economic development initiatives must be sustained by the community once university partners exit. Therefore activities must be locally anchored, as noted in a White House directive that all federal programs become “place-based” in approach (Orszag, Barnes, Carrion, & Summers, 2009). Place-conscious planning and place-based programming refer to the notion

Journal of Public Affairs Education 221 M. Stout that social and economic investments must be driven by the specific needs perceived by a given community and must be targeted and well coordinated to achieve efficient, sustained, synergistic, and substantive impact. Based on community impact research, experts agree that “the prosperity, equity, sustainability, and livability of neighborhoods, cities and towns, and larger regions depend on…locally-driven, integrated, and place-conscious solutions guided by meaningful measures” (Orszag et al., 2009, p. 2). Indeed, this has been the strategy of successful community development corporations and their principal charitable funders for decades (LISC, 2011). Fortunately, this philosophical perspective is shared by both service learning and action research theory. To be community driven and produce results that are more socially and economically as well as environmentally sustainable, the experts on tap must build competencies in participatory practice. This effort is particularly critical in postindustrial rural communities “once dependent on such extractive industries and coal and timber—that are experiencing population decline, infrastructure deterioration, and limited economic development prospects” (Plein & Morris, 2005, p. 166). In these contexts, participatory planning and design can become a proactive economic development strategy. This philosophical perspective lends itself well to service learning and action research in collaboration with citizens, local government, nonprofit organizations, and volunteer associations. Facilitation of collaborative, participatory practices has become a specialization in the fields related to community development, including public administration, public policy, and planning and design (Fagence, 1977; Forester, 1999; King, Feltey, & Susel, 1998; Roberts, 2004; Sanoff, 1978; Stivers, 1994). The interpersonal communication skills and techniques for facilitating dialogue and deliberation have become widely recognized as a new requirement for preparation of public administrators and practitioners involved in local government and planning professions (APA, 2011; ICMA, 2011; NASPAA, 2009). According to facilitation experts, a process should be designed specifically for the purpose at hand (Kaner, Lind, Toldi, Fisk, & Berger, 1996). For the purpose of community building, processes are designed for getting to know one another and team building (Cain & Jolliff, 2010; Thiagarajan & Parker, 1999). For example, interactive icebreakers are often used to establish a basis for connection among individuals (West, 1997). Dialogue processes are used to foster storytelling and relationship building while deliberative processes are designed to seek consensus and integrative strategies. Techniques for these different purposes can be obtained from resources such as the National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation (NCDD, 2010), the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2, 2007), the Institute of Cultural Affairs (ICA, 2011), and the National Charrette Institute training (Pretty, Gujit, Scoones, & Thompson, 1995; Sanoff, 2000). Key activities involved in leadership and organizational development include training in governance roles, responsibilities, and collaboration for key stakeholders such as elected officials, citizen advisory board members, lead administrators, and

222 Journal of Public Affairs Education Local Governance and Community Development nonprofit board members. Student engagement in such activities builds competencies in articulating and applying a public service perspective, participating in the policy process, and communicating productively with diverse stakeholders. Key activities in community and economic development include planning, policy making, and project implementation. Student engagement in these activities builds competencies in contributing to the policy process, the analytical and critical thinking skills necessary for public problem solving, and the ability to communicate productively with diverse stakeholders.

Harnessing Capacity Once capacity is built, it must be put into action through community development policy and program implementation. Here, key technical assistance activities include implementation planning, project management, and resource development with cross-sector teams involved in collaborative governance. Student engagement in such activities builds leadership and management competencies while continuing to hone analytical and interpersonal skills. On the action research side, as community capacity is built through collaborative, participatory practices, we then begin to measure it as an effect or outcome of interventions. In this sense, capacity is a dependent variable and, over time, community capacity shifts from being the capacity to develop to the capacity to sustain. After implementation of outreach programs, service learning, or action research activities, change from the baseline measures in the various community capitals are measured through impact assessment (post-test); this in turn establishes benchmark data about needs and assets for longitudinal study and evolving community development activities. Further analysis attempts to determine which activities may have contributed to specific changes. This type of impact assessment must include individual and various group units of analysis, and it covers a host of indicators that lend themselves to multiple data collection and analysis methods. All of these characteristics lead to complexity in research design and methodology that requires collaboration across disciplines and research approaches for greatest success. But without this comprehensive view, it is difficult to know whether community engagement efforts generate an appropriate return on investment.

University Fostered Community Capacity Pulling these phases together, Figure 1 illustrates how outreach programs, service learning, and action research can be woven together in an integrated, longitudinal approach that builds and harnesses community capacity toward desired ends. Ideally, in seeking to serve a particular community (geographic or otherwise), applied research is employed to identify baseline community capacity. This information can be articulated broadly to both university and community-based government and nonprofit organizations. These stakeholders then implement appropriate capacity building strategies for the community through

Journal of Public Affairs Education 223 M. Stout outreach programs, service learning, or action research approaches. Such efforts can be delivered in either a concerted or an integrated fashion. Applied research can then be employed once again to evaluate specific outreach, service learning, and action research activities in both formative and summative fashions. Finally, overall outcomes can be measured periodically to determine the level of synergistic impact on community capacity over time.

Figure 1. Integrated Outreach, Service Learning, and Action Research Approach

Integrated Service Learning Action Research Approach

Program Evaluation

Service Learning Outreach Action Programs Research

Community Capacity

Needs & Assets / Impact Assessment

Delivering an Integrated Model This integrated model for outreach, service learning, and action research is particularly well suited to the MPA degree. Practice fields like public administration are charged with building specific sets of skills and attitudes as opposed to knowledge of a field alone—what are often referred to as knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) (D’Agostino, 2008; Whitaker & Berner, 2004). Furthermore, professionals are often responsible for producing applied research in practice, not just in academic contexts. In short, service learning and applied research in practice fields are particularly well suited to “developing the skills and competencies employers value—capacities to work in teams, solve problems, communicate clearly, and exercise ethical leadership” (Kellogg Commission, 1997, p. 36). Although MPA programs have a long tradition of field-based internships and capstone consulting projects (D’Agostino, 2008), extending application into other courses is increasingly

224 Journal of Public Affairs Education Local Governance and Community Development thought to hold value (Bushouse & Morrison, 2001). This is understandable given the shared mission of public service in both MPA and service learning programs (Dicke et al., 2004; Newcomer & Allen, 2010). Furthermore, based on the previous discussion, it is clear that specific community development activities stand to build all core competencies desired in accredited MPA programs (NASPAA, 2009).

Principal Collaborators In the pilot project presented herein, champions from the Extension Service and MPA faculty have come together to formulate a fresh, integrated approach to outreach, service learning, and action research. Together, they are working with a small city (population 9,500) to pilot the model during the 2011–2013 academic years (still in progress at this writing). The city requested technical assistance from the university in substantially revising its comprehensive plan. Because such social transformation is a particularly useful focus for service learning (Bushouse & Morrison, 2001), the request seemed a good fit as a pilot for themodel, and it is being supported by Campus Compact. Furthermore, comprehensive planning and implementation purposes provide a robust relationship with desired learning outcomes for local governance and community development competencies, which is a key consideration for project selection (Dicke et al., 2004; Imperial et al., 2007). The following subsections provide a brief background on the collaborators involved in outreach, service learning, and action research.

Outreach Partner The Extension Service hosts a unit focused on Community, Economic, and Workforce Development. The faculty working in community and economic development implement a variety of outreach programs, including baseline research to produce a Community Profile, a community assessment program called First Impressions, and a planning and design charrette program called the Community Design Team (CDT). The first two programs generate valuable information for the third and so have been employed in a serial, building-block fashion in the pilot project. Furthermore, the CDT represents in large part the apex of the outreach effort. As described by its founders, the CDT was launched in 1997 (Loveridge, 2008) as a “multidisciplinary group of volunteer professionals who donate their time to communities wishing to improve their future” (Loveridge & Plein, 2000, p. 11). With the team’s focus on design, landscape architects are principal players in place- making within the overarching purpose of community and economic development. However, this broader focus draws in experts in civic engagement, community building, land use and transportation planning, economic development, and local governance (Loveridge & Plein, 2000). The CDT is composed primarily of faculty and a few of their students, as well as professionals from around the state. Due to its success, “CDT has become a platform and inspiration to build other university outreach efforts” (Plein & Morris, 2005, p. 179).

Journal of Public Affairs Education 225 M. Stout

Service Learning Partner Like many MPA programs (see, for example, Bushouse & Morrison, 2001; Cunningham, 1997; D’Agostino, 2008; Dicke et al., 2004; Imperial et al., 2007; Killian, 2004; Kramer, 2007; Lambright, 2008; Lambright & Lu, 2009; Waldner & Hunter, 2008; Whitaker & Berner, 2004), the program in question has a tradition of rigorous service learning through internship placement requirements (500 contact hours) and inclusion of applied research, client-based learning, and capstone projects in its core curriculum. Indeed, this apprenticeship philosophy is perfectly suited to service learning and action research. Furthermore, faculty members helped found the CDT and have participated in the program since its inception. The faculty’s commitment to community development was further secured in its acquisition of an additional faculty line in 2008 for a hire with local and community governance expertise. The MPA plan of study includes 12 credit hours of electives (four regular graduate courses) that may be tailored to the interests of each student. In response to student and regional requests and with consideration of historical involvement in the CDT, a new area of emphasis was designed to prepare graduates for work in local governance and community development. Although the emphasis may include a variety of related electives both within and outside the MPA course offerings, a core series of electives is being offered within the program in a building- block fashion: (a) Local Governance; (b) Public Engagement & Collaboration; (c) Public Planning; and (d) Sustainable Community & Economic Development. The four courses are offered in sequence to match best practices in the community development process.

Action Research Partners The action research activities are undertaken by faculty and community-based partners in conjunction with students as assigned in associated service learning activities. In other words, all collaborators contribute to action research. The pilot project has emphasized development of the service learning and outreach program collaboration aspects of the model, but the long-term intention is to integrate the full complement of action research shown in Figure 1. In future applications of the model, the community capitals approach (Emery & Flora, 2009; Fey et al., 2006; Flora & Flora, 2007) will be employed to measure impact. This effort may include employing an external evaluation team. In the pilot, baseline needs and assets were assessed through community profile research, field observations of various planning issues, stakeholder meetings, a written Civic Index survey, and a series of open-ended community conversations. Student assignments also contribute to formative evaluation on community change through participatory community development. Students participating in the service learning elements of the project produce reflective journals after every fieldwork visit, contributing to an ongoing process evaluation of the pilot.

226 Journal of Public Affairs Education Local Governance and Community Development

Journals address how theory plays out in practice, lessons learned for future scenarios, and reflections on professional identity. Community stakeholder and student evaluations at the end of the course will contribute to this implementation evaluation, which is a common practice in service learning (Bushouse & Morrison, 2001). In addition, through participation in a Campus Compact initiative called Community LINKS, the pilot project is engaged in a process evaluation of the project conducted by an external evaluator through before and after focus group discussions with select project faculty, students, and community stakeholders in addition to group interviews across projects to discuss emergent themes.

Integrated Model Components The overarching purpose of the integrated model is to promote community development—an objective with a good fit for action-oriented approaches (Imperial et al., 2007; Killian, 2004). Following trends in community development theory and best practices for participatory planning and implementation noted in the previous section, the components of the model are (a) a two-year cycle of facilitative leadership and technical support outreach along a proven developmental path; (b) collaborative action research on community readiness and capacity for community development on a pre- and post-service schedule; and (c) curriculum-driven service learning activities in the MPA emphasis in local governance and community development. This approach is best suited to a community host that is in need of comprehensive planning and capacity building, as opposed to project-oriented technical assistance. Once such a community is identified, a memorandum of understanding is developed to ensure that both parties understand roles and responsibilities as well as expected deliverables (Bushouse & Morrison, 2001). This reinforces the client-based nature of the course (Waldner & Hunter, 2008). The model follows a two-year cycle of four semesters framed by the MPA courses, in tandem with appropriately matched Extension Service outreach programs. Although it may appear that curriculum is driving community development efforts, in actuality, the curriculum was designed to follow the proven, ongoing cycle of community development activities: (a) assess; (b) mobilize and organize; (c) vision and plan; (d) implement; and (e) evaluate (and return to step a). These activities build competencies across all five domains desired for accreditation (NASPAA, 2009). In this way, both community members and students build their capacity to conduct these activities in the most effective fashion. Students work both independently and as a team, in some cases alongside other university-based and community-based partners. This prepares students for real-world expectations of self-direction, teamwork, and inter-organizational collaboration (Killian, 2004) and builds both research and management skills (Whitaker & Berner, 2004). However, this type of approach is also highly ambiguous and leads to higher levels of stress and unpredictability (Jacoby, 2003). As a result, it is better suited to fairly mature students, as has been noted in the pilot implementation.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 227 M. Stout

The service learning components of the model have been designed considering best practices found in the literature, both general and specific to public affairs (Imperial et al., 2007; Lambright & Lu, 2009). Service learning activities are actively led by faculty, selected projects are closely integrated with course material, and students engage in regular reflection and critical assessment activities both individually and as a team. This approach differs from student-led team-based projects (Whitaker & Berner, 2004) that are more typical to MPA capstone courses, considering that students may begin the series of courses in their first semester of study. Students in both types of courses simultaneously note their appreciation of the faculty leadership.

Semester 1: Preparation and Assessment The first MPA course is Local Governance, which provides an introduction to the institutions and processes of collaborative local governance, considering the contextual political economy and legal structures. Institutions include government structures (county, municipal, special districts), volunteer boards and commissions, and various types of community-based organizations. As stakeholders within these organizations are identified, faculty and students begin mapping social network relationships among community members (Scott, 1991; Wasserman & Faust, 1994). This data is crucial to the second-semester activities. The integrated service learning activities include getting to know the actors, groups, organizations, and institutions through stakeholder meetings about the project. Furthermore, students help develop and deliver capacity building training in operations and collaboration to the governing body, executive staff, citizen advisory boards, and nonprofit organizations. As faculty and students engage with community members, capacity building needs at the organizational, group, and individual levels of analysis are identified for referral to various technical assistance resources. The reflective exercises used in service learning are highly valuable to this purpose, helping students make sense of what they are seeing in light of theory. Students return to the community at the end of the semester to present preliminary findings from the action research activities, building their interpersonal and presentation skills. The first action research step is to generate a profile of the social, economic, and environmental factors influencing the community’s political economy and institutions. A fairly comprehensive set of indicators includes the categories of community services and infrastructure; cultural and historic heritage and identity; economic opportunity; governance; health and well-being; social networks, civic engagement, and citizen participation; and the natural and built environment. Community profiles gather basic demographic and economic data available through existing sources like the U.S. Bureau of the Census or Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are derived on the lowest level available (city, county, region, or state). To complement this economic data, profiles also cover basic organizational

228 Journal of Public Affairs Education Local Governance and Community Development information on the local governments in the area, including the municipality, county, and special districts as well as citizen advisory boards and community-based nonprofit organizations and volunteer associations. All relevant plans and ordinances are collected for background, and consideration is given to the limitations placed on the municipality by statute. To get a sense of the quality of life, consideration is also given to the types of health and human services available to the community through both public and private sources. The community profile is augmented with field observation as well as information about civic capacity. For initial field observation, students and faculty participate as evaluators in the First Impressions assessment program during their first community visit as a method of forming their own sense of place in the host community. Students also gather and analyze baseline data on community capacity and readiness for development activities. Some general patterns, discovered through decades of research on community readiness and capacity for development, are assessed using the Civic Index survey developed by the National Civic League, which can be implemented either as a written survey or a focus group discussion guide, depending on the time available in the community. In the pilot case, a written Civic Index survey was used in both hard-copy and Web-based formats. Students build applied research skills through these various activities that either apply or augment those learned in research methods courses.

Semester 2: Mobilizing and Organizing The second MPA course is Public Engagement & Collaboration, which explores theories of community and causes of community conflict, and develops skills in techniques for engaging citizens, nonprofit, and government actors in collaborative community building, implementation, and governance. The integrated service learning activities include mobilizing actors, groups, organizations, and institutions in the host community toward collaborative action. These activities are guided by a Public Engagement Plan (PEP) for the city’s visioning and planning processes, developed and implemented by the students as a project team. The course curriculum is designed to cover a variety of techniques, while referring students to key resources for continuing professional development. Students determine how to leverage existing community meetings and make presentations to as many groups as feasible within travel budgets and schedules. Service learning visits include stakeholder meetings to present and approve the PEP; facilitation of Community Conversations; presentation of results; and establishing ad hoc community teams for summer activities. In the pilot community, summer activities included a One Book, One Community reading program and the start of a VISTA placement for community and economic development activities associated with the project. The opportunity to put theory into action to design a Public Engagement Plan and then actually executing that plan provides a whole new level of praxis the students deeply appreciate. They leave the course feeling ready to replicate the activities on their own.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 229 M. Stout

In contribution to action research, data gathered during the community conversations focus on not only civic capacity similar to the issues noted in the Civic Index survey but also on open-ended discussion of community challenges, opportunities, and treasures. These discussions comprise oral histories of the community that contribute to assessing community capacity and community-based planning and design. The conversations act as a bridge between the Civic Index survey and the forthcoming planning and design charrette in the third semester.

Semester 3: Visioning and Planning The third MPA course is Public Planning, which offers an introduction to the substantive range of public planning. The theoretical foundations include principles and practices of program, project, and physical planning with consideration of the local political and economic context. The integrated service learning activities include collaborating with the Community Design Team in conducting community-based visioning and comprehensive planning in the host community. Students facilitate and participate in the planning process according to the Public Engagement Plan developed in the Public Engagement & Collaboration course. Planning has become increasingly participatory as citizen demand has increased and facilitation technologies have advanced. For the purpose of visioning, processes are designed to produce divergent, expansive brainstorming (Kaner et al., 1996). For example, World Café (NCDD, 2010) is designed specifically for exploration that engages up to hundreds of people in tables of four in serial rotating configurations that enable cross-pollination of ideas over hours or even days, as does Open Space Technology (Owen, 2008). For the purpose of deliberation, prioritization, or decision making, processes are designed to produce convergent integration of ideas and consensus (Kaner et al., 1996). This supports the process of shifting individual perspectives into a collective vision (Selsky & Smith, 1994). If needed, processes for conflict resolution and transformation are used as well (Abigail & Cahn, 2010). In the pilot community, such conflict did emerge, and the students used a management technique that allowed both positions to be integrated into resulting plans. Plan elements include the issues that emerge during the participatory planning process. Typical areas of concern include land use and special districts; transportation; parks, recreation, and open space; housing; cultural resources and historic preserv- ation; economic development and tourism; and health and social services. Although their work is not necessarily in the legal format of a comprehensive community plan, MPA students prepare white papers on local policy issues identified in the Civic Index survey and community conversations and develop implementation plans for the recommendations and strategies developed during the planning process alongside community-based and CDT experts in various specializations. Recommendations for response strategies are formulated in strategic plan logic model format for use in comprehensive plans, implementation, and grant writing.

230 Journal of Public Affairs Education Local Governance and Community Development

Participatory planning activities are themselves a form of action research. The methods, including facilitated dialogue, accelerated real-time planning and design, interactive assessment presentations, and deliberation are all geared toward revealing both community and expert knowledge necessary to create successful strategies that celebrate place-based cultural and environmental history (Cohen- Cruz, 2005). Three such projects have been selected in the pilot host community that will implement strategies designed to meet economic development, parks and recreation, and transportation objectives simultaneously. As implementation plans are developed with stakeholders, capacity building needs at the organizational and group levels of analysis are identified for the fourth semester’s work with community-based project action teams.

Semester 4: Implementing and Evaluating The final MPA course is Sustainable Community & Economic Development, which explores the theory, principles, and ethics of economic, environmental, and social sustainability as applied to community and economic development activities. As planning moves into implementation, the objective is to complete at least one small-scale project to build momentum through success. The projects are selected from the logic models generated by the Public Planning course students, as prioritized and directed by community members. The integrated service learning activities include facilitating community-based action teams in project development, resource development, implementation, and management. In this course, the previously completed white papers, strategic plans, and logic models are used to generate actual grant applications for available funding sources identified by the students. The action research activities at this point need to set the stage for impact assessment over time. Measurable outcomes typically sought through community investment programs include (a) economic competitiveness and access to opportunity; (b) environmental sustainability; (c) community health; and (d) safety and security (Orszag et al., 2009). The specific indicators chosen for these outcomes and the particular strategies used to achieve them must be community driven and contextually specific in order to craft responsive, integrated solutions. However, as noted in the previous section, the intention in future iterations is to follow the community capitals approach.

Program Sustainability To ensure successful implementation without relying on community payment for services, as is required by Extension Service outreach programs, funding for the pilot project was acquired from the Campus Compact Campus Community LINK program to cover the direct costs involved. Direct costs consist primarily of equipment necessary for fieldwork, supplies needed for public meetings, and travel costs for faculty and students. Following the CDT approach, the community contributes by arranging home stays for multiday visits and providing refreshments

Journal of Public Affairs Education 231 M. Stout and children’s activities during community events. Furthermore, the community is responsible for associated Extension Service program fees. Similar fees could be charged in the future to replace the Campus Compact funds. However, just as Extension programs are heavily subsidized by the state budget for outreach, the model being piloted may ultimately need a similar source of stable funding. Rather than running such a program through departmental budgets, it will be most beneficial for funding to flow through an appropriate institutional center as a platform for collaborative outreach, service learning, and action research activities. However, it takes more than funding to sustain an academic program. It is critical for the approaches used in this model to be fully recognized within promotion and tenure procedures. Unfortunately, it is challenging to integrate teaching, research, and service activities in practice as desired (Kellogg Commission, 1999b) and then disaggregate them for performance review purposes (Glassick, Huber, & Maeroff, 1997). “Ideally, the institution should offer opportunities for outreach and blend faculty roles in teaching, research, and service” (Plein & Morris, 2005, p. 167). However, not all academic programs share this policy. Therefore, this is an issue that may need to be addressed before replicating it in other MPA programs. The longitudinal approach described herein requires a much more substantive investment from faculty members that will likely demand change in some performance review processes. Service learning, which demands substantially more effort than classroom pedagogies, must be given appropriate credit in review and consideration in student evaluations. Similarly, the products of applied and action research must be recognized as valid forms of scholarship rather than merely as contributing to community service. Such changes in faculty evaluation will enable a more robust and comprehensive approach to outreach missions, rather than limiting it to the silo of extension programs or to teaching faculty as opposed to tenure-track faculty (Harl, 2003). It also fosters the alignment of loyalties and interests between the individual faculty member and the land grant institution (Kellogg Commission, 2000) as envisioned by the late Ernest Boyer (1990). Therefore the pilot of this model provides an opportunity to identify or develop best practices for including integrated approaches to service learning and action research in promotion and tenure procedures.

Conclusions The integrated model for outreach, service learning, and action research described herein and its collaborative implementation across university units and community-based organizations stands to make a substantive contribution to best practices in the pursuit of the outreach mission, MPA service learning, and concentrations in local governance and community development. The service learning elements will enhance the value brought to communities in stand-alone projects and individual courses due to the comprehensive nature of the model and its extended two-year schedule. Community development timelines do not

232 Journal of Public Affairs Education Local Governance and Community Development typically fit the academic quarter or semester very well. On one hand, the advanced planning required by the academy is much longer than typical community preparation cycles—once a need is identified, community members want to move quickly to address it with technical assistance. In such cases, the model may not be the best approach. On the other hand, even a 16-week semester is not long enough to achieve substantive and sustained outcomes, as has been noted by other MPA faculty (Bushouse & Morrison, 2001). The participatory approach to community and economic development can take quite a bit of time to sprout and take root. As noted in the community readiness literature, premature action leads to less effective results, and technical assistance is likely needed in multiple phases of the developmental process, not just one. Scheduling outreach, service learning, and action research activities over two years with frequent visits is designed to resolve these issues. The moderate pace in the pilot community is proving to be about as aggressive as both community and university volunteers can accommodate and so appears to be an excellent compromise with those who are engaged as full-time project staff. Experience and learning from the research elements of the model will serve three principal purposes: (a) to expand knowledge of the measurable value of university outreach to local communities; (b) to fulfill increasing demands from community development funders for longitudinal impact assessment; and (c) to help faculty and service providers more strategically and effectively target future community design and development activities. Stand-alone program evaluations cannot produce this type of information (UnitedWay, 2005). Without broad-based, long-term, and comparative data collection and analysis, it is nearly impossible to determine what types of engagement or what types of community development activities achieve the most successful outcomes. Furthermore, program-specific needs and assets assessment cannot determine community readiness for successful intervention. Therefore we, as applied scientists and scholars, must seek to provide this needed information and guidance. This is perhaps the most important value- added item we can give to the efforts of communities, nonprofit organizations, and government agencies. However, the action research elements are also producing data for a pedagog ical case study on the model itself. From the MPA curricular perspective, pilot implementation of this model is producing measurable results in terms of building core competencies across all five domains required for accreditation (NASPAA, 2009). To reiterate, as students gather the baseline data to understand a community’s context, they build competencies in participating in and contributing to the policy process while developing analytical and critical thinking skills necessary for problem solving and decision making. As students help build community readiness for development activities through various training and survey efforts, they build competency in articulating and applying a public service perspective while developing a clear understanding of public leadership. As students help

Journal of Public Affairs Education 233 M. Stout mobilize and organize the community toward collaborative action, they build competencies in interacting productively with diverse stakeholders. As students facilitate stakeholders in collaborative planning, they build competencies in contributing to the policy process while further honing analytical and critical thinking skills necessary for problem solving and decision making. As students support stakeholders in implementing policies and programs, they continue to hone interpersonal skills while building leadership and management skills. An in-depth case study at the end of pilot implementation will detail precisely how the courses and assignments therein produce these outcomes. In sum, the broad-based purposes and activities involved in local governance and community development offer students ideal opportunities to build comprehensive public administration competencies. Therefore, other MPA programs are encouraged to replicate this model, as amended and appropriate to their own community contexts. Together, we can build community capacity while deeply enhancing student learning and increasing faculty applied research and knowledge production.

Acknowledgments The author thanks MPA graduate assistant Rachel Cramer for her research support.

References Abigail, R. A., & Cahn, D. D. (2010). Managing conflict through communication (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

American Planning Association (APA). (2011). AICP certification. Retrieved from http://www. planning.org/certification/index.htm

Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Brannon, P. M., Morgan Dean, R. Q., & Morgan Dean, J. C. (2002). Our land grant mission in the twenty-first century.Human Ecology, 30(1), 1.

Brown, J. S., Pendleton-Jullian, A., & Adler, R. (2010). From engagement to ecotone: Land-grant universities in the 21st century. Change, 42(6), 8–17.

Bushouse, B., & Morrison, S. (2001). Applying service learning in Master of Public Affairs programs. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 7(1), 9–17.

Cain, J., & Jolliff, B. (2010). Teamwork and teamplay: A guide to cooperative, challenge, and adventure activities that build confidence, cooperation, teamwork, creativity, trust, decision making. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.

Chaskin, R. J., Brown, P., Venkatesh, S., & Vidal, A. (2001). Building community capacity. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

234 Journal of Public Affairs Education Local Governance and Community Development

Chazdon, S. A., & Lott, S. (2010). Ready for engagement: Using key informant interviews to measure community social capacity. Community Development, 41(2).

Chrislip, D. D. (2002). The collaborative leadership fieldbook: A guide for citizens and civic leaders. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cohen-Cruz, J. (2005). Local acts: Community-based performance in the United States. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Collier, P. J., & Williams, D. R. (2005). Reflection in action: The learning-doing relationship. In C. M. Cress, P. J. Collier, & V. L. Retenauer (Eds.), Learning through serving (pp. 83–97). Sterling, CA: Stylus.

Compact. (2011). Campus Compact. Retrieved from http://www.compact.org/

Cote, L. S., & Cote, M. K. (1993). Economic development activity among land-grant institutions. Journal of Higher Education, 64(1), 55–73.

Cunningham, B. (1997). Experential learnng in public administration education. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 3(2), 219–227.

D’Agostino, M. J. (2008). Fostering a civically engaged society: The university and service learning. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 14(2), 191–204.

Denhardt, R. B., & Glaser, M. A. (1999). Communities at risk: A community perspective on urban social problems. National Civic Review, 88(2), 145–153.

Dicke, L., Dowden, S., & Torres, J. (2004). Successful service learning: A matter of ideology. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 10(3), 199–208.

Donnermeyer, J. F., Plested, B. A., Edwards, R. W., Oetting, G., & Littethunder, L. (1997). Community readiness and prevention programs. Journal of the Community Development Society, 28(1), 65–83.

Edwards, R. W., Jumper-Thurman, P., Plested, B. A., Oetting, E. R., & Swanson, L. (2000). Community readiness: Research to practice. Journal of Community Psychology, 28(3), 291–307.

Emery, M., & Flora, C. (2009). Spiraling-up: Mapping community transformation with community capitals framework. Community Development, 37(1), 19–35.

Fagence, M. (1977). Citizen participation in planning. New York: Pergamon.

Fey, S., Bregendahl, C., & Flora, C. (2006). The measurement of community capitals through research: A study conducted for the Claude Worthington Benedum Foundation by the North Central Regional Center for Rural Development. Online Journal of Rural Research and Policy, 1(1), 1–28.

Flora, C., & Flora, J. L. (2007). Rural communities: Legacy and change (3rd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Forester, J. (1999). The deliberative practitioner: Encouraging participatory planning processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Foster-Fishman, P. G., Cantillon, D., Pierce, S. J., & Van Egeren, L. A. (2007). Building an active citizenry: The role of neighborhood problems, readiness, and capacity for change. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39, 91–106.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 235 M. Stout

Glassick, C. E., Huber, M. T., & Maeroff, G. I. (1997). Scholarship assessed: Evaluation of the professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Harl, N. E. (2003). Relevance of the land grant mission in the twenty-first century. Paper presented at the Unknown, Manhattan, KS.

Institute of Cultural Affairs (ICA). (2011). ICA Certified ToP Facilitator Program. Retrieved from http://www.ica-usa.org/?page=topfacilitator

International Association for Public Participation (IAP2). (2007). Spectrum of public Participation (p. 1). Thornton, CO: Author.

International City/County Management Association (ICMA). (2011). ICMA University. Retrieved from http://icma.org/en/university/home

Imperial, M. T., Perry, J. L., & Katula, M. C. (2007). Incorporating service learning into public affairs programs: Lessons from the literature. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 13(2), 243–264.

Jacoby, B. (2003). Fundamentals of service learning partnerships. In B. Jacoby (Ed.), Buildng partnerships for service learning (pp. 1–29). San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.

Kaner, S., Lind, L., Toldi, C., Fisk, S., & Berger, D. (1996). Facilitator’s guide to participatory decision- making. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.

Kellogg Commission. (1997). Returning to our roots: The student experience. In Kellogg Commission on the future of state and land-grant universities (Vol. 1, pp. 1–41). New York: National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges.

———. (1999a). Returning to our roots: A learning society. In Kellogg Commission on the future of state and land-grant universities (Vol. 4, pp. 1–53). New York: National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges.

———. (1999b). Returning to our roots: The engaged institution. In Kellogg Commission on the future of state and land-grant universities (Vol. 3, pp. 1–57). New York: National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges.

———. (2000). Returning to our roots: A coherent campus culture. In Kellogg Commission on the future of state and land-grant universities (Vol. 5, pp. 1–58). New York: National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges.

Killian, J. (2004). Pedagogical experimentation: Combining traditional, distance, and service learning techniques. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 10(3), 209–224.

King, C. S., Feltey, K. M., & Susel, B. O. (1998). The question of participation: Toward authentic participation in public administration. Public Administration Review, 58(4), 317–326.

Kramer, R. (2007). How might action learning be used to develop the emotional intelligence and leadership capacity of public administrators? Journal of Public Affairs Education, 13(2), 205–242.

Kretzmann, J. P., & McKnight, J. L. (1993). Building communities from the inside out: A path toward finding and mobilizing a community’s assets. Chicago: ACTA Publications.

Lambright, K. T. (2008). Lessons outside of the classroom: Examining the effectiveness of service learning projects at achieving learning objectives. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 14(2), 205–217.

236 Journal of Public Affairs Education Local Governance and Community Development

Lambright, K. T., & Lu, Y. (2009). What impacts the learning in service learning? An examination of project structure and student characteristics. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 15(4), 425–444.

Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC). (2011). Retrieved from http://www.lisc.org/

Loveridge, S. (2008). Strategies for economic development partnerships with institutions of higher learning. In D. Nizalov, L. Reese, & H. Ockman (Eds.), Municipal development toolkit. Retrieved from http://www.municipaltoolkit.org/en/about/

Loveridge, S., & Plein, L. C. (2000). Catalyzing local leadership and infrastructure development. In P. V. Schaefer & S. Loveridge (Eds.), Small town and rural economic development: A case studies approach (pp. 11–20). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

Marré, A. W., & Weber, B. A. (2010). Assessing community capacity and social capital in rural America: Lessons from two rural observatories. Community Development, 41(1), 92–107.

Miller, M. A. (1990). Exploring rural community readiness for participation in community and natural resource development extension education programs. Columbus: The Ohio State University.

National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administraiton (NASPAA). (2009). NASPAA Accreditation Standards. Washington, DC: Author.

National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation (NCDD). (2010). Resource Guide for Public Engagement. Boiling Springs, PA: Author.

Newcomer, K. E., & Allen, H. (2010). Public service education: Adding value in the public interest. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 16(2), 207–229.

Norris, F. H., Stevens, S. P., Pfefferbaum, B., Wyche, K. F., & Pfefferbaum, R. L. (2008). Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41, 127–150.

Nozick, M. (1999). Sustainable development begins at home: Community solutions to global problems. In J. T. Pierce & A. Dale (Eds.), Communities, development and sustainability across Canada (pp. 3–26). Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Press.

Orszag, P. R., Barnes, M., Carrion, A., & Summers, L. (2009). Memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies. Washington, DC: The White House.

Owen, H. (2008). Open space technology: A user’s guide (3rd ed.; revised, expanded, updated). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Perrings, C. (1998). Resilience in the dynamics of economy-environment systems. Environmental and Resource Economics, 11(3–4), 503–520.

Perry, R. W., & Lindell, M. K. (2003). Preparedness for emergency response: Guidelines for the emergency planning process. Disasters, 27(4), 336–350.

Plein, L. C., & Morris, J. (2005). Promoting smart growth through participation and partnership: The community design team in rural West Virginia. In W. Wiewel & G.-J. Knaap (Eds.), Partnerships for smart growth:University-community collaboration for better public places (pp. 165–180). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Pretty, J., Gujit, I., Scoones, I., & Thompson, J. (1995). Participatory learning and action: A trainer’s guide. London, England: International Institute for Environment and Development.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 237 M. Stout

Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Roberts, N. (2004). Public deliberation in an age of direct citizen participation. American Review of Public Administration, 34(4), 315–353.

Sanoff, H. (1978). Designing with community participation. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Sanoff, H. (2000). Community participation methods in design and planning. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Scott, J. (1991). Social network analysis. London: Sage.

Selsky, J. W., & Smith, A. E. (1994). Community entrepreneurship: A framework for social change leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 5(3–4), 277–296.

Service-Learning. (2002). Learning in deed: The power of service-learning for American Schools (pp. 1–58). Newton, MA: National Commission on Service-Learning.

Spainer, G. B. (1999). Enhancing the quality of life: A model for the 21st century land-grant university. Applied Developmental Science, 3(4), 199–205.

Stephenson, M. J. (2011). Conceiving land grant university community engagement as adaptive leadership. Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning, 61(1), 95–108.

Stivers, C. (1994). The listening bureaucrat: Responsiveness in public administration. Public Admini stration Review, 54(4), 364–369.

Thiagarajan, S., & Parker, G. (1999). Teamwork and teamplay: Games and activities for building and training teams. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeffer.

United Way. (2005). Connecting program outcomes measurement to community impact. Alexandria, VA: United Way of America.

Waldner, L. S., & Hunter, D. (2008). Client-based courses: Variations in service learning. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 14(2), 219–239.

Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social networks analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

West, E. (1997). 201 Icebreakers: group mixers, warm-ups, energizers, and playful activities. Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill.

Whitaker, G. E., & Berner, M. (2004). Learning through action: How MPA public service team projects help students learn research and management skills. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 10(4), 279–294.

Margart Stout is an assistant professor of Public Administration at West Virginia University. Her research explores the role of public and nonprofit practitioners in achieving democratic social and economic justice with specificinterests in administrative theory, public service leadership and ethics, and sustainable community development.

238 Journal of Public Affairs Education Departments of Public Administration and Colleges of Business Administration: Allies or Aliens?

Lauren N. Bowman and James R. Thompson University of Illinois–Chicago

Abstract With many universities facing pressures to economize, proposals for the restructuring and consolidation of academic units have become common. Departments of public administration are particularly susceptible to such maneuvers, given the interdisciplinary nature of the field and the absence of consensus over the best structural configuration for the departments. One configuration that has attracted the attention of university administrators is the co-location of departments of public administration and those related to business administration. Yet, little research is available on the implications of this structural arrangement for public administration programs. This paper reviews the experiences of public administration programs that are currently located in business schools as well as those that have left business schools. The authors identify multiple advantages and disadvantages of this arrangement as well as the impediments to a successful partnership. They also present two models that illustrate commonly found configurations.

Since the early years of public administration (PA) as a discipline, scholars have posed various fundamental questions about everything from the identity of the field to the research topics that are most vital to the field’s advancement. With no consensus on answers, these questions recur with some regularity while other less rarefied topics remain unexamined. One issue that has not been explored in depth is the location of public administration programs within university structures. A review of program location reveals that, of the programs accredited by NASPAA (National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration) in the United States, 54 are currently located in schools or colleges of public affairs, 14 in colleges or schools of business, and 72 in other colleges or schools (such as

Keywords: public administration, pedagogy, public-private, business school

JPAE 19(2), 239–261 Journal of Public Affairs Education 239 L. N. Bowman & J. R. Thompson arts and sciences). These numbers change over time as university structures evolve, a process that has been accelerated due to financial strains associated with the economic recession. Public universities in particular are facing reduced government support and many have consolidated programs and colleges in a quest for greater efficiency (Wiseman, 2011). As restructuring efforts become more widespread, it becomes important to understand the ramifications of these new arrangements for individual programs. In this paper, we seek to better understand the possible consequences of one particular structure, the inclusion of public administration programs in business schools. This configuration is of particular interest because business schools provide a logical new home for public administration programs that are displaced due to restructuring efforts. This configuration is also of interest in light of the expansion of public-private contacts coincident with the shift toward “network” governance (Kettl, 2002). The new model features collaborative arrangements between government agencies and for-profit as well as nonprofit entities in the delivery of service. For-profit entities, for example, now operate correctional institutions as well as public schools in some jurisdictions (Goldsmith & Eggers, 2004). This growing interdependence highlights the need for research into factors and considerations that facilitate mutually beneficial public-private engagement, particularly in light of recent partnerships that have come to unfortunate ends.1 Such research, as well as research into related phenomena including economic development and the private funding of public infrastructure, could benefit from the co-location of faculties from the public and business administration disciplines. This article reports the results of an investigation into the experiences of public administration programs that are currently in business schools as well as those of public administration programs that have left business schools. Our focus is on whether and to what extent members of the public administration faculty perceive being part of a business school as advantageous to their welfare and that of their program. The research questions that drove our inquiry are presented subsequent to a review of trends governing the location of public administration programs within university structures.

Whither Public Administration? The appropriate location of public administration as a discipline has long been a matter of contention. When the study of public administration migrated out of municipal research bureaus into a university setting, many programs were initially located in departments of political science and remained there throughout the 1950s and early 1960s (Ingraham & Zuck, 1996). By the early 1950s, of the 105 universities offering public administration courses, 68 housed them in political science departments, 16 were in research institutes, and 6 were housed in other schools (the rest were subject to other, varied institutional arrangements; Ingraham & Zuck, 1996). However, public administration’s political science roots

240 Journal of Public Affairs Education PA Departments and Business Schools: Allies or Aliens? became attenuated after the field expanded to include ideas drawn from disciplines such as psychology, economics, and sociology (Frederickson & Smith, 2003). By the late 1960s, a movement emerged advocating “generic” administration, a perspective based on the belief that overarching aspects of administration span all institutional settings including public, private, and nonprofit organizations (L. Henry, 1975). Well-known public administration and business scholars wrote about generic administration as a path for progress in administrative studies and suggested that schools of generic administration would provide the best incubators for knowledge growth in this area (Litchfield, 1956; Yoon, 1968). Litchfield distilled this rationale rather succinctly in an article in Administrative Science Quarterly by arguing that theory had failed to achieve a desirable degree of generalization that could account for similar administrative issues occurring in different settings. The author also lamented that structure was to blame, as it had made “a general theory more difficult of attainment by developing separate schools in these fields in our universities” (1956, p. 7). Some universities responded to such arguments by creating schools of generic administration including public administration. Henry’s history of NASPAA provides some insight into the rise of generic schools of management (N. Henry, 1995):

On several campuses, public administration graduate programs were being organized in, or reorganized into, combined professional schools, where they almost invariably became the junior partners. Particularly threatening to the public administration programs in such situations was a strong movement for accreditation of business schools through the American Association of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB). A number of leading business school deans proposed that AACSB standards and accreditation reviews include the public administration programs in the combined schools.

For the most part, however, these schools did not last (Frederickson & Smith, 2003). The only real generic school of administration still in existence is the Atkinson Graduate School of Management at Willamette University. L. Henry (1975) points to a lack of consideration for the distinctly public aspect of public administration as the death knell of generic schools of administration. Schools of business administration replaced many of these schools; and though some continued to house public administration, they abandoned the pretense that administration is similar across sectors. With the view that political science should be the disciplinary home of public administration programs in universities no longer widely held and the short-lived turn toward generic administration mostly dead, public administration programs no longer had an agreed-upon place within the American university structure. Public administration programs were instead dispersed throughout a variety of

Journal of Public Affairs Education 241 L. N. Bowman & J. R. Thompson colleges such as arts and sciences, public affairs, or business. At the same time, the Master of Business Administration (MBA) was gaining ground as the central degree in American business schools (Pfeffer & Fong, 2002). The argument for co-locating the MPA and MBA programs relied on their dual focus on “administration” as well as their professional orientation. Our purpose is to better understand the dynamics surrounding the relationships between the two programs as well as between the departments they are part of.

Methods and Data To better understand the advantages and disadvantages for departments of public administration of being located within schools of business administration, interviews were conducted with individuals who have participated in those arrangements.2 The initial protocol called for interviews with three representatives from each school, the current or former dean of the business school, the head of the business administration program, and the head of the public administration program. Some deans and heads of business administration were not willing to take part in the study; where appropriate, we relied instead on “snowball” sampling to locate additional participants. The participants were chosen from NASPAA-accredited master of public administration programs that are currently located in business schools or were located in business schools but have left since 1995. We interviewed participants from a total of 12 institutions, eight with public administration programs that are currently located in business schools and four that were previously in business schools. The public administration programs included in the study are geographi cally diverse, representing universities located across the United States. The participating programs represent all NASPAA-defined size categories, from 0–50 students to 401–550 students. The full population of schools that participants were drawn from is listed in Table 1. Although 15 of our 19 interviews were with public administration faculty, we were able to gain the cooperation of two business faculty and two deans of colleges with combined programs. Of the 12 institutions represented in the study, we interviewed the current or former head of the public administration department at 11. Our premise was that because of their position, these individuals were best positioned to assess the relationship between their unit and the rest of the college. Where appropriate, we reviewed school and program websites to confirm the validity of information provided by participants, such as the existence of joint academic programs and the respective sizes of the business and public admini stration faculty. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted in August, September, and October of 2011 and were later coded using computer software to systematically identify recurring themes. Some participants provided supplemental materials to augment the information provided in the course of their interviews.

242 Journal of Public Affairs Education PA Departments and Business Schools: Allies or Aliens?

Table 1. Public Administration Programs Currently or Previously Located in a Business School

Public Administration Programs Currently Public Administration Programs Formerly Located in Business Schools Located in a Business School Brigham Young University** Northern Kentucky Louisiana State University** University of Arizona U of Missouri–Kansas City University of New Mexico CSU–Bakersfield Ohio State University CSU–San Bernardino University of Nevada–Las Vegas CSU–Dominguez Hills University of Louisville University of North Dakota George Washington University University of La Verne City University of New York–Baruch College Old Dominion University University of Maine Governors State University Long Island University, C.W. Post Campus Suffolk University** Kean University Long Island University–Brooklyn Willamette University*

Note. Includes only NASPAA-accredited programs. * Offers an MBA with a specialization in public administration ** Has some degree of structural autonomy

Findings The research was guided by the following questions (see Appendix A for a complete list of interview questions): • What are the areas of compatibility and incompatibility between departments of public administration and colleges of business administration? • What are the advantages and disadvantages for a department of public administration of being located within a college of business? • Are there systemic impediments to a harmonious relationship between departments of public administration and colleges of business administration? • How can adverse aspects of the arrangement be mitigated/How can positive advantage of the arrangement be taken?

Journal of Public Affairs Education 243 L. N. Bowman & J. R. Thompson

Areas of Compatibility Multiple areas of compatibility between business and public administration programs, many of them centered on course content and teaching method, were identified. Although there is a great deal of literature outlining their differences, business and public administration are substantively similar in many respects. Both public and business administration students learn about management, including topics such as personnel management, organization behavior, innovative management techniques, and information technology. Interviewees from both public and business administration acknowledged these compatibilities. A participant from an MBA program in a business school that currently houses a public administration program commented on how public administration faculty are able to work with accounting faculty to produce course content: “We have for instance accounting for nonprofits. We work with the public administration people on that. So public and not-for-profit finance, not-for-profit accounting and control—we work together on it.” An emphasis on practical skills also provides a level of consonance between public administration and business coursework (Ventriss, 1991). In his analysis, Wooldridge (1987) notes that both private and public workers need well-developed management skills. Because the subject matter being taught is similar, public administration students can take business courses that are skill oriented, and vice versa. Wooldridge (1987) also notes that the need to impart management skills to public administration students qualifies such programs as professional education, as distinct from more academic pursuits such as in the humanities. A participant from a public administration program that was once located in a business school highlighted this shared orientation toward training professionals:

I would say there were several things that made having public administration in a business school positive. One was the emphasis was on professional programs like an MBA and MGA [Master of Governmental Administration] or a masters in accounting. The professional ethic of higher education was shared.

Another participant from a public administration program that is currently located in a business school characterized business and public administration programs similarly, saying they have a “heavy emphasis on applied, pragmatic, skill-based learning in almost every class.” Both business and public administration also engage in similar styles of pedagogy. A PA-based participant from a program that has moved out of a business school noted:

The mode of pedagogy was similar, case studies, group projects, client- based projects, and that sort of thing were very common in business schools as they would be in public administration but not necessarily in political science or in an arts and sciences domain.

244 Journal of Public Affairs Education PA Departments and Business Schools: Allies or Aliens?

Notwithstanding these compatibilities, we did not find a significant degree of course sharing. We had expected that MPA and MBA programs located within the same college would benefit by having students take each other’s courses, particularly on subjects where sectoral context is of little consequence— for example, regarding the use of technology in the workplace and operations research. However, we found little such crossover at the schools included in the study. In part this was due to a simple preference by faculties on both sides to control their own curriculum. For example, one interviewee commented, “There’s always some sense of, ‘I’m not sure that I want your people teaching my people.’” In addition, interviewees commented that even with topics that were not overtly sector specific, the cases and examples employed were generally from the sector that the instructor was affiliated with. One public administration faculty member commented:

For example, in some of the basic accounting courses or even some of the basic management courses, the cases, the examples that were used tended to come out of business. They had very little relevance to the students who were on the public administration side. Then if they were public administration examples, the business students balked.

Though we found little student crossover, we did find instances of public administration faculty teaching ethics courses for both business and public administration students.

Areas of Incompatibility Although compatibilities are mostly concentrated in the areas of teaching and coursework, incompatibilities tend to span many aspects of academic life. One major incompatibility relates to the role of government: Government is seen by many business faculty as hostile to the essential enterprise of business and to the free market in general. Considering the emphasis in the business literature on profitability and on the cost of government regulation and in the public administration literature on concerns such as equity and democracy, this view is not entirely unexpected (Allison, 1992; Ira, 2009; Leone, 1977; Martin & Lodge, 1975). This difference was widely cited by PA-affiliated interviewees.3 One participant from a public administration program that left a business school connected this difference in viewpoint to larger trends in the United States: “Business school folks don’t view government service in the same way as government service people do. Of course, we’re seeing that nationally now where there seems to be a concerted effort to do in the public sector.” This divergence in outlook can also affect the attitudes of MPA students toward the programs they are part of. A PA-based participant currently in a school of business administration lamented losing students to business pursuits:

Journal of Public Affairs Education 245 L. N. Bowman & J. R. Thompson

In the business school with the public management program, a lot of students were initially interested in it and the program recruited a lot of students but then they got there and the culture said, “this is silly, this is a lower valued activity,” and so you get this cultural notion that it is a lower valued activity . . . and that is what the faculty focuses on, it is what they value, and students value making money.

The size and wealth of the donor base is another area of incompatibility between business and public administration. Participants from public administration programs expressed concerns about differences in fund-raising capacity. Research reveals that business programs receive more donations from alumni than any other program on campus (Okunade, Wunnava, & Walsh, Jr., 1994). As a result, public administration is sometimes viewed as failing to make equal contributions to the school’s coffers while nevertheless benefiting from the school’s wealth. Also, external funding in the form of research grants is accorded less importance in business schools than in public administration, where faculty often rely on such grants to fund research. A participant whose public administration program is currently located in a business school provided an example of how grants are not valued in business schools:

Here at the business school they don’t believe that getting grants is important. They had a candidate who I thought was just sterling and actually did get tenure, but they had a fit because this person had a huge NSF grant. [It is] beyond my imagination they would have a fit, but they did. Well, grants are not relevant in business schools from either government sources or an academy or from a foundation. They are relevant in public administration in many cases.

Business faculty rely less on grants than do public administration faculty, in part because they receive research support from their schools. One PA-based participant in a program currently located in a business school supports this explanation: “I don’t know of anybody that’s ever been turned down for a legitimate project. And most of that money comes from the school of management, not the university.” Lastly, MPA programs tend to be much smaller than their business counterparts in terms of class size and number of faculty; this situation sometimes results in animosity between faculties when public administration faculty do not seem bear their share of the student load. One participant from a public administration program that left a business school pointed to disparate teaching loads as contri buting to tension between the faculties:

The disparities in class sizes and enrollments really created some frustration not on the public administration side but on the business side, like, “you don’t really teach as many students as we do, or you don’t have as heavy a load as we do.”

246 Journal of Public Affairs Education PA Departments and Business Schools: Allies or Aliens?

Public administration programs that left business schools generally did so on their own volition, citing some mix of the following four reasons for the move: (a) a shift of resources out of public administration for use by the business side; (b) a lack of support from the dean; (c) feeling generally unwanted by the business faculty; and (d) being encouraged by NASPAA to seek a more propitious location.

Advantages of Being Located Within a College of Business Research participants, both from universities where public administration is currently in the business school and from universities where public administration has left the business school, highlighted various advantages to being located within a business school.4 One regularly recurring theme was higher salaries for public administration faculty. Interviewees mentioned being able to offer higher salaries as helpful in attracting highly qualified candidates for faculty positions. Specifically, interviewees did not state that salaries for public administration faculty were equivalent to those of business faculty, only that they were higher than if their programs were located, for example, in a college of arts and sciences. The College and University Professional Association for Human Resources 2010–11 survey of faculty salaries supports this finding, reporting that the average salary for an assistant professor of public administration is $56,952, compared to $87,248 for the average assistant professor of business administration. The disparity narrows for associate professors ($69,791 versus $93,767) and full professors ($90,251 versus $111,621; The Profession, 2011). Facilities are also often better for public administration programs located in business schools than for those programs that are not. This finding is supported by research highlighting a trend toward building impressive and often expensive facilities to house business schools (Mangan, 2002). Participants also opined that business schools wield more influence on campus than do other colleges. This situation is supported by Salancik and Pfeffer’s (1974) study of subunit power at a Midwestern university. They found that subunits with the most resources and students have the most power on campus. According to the Chronicle of Higher Education (Student Demographics, 2011), business was the most common bachelor’s degree awarded in the 2008–09 school year. One participant from a public administration program currently located in a business school described the feeling of power that comes with being in a business school: “There is a strong sense of both cachet and importance to what we’re doing in the school that carries some substantial weight with the current administration on the campus and to some extent in the city.” An interviewee from a public administration program that left a business school conveys a similar sentiment: “Being associated with a powerful college as opposed to a college of humanities or a college of liberal arts or college of education, say, there is a certain advantage to being part of one of the heavy players on campus.” A student-oriented advantage to being located in a business school is enhanced access to business-related courses—notwithstanding our finding, noted earlier,

Journal of Public Affairs Education 247 L. N. Bowman & J. R. Thompson that in very few locations do students from both programs share core courses. The crossover we found was mostly in the form of students from one program taking occasional electives in the other. Some participants from public administration also reported lower teaching loads because of being affiliated with a business school. As an alternative to competing for faculty on the basis of salary, some business schools are instead offering lower teaching loads; 2–1 or even 1–1 compared to the 2–2 (two courses for each of two semesters) that prevails in most research universities. Thus, a representative from a public administration program that has since left the business school noted that teaching loads had risen from 2–1 to 2–2 consistent with the norm in the college where the program is currently housed.

Disadvantages of Being Located Within a College of Business Public administration participants also reported various disadvantages of being located in business schools. One major disadvantage is that, although business schools may be powerful and flush with resources, not all units within a business school are treated equally at the college level. Participants reported that public administration programs located in business schools are generally not accorded equal status due to their smaller size, to the higher prestige accorded an MBA degree, and to the dean’s affiliation with the business side. One public administration participant currently in a business school characterized their department’s relationship with the rest of the college as follows: “There was a feeling that we’re seen by some as a second-class citizen within the business school.” A participant whose department left the business school described a similar attitude regarding the relative value of public administration, saying, “Nor did they think that [MPAs] were worth having, [they thought] that everybody should just get an MBA. The whole school was oriented towards the MBA as ‘the’ degree.” In their article on the state of business school education, James O’Toole and Warren G. Bennis’s characterization of the MBA as having enjoyed “rising respect- ability in academia and growing prestige in the business world” supports the view that the MBA has been a central degree in many universities (O’Toole & Bennis, 2005, p. 1). One participant described a feeling that public administration could lose its identity in a school that is so focused on business: “I suppose it could happen—we never let it—but the business view of the world could creep into influencing curriculum, course offerings, and even faculty [in the way you teach a] public policy course.”

Systemic Impediments to a Harmonious Relationship One major theme that emerged from the interviews was the presence of value differences between business and public administration faculty. One participant from a public administration program that has left a business school explained where these differences were most apparent:

248 Journal of Public Affairs Education PA Departments and Business Schools: Allies or Aliens?

Clearly, the business model was highly competitive, very self- interested, profit-oriented. Those are the kinds of values that were instilled in students. . . . In public affairs, it’s much more consensual, resolving conflicts, negotiating, serving a public interest. The value structures were very incongruent, and I think they got exaggerated with time.

Many public administration faculty viewed these differences in values as an obstacle to developing a mutually beneficial relationship with members of the business faculty. One faculty member from a public administration program that left a business school provided an example:

One year, one of my colleagues . . . applied for the deanship when it was open. But a couple of the backstabbers over in the business faculty said really bad things about him, that he’d made special deals and gone behind people’s backs. Things that weren’t true—and it really was because he was public sector oriented.

Participants from both business and public administration faculties noted a relative lack of research collaboration. In the few instances where faculty did collaborate, the research often involved topics that were cross-sectoral in nature, such as economic development and public-private partnerships. American Association of Colleges and Schools of Business (AACSB) accreditation requirements also pose an impediment to harmonious relationships between public administration programs and business schools. A public administration faculty member in a program currently located within a business school commented:

We’re ignored a lot, because for instance, AACSB accreditation, we’re not really included in. So, you know, they don’t have to pay attention to us as much as they pay attention to other departments, because in that particular respect, we’re not on their radar.

Although the requirements outlined by the AACSB are very general, they can work against cohabitation to the extent that the school must ensure that sufficient resources are directed to AACSB-accredited programs. Scherer and colleagues note an increasing importance of accreditation for business schools in a now global and highly competitive market, so that many schools have little choice but to focus on accreditation concerns (Scherer, Javagli, Bryant, & Tukel, 2005). The AASCB guideline titled “Adequacy for the Array of Programs” states in part, “A concern of the accreditation review is to see that the school has sufficient financial support to sustain quality management education programs. This judgment must take into consideration the total constellation of programs the school delivers” (AACSB, 2011). In business schools where business

Journal of Public Affairs Education 249 L. N. Bowman & J. R. Thompson programs such as the MBA are the central concern, such standards can be used to marginalize a public administration program. One participant identified AACSB requirements as an impediment to student crossover: “Finally, there’s this thing called AACSB, which has, compared to NASPAA, very rigid guidelines, like proportion of non-business students in a class and things of that sort.” Accreditation dynamics can affect PA programs located in business schools in at least two ways. The first and most direct way is that NASPAA is not favorably disposed to accredit “generic” management programs. As noted, we identified only one such program extant, that at the Atkinson School of Management at Willamette University. Although that program is currently accredited by NASPAA, a school representative said that an initial denial was overturned only upon presentation of a document from the 1980s in which AACSB and NASPAA agreed to jointly accredit generic schools of management. An interviewee from another institution commented:

There have been [accreditation] problems with schools and situations in the past that got dinged because they weren’t uniquely public administration enough. You know what I mean, they kind of blended programs and you know, it was like an MBA with an emphasis in public management.

A second way that accreditation dynamics can have an impact is more indirect. Where the programs are co-located, the MBA program, as the school’s premier program, tends to draw attention and resources away from the MPA program. Although NASPAA does not express a preference regarding school location, it does emphasize the need for adequate resources. If a program’s resources are being poached in favor of the MBA due to rankings or accreditation pressures, NASPAA may recommend an alternative configuration. One interviewee commented as follows:

A NASPAA accreditation committee said that the school should leave the College of Business because (a) the mission of the college has been narrowed . . ., (b) the budget starvation and shifting of resources entirely to the business side, and (c) the dean’s lessened interest in the good fit that had always been perceived as a good fit.

The relatively recent practice of ranking MBA programs has also created an impediment to positive relationships between business schools and public administration programs. Multiple participants reported that rankings are a major concern for many business school deans, even when achieving a high ranking is unrealistic due to location or resources. DeAngelo, DeAngelo, and Zimmerman (2005) call this phenomenon “rankings myopia,” which is the

250 Journal of Public Affairs Education PA Departments and Business Schools: Allies or Aliens? direction of resources to MBA programs in order to improve rankings at the expense of other programs and research (p. 1). One interviewee referenced a preoccupation with rankings and a resultant poaching of resources as having precipitated the public administration program’s exit from the business school:

Then we got a new dean—and that was about the same time when people were becoming much more aware of program rankings in the U.S. News and World Report and those kinds of things. The new dean made it very clear that his focus was on the MBA program and was quite effective in pooling together any other resources that he found that could be spared around the college.

Mitigating Adverse Aspects of the Arrangement/Taking Advantage of Positive Aspects of the Arrangement At some universities, the public administration program and business school have been able to overcome barriers and develop a positive, productive relationship. One vital component of such a relationship is recognition by members of the non-PA faculty of the value that public administration brings to the school. For example, in some schools, public administration is viewed as adding value by virtue of the access to and support of key public officials that it facilitates. This kind of access is especially relevant in public universities. One participant from a public administration program currently located in a business school explained the importance of such connections as follows:

On the other hand, they also appreciate that we bring a lot to the table in terms of access to government officials, in terms of access to people [throughout] the community, throughout the state. We can probably introduce them to many more people than some of the MBA people can. And we do. So in that sense, they see us as a positive, as a strength.

Hearn and Anderson (2002) found increased conflict relating to promotion and tenure decisions in departments in low-consensus fields and suggested that a lack of shared, core beliefs may produce conflict in such decisions at the college level as well. However, we found a very moderate level of promotion and tenure- based conflict involving faculty in public administration programs located within business schools. Two conditions appear to mitigate any conflict: high autonomy afforded the public administration programs regarding promotion and tenure criteria and decisions, and college-level agreement on appropriate promotion and tenure criteria. A participant from a public administration program that left a business school described the autonomy the department was allowed in promotion and tenure decisions:

Journal of Public Affairs Education 251 L. N. Bowman & J. R. Thompson

I won’t say it was just a ratification by the dean, but there was a huge presumption that public administration knew what it was doing and that it was persuasive when it [cast] something up and didn’t casually put people forward that were undeserving. So it was a strong presumption that the dean would [bless] the proposal.

One way that a few public administration programs bring value to their respective schools of business is by teaching ethics courses for business students. A participant who is a faculty member in a public administration program currently located in a business school described this role as follows: “If anything, the joke is because we service all the ethics classes that…we’re the conscience of the business school.” Another mechanism for facilitating a positive public administration–business school relationship is to have public administration faculty serve in college-level administrative positions. Having representation at the college level ensures that the public administration program, which is generally much smaller than business- related departments, has a voice in decision making and is able to protect its interests. In one business college, a member of the public administration faculty held the position of associate dean; in another, a member of the public administration faculty served as head of the college-wide strategic planning committee. One interviewee noted that their program lost the position of associate dean before making a decision to leave the business school: “The first years we were there, the head of the school [of public administration] also had as his title, associate dean of the college of business. I always thought that was helpful and important.” Another avenue for protecting the interests of public administration is to achieve some level of structural autonomy for the program, such as by creating an institute or school of public administration. Table 1 reveals that this is a fairly common arrangement; examples include the Romney Institute at Brigham Young University, the Public Administration Institute at Louisiana State University, and the Institute for Public Service at Suffolk University. This arrangement helps promote autonomy in other aspects of the public administration program such as course offerings and budget. Some public administration programs are able to move beyond simply mitigating the negative facets of their relationship with their business schools to actually taking advantage of their circumstances. One area ripe for collaboration is in nonprofit management. At Brigham Young University, the Marriott College of Business and the Romney Institute of Public Management work together to deliver courses for a minor in social innovation for graduate students. Similarly, at the University of North Dakota, the public administration program teaches a social entrepreneurship course for both MBA and MPA students, and business and public administration faculty co-teach a course called Government and Business. Joint programs in social entrepreneurship and health care management are increasingly prevalent as well.

252 Journal of Public Affairs Education PA Departments and Business Schools: Allies or Aliens?

Discussion Two alternative configurations of relationships between public administration programs and business schools are identified for heuristic purposes. One configuration, in which the programs engage in a symbiotic relationship, is labeled the harmonious relationship model. Another configuration, characterized by very limited interaction between the two programs, is labeled the cohabitation model. Table 2 presents the defining characteristics of each model.

Table 2. Public Administration Programs in Business Schools Models

Cohabitation Harmonious Relationship

Little if any course sharing Some sharing of courses

Intermittent formal and informal discussions Secession not at issue of secession Indifference/hostility of business faculty Widespread acceptance of public administration by business faculty Little collaboration on research Routine collaboration of on research between faculties between faculties Establish sources of support outside school Dean supportive of the MPA program (via donors, alumni, university administrators)

The harmonious relationship model is marked by a high level of interaction and cooperation between the business school and the public administration program. The school and the program create joint programs and share courses, taking advantage of their proximity. The business faculty recognize and accept the value of a public administration program as well as the public sector in general. One participant from a public administration program currently in a business school related an instance that embodies this attitude as follows:

At first it looked like he [the dean] was trying to move it [public administration] out of the school so that it would be a “pure” business school. And in fact, there was an explicit backlash from a small but vocal segment of the business faculty of the school saying, “How dare you suggest that you’re going to break up the school? That department is an integral part of what makes us a success as a school.”

A participant from a business program where the public administration program is located in the business school explained how faculty there view public administration and business as complementary:

Journal of Public Affairs Education 253 L. N. Bowman & J. R. Thompson

There is a recognition among our faculty [that] the public sector– private sector interface is so crucial to the success of business and the success of society, really. And having this within our own ranks, within our own colleagues, is extremely valuable in terms of our intellectual breadth.

The support of the dean of the business school is also a major component of the harmonious relationship model, because the dean can play a central role in keeping the public administration program an integrated and valued part of the school. This sentiment was exemplified in a quote from a public administration participant whose program has left a business school:

So that’s a crucial element in my view, if you say how can it go well and how can it not go so well, I would say 85% of the answer is the attitude of the college of business dean.

The most significant feature of the harmonious relationship model is that both parties are able to reap advantages by the location of the public administration program in the business school by collaborating on joint programs, through research partnerships among faculty, and through course sharing. The cohabitation model is marked by very little interaction between the public administration program and the school of business. Courses are not shared, business faculty do not conduct research with public administration faculty, and relations between the two faculties are marked by indifference or hostility. One participant from a public administration program currently located in a business school cited treatment consonant with this model: “I think we would be considered somewhat of a redheaded stepchild . . . we feel we’re treated a little bit as an outsider, and perhaps don’t get the full slate of resources that we think we deserve.” As noted earlier, many participants reported that business faculty do not value the public sector or recognize public administration as a field that belongs in a school of business. One participant from a public administration program that has left a business school commented that “what we enjoyed or suffered was benign neglect.” Participants whose programs fit this model also said that they often looked to external sources for support for their program, including university-level administrators and politically connected alumni. The idea of removing the public administration program from the business school is discussed with some regularity by either the business school or public administration faculty, or both. It is important to note, however, that this type of relationship is not always marked by hostility; some programs are instead provided a great deal of autonomy and simply operate with a minimal level of interaction with business programs and faculty. A participant from a public administration program that is currently located in a school of business explains that this relationship came about naturally for his program:

254 Journal of Public Affairs Education PA Departments and Business Schools: Allies or Aliens?

It just happened to historically evolve, that separate but equal philosophy became very entrenched there. Graduate-level resources are the most sought-after resources and so by keeping it separate it tends to keep the discussion down. And there just has not been a history of cooperation at the graduate level. But the separate but equal policy has just generally kept it relatively even steven.

Conclusion To an outsider, the logic of merging the business and public administration programs may appear compelling. A central finding from our study, however, is that although these combinations can work, the presence of multiple, systemic factors makes for an awkward relationship. One such factor is simply the disparity in size that tends to exist between the two programs; public administration faculty commonly are outnumbered by an 8:1 or 9:1 ratio. In conjunction with the cultural and value differences noted earlier and the higher stature accorded the MBA degree, there is a natural tendency for the public administration department to become marginalized. We were struck that even at institutions where a harmonious relationship generally has prevailed or does prevail, the question of whether the public administration program should relocate arises regularly. It is important, however, to note that we observed a correlation between school stature and program compatibility. Specifically, inter-program tensions tend to be higher at second-tier programs than at third-tier programs (where the second-tier is defined as lower-ranking research universities and the third tier as teaching universities). At the teaching universities, less priority is assigned to considerations such as MBA rank, which, as we noted, can work to the detriment of the public administration program. At second-tier universities, in contrast, pressures on the dean to improve program ranking as a means of distinguishing the MBA from those of other second-tier schools can be intense. A key question in assessing the advantages and disadvantages to public administration of being located within a business school is, “Compared to what?” Considerations of value compatibility highlight the advantages of being located within schools of public affairs. Less clear is that a location in, for example, a college of arts and sciences is preferable to that in a college of business. At one of the institutions included in our study, the department of public administration migrated first from a college of business to a college of social and behavior sciences and then to a school of public affairs. A faculty member commented that there were tensions between public administration and other units within the college of social and behavioral sciences, as there had been between public administration and other units within the college of business. Many of non-PA faculty in the college of social and behavioral sciences, according to this informant, considered the “applied”

Journal of Public Affairs Education 255 L. N. Bowman & J. R. Thompson research being done within the department of public administration as inferior to the more theoretical work being done elsewhere within the college. It is notable that interviewees at several institutions where relationships can be characterized as generally “harmonious” were cautious when asked if they would recommend a merger between public administration and a college of business at other institutions. For example, one public administration faculty member commented:

As huge a fan as I am of our situation, I don’t know if it could happen today spontaneously or forced because this was brought together and it’s kind of grown into what it is. . . . But, talking about just the little bit that you’ve mentioned, for example, your emphasis on grants, throwing those two together, I just don’t know if those two kinds of cultures could come together [today].

A representative of a program that had left the business school, but whose reflections on that period in the program’s history were generally positive, nevertheless noted recurring debates over whether the public administration program was appropriately situated, adding:

I don’t see this as a viable model anymore. I fought as good a defensive campaign as you could fight. I withstood 3 attempts to basically get rid of public administration in the business school, and now that I am out of it, it is a heck of a lot more fun playing offense than defense.

Footnotes 1. Recent examples include disputes between the State of Arizona and the firm it contracted with to run its prisons and between the State of Indiana and IBM over a canceled welfare modernization contract (Ortega, 2012; Ritchie, 2012).

2. Interview questions are included as Appendix A.

3. Ten of the 15 PA interviewees indicated the presence of divergent cultures between PA and business (6 from programs currently in business schools, 4 from programs that once were but are no longer in business schools).

4. A summary of the incidence of the perceived advantages and disadvantages of being located within a business school is provided as Appendix B.

256 Journal of Public Affairs Education PA Departments and Business Schools: Allies or Aliens?

References Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB International). (2011, January 31). Eligibility procedures and accreditation standards for business accreditation (3rd ed.). Tampa, FL: Author.

Allison, G. T. (1992). Public and private management: Are they fundamentally alike in all unimportant respects? In R. J. Stillman, III (Ed.), Public administration: Concepts and cases (5th ed., pp. 282–288). Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.

DeAngelo, H., DeAngelo, L., & Zimmerman, J. L. (2005). What’s really wrong with U.S. business schools? Retrieved from http://fisher.osu.edu/~young_53/DeAngelo-DeAngelo-Zimmerman.pdf.

Frederickson, H. G., & Smith, K. B. (2003). The public administration theory primer. Cambridge, MA: Westview Press.

Goldsmith, S., & Eggers, W. (2004). Governing by network: The new shape of the public sector. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.

Hearn, J. C., & Anderson, M. S. (2002). Conflict in academic departments: An analysis of disputes over faculty promotion and tenure. Research in Higher Education, 43, 503–529.

Henry, L. (1995). Keeping business at bay. In Early NASPAA History. Retrieved from http://www. naspaa.org/about_naspaa/about/history.asp#Keeping%20Business%20At%20Bay

Henry, N. (1975). Paradigms of public administration. Public Administration Review, 35, 378–386.

Ingraham, P. W., & Zuck, A. (1996). Public affairs and administration education: An overview and look ahead from the NASPAA perspective. Journal of Public Administration Education, 2, 161–174.

Ira, K. (2009). Regulation is not the answer. Harvard Business Review, 87, 113–113.

Kettl, D. (2002). The transformation of governance: Public administration for twenty-first century America. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Leone, R. A. (1977). The real cost of regulation. Harvard Business Review, 55, 57–66.

Litchfield, E. (1956). Notes on a general theory of administration.Administrative Science Quarterly, 1, 3–29.

Mangan, K. S. (2002). The new “arms race” in business-school buildings. Chronicle of Higher Education, 48, A30.

Martin, W.F. & Lodge, G.C. (1975). Our society in 1985—Business may not like it. Harvard Business Review, 53, 143–152.

Okunade, A. A., Wunnava, P. V., & Walsh, Jr., R. (1994). Charitable giving of alumni: Microdata evidence from a large public university. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 53, 73–84.

Ortega, B. (2012, February 15). Group: Facilities hard to oversee, aren’t cost effective. Arizona Republic. Retrieved from http://www.azcentral.com

O’Toole, J., & Bennis, W. G. (2005). How business school lost its way. Harvard Business Review, 83, 96–104.

Pfeffer, J., & Fong, C. T. (2002). The end of business schools? Less success than meets the eye. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 1, 78–95.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 257 L. N. Bowman & J. R. Thompson

Ritchie, C. (2012, February 28). State, IBM blame each other as trial involving Indiana’s canceled welfare contract begins. Indianapolis Star. Retrieved from http://www.indystar.com

Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1974). The bases and use of power in organizational decision making: The case of a university. Administration Science Quarterly, 19, 453–473.

Scherer, R. F., Javagli, R. G., Bryant, M., & Tukel, O. (2005). Challenges of AACSB international accreditation for business schools in the United States and Europe. Thunderbird International Business Review, 47, 651–669.

Student Demographics. (2011, August 21). Chronicle of Higher Education, 58, 32–40.

The Profession. (2011). Chronicle of Higher Education, 58, 22–29.

Ventriss, C. (1991). Contemporary issues in American public administration education: The search for an educational focus. Public Administration Review, 51, 4–14.

Wiseman, R. (2011, August 21). Hunkering down, colleges rethink financial strategies.Chronicle of Higher Education, 58(1), 6–6.

Wooldridge, B. (1987). Increasing the professional management orientation of public administration courses. American Review of Public Administration, 17, 93–100.

Yoon, B. M. (1968). Management discipline in a school of administration: A reappraisal in the public service. Academy of Management Journal, 11, 279–289.

James Thompson is an associate professor of public administration at the University of Illinois at Chicago. His research focuses on change and reform in the public sector, the civil service and civil service reform, and human resource management practices in the public sector. e-mail: [email protected]

Lauren Bowman is a PhD student in the Department of Public Administration in the University of Illinois at Chicago. Her research focuses on gender and administration as well as public organizations and public management.

258 Journal of Public Affairs Education PA Departments and Business Schools: Allies or Aliens?

Appendix A

Interview Questions

Questions—Survey on Public Administration Programs in Schools of Business Administration 1. Is your program now located within a school of business administration or has your program been located within such a school anytime within the past ten years? a. If yes, how long has/was that arrangement been in place? b. Does the combination of the two programs in a single school reflect an underlying philosophy that management is generic? 2. What is the relative size of the PA program relative to the business program in 1) faculty, 2) students? 3. What benefits, if any, have been gained as a result of having both the business and public administration programs within the same school? a. To what extent did/do business and public administration students take the same courses and sit together in the same classes? b. Do public administration students take courses from business program faculty? c. Do business administration students take courses from public administration faculty? d. Please provide the specifics of any such arrangements. 4. What issues, if any, have arisen as a consequence of having both the business and public administration programs within the same school? 5. Do prospective faculty members see being in a business school as an advantage? 6. Has there been an advantage in being in a business school to the extent that the business school has greater clout on campus? 7. Has the business school affiliation been a factor with regard to accreditation? 8. To what extent do faculty members from business and public administration collaborate in conducting research in areas that straddle the two disciplines?

Journal of Public Affairs Education 259 L. N. Bowman & J. R. Thompson

9. On what basis are decisions about the allocation of resources between the business and public administration programs made? Has the division of resources between the two programs been contentious? How has the public administration program fared in this regard? 10. Are there disparities in the salaries of business and public administration faculties? If so, to what extent have those disparities caused dissension within the school? 11. How are promotion and tenure decisions made? To what extent have promotion and tenure criteria been an issue between the two faculties? 12. To what extent do the public and business administration faculties differ with regard to the relative priority assigned research, external funding, and consulting? 13. To what extent is improving the ranking of the MBA program a priority for the college? 14. What would be your advice to another university considering merging PA into the College of Business? 15. (for business faculty interviewees) Is public administration as a discipline valued by members of the business faculty?

260 Journal of Public Affairs Education PA Departments and Business Schools: Allies or Aliens?

Appendix B Incidence—Perceived Advantages and Disadvantages of Being Located Within a Business School.

Compatibilities between business and Number of respondents Number of respondents public administration from business schools from business schools that no longer house currently housing public public administration administration programs programs who noted this who noted this Similar emphasis on practical skills 1 4 Incompatibilities between business and public administration Government viewed as hostile to the enterprise 4 5 of business Business has more capital/wealthier donors 3 5 Public administration program is smaller than 5 5 the business program Advantages for public administration programs located within a business school Higher salaries for public administration faculty 5 4 Better facilities and resources 2 6 More influence around campus 1 3 Medium or high frequency of students from one 0 6 program taking courses in the other Teaching load is lower 2 1 Disadvantages for public administration programs located within a business school Public administration programs not accorded 6 6 equal status because the MBA is the central degree Dean focused on business to detriment of 5 1 public administration Systemic impediments to a harmonious relationship Value differences 4 6 Focus on AACSB accreditation 1 3 Rankings concerns for the MBA 6 2 Mitigating Adverse Aspects of the Arrangement/Taking Advantage of Positive Aspects of the Arrangement Public administration program is valued for 2 4 the connections it provides for the school High autonomy/college-wide agreement 6 7 concerning promotion and tenure Public administration teaches ethics courses 1 1 for business Public administration has representation at 4 4 the college level Public administration has structural autonomy 3 3 Collaborate on programs/courses 1 5

Journal of Public Affairs Education 261 262 Journal of Public Affairs Education Public Affairs Programs and the Changing Political Economy of Higher Education

Daniel Rich University of Delaware

Abstract The changing political economy of higher education threatens the viability of some public affairs programs and challenges the overall value of public affairs education, research, and service. This article evaluates these changes and the strategies available to public affairs programs, individually and collectively, to counter the erosion of support.

Across the nation, public affairs programs are facing challenges to their fiscal viability, often accompanied by demands to justify their existence. The financial crisis and economic downturn have spawned an accelerated retrenchment of public funding of higher education. In turn, this has led university leaders to justify budget cuts to programs that exemplify more expansive public responsibilities. The squeeze on program funding has been accompanied by a shift in the prevailing models of university budgeting (Berry, 2010). Under the new models, academic units are treated as cost centers that must be justified either by compensating revenue generation or by becoming an institutional priority for subsidy. In this environment, many public affairs programs, especially exclusively graduate programs, have been pressed to focus on generating new revenue sources by increasing the number of tuition-paying graduate students, developing online and off-site programs, intro- ducing executive training, attracting grants, contracts and donations, and developing undergraduate degree options (Teicher, 2010). From the vantage point of a particular campus, it may appear that the pressures are local and short term and that they will abate once the economic downturn is reversed. Viewed in the broader context of the changing environment of higher education, however, the recent pressures are expressions of a long-term transformation that poses serious challenges to the viability of public affairs programs.

Keywords: universities, strategies, entrepreneurship, engagement

JPAE 19(2), 263–283 Journal of Public Affairs Education 263 D. Rich

Berry notes “that our programs—perhaps more than ever—have to demonstrate our purpose for existing; and our relevance to students, our universities, and our broader communities” (2010). The question is, why is this the case? It is not because public affairs programs are failing to meet their objectives, or are not accountable for meeting the professional standards set for them. Nor is it that university leaders simply fail to understand public affairs programs or recognize their contributions, though this may often be the case. The source of the challenge is more fundamental, and even more threatening. In essence, public affairs programs and the public service values they embody are themselves no longer valued as they were for the last half century. Moreover, these programs and values are not regarded as important to the emerging vision of the public role of 21st-century universities. The dominant vision during the last half of the 20th century was that universities should apply their expertise to address all of America’s critical social and economic issues at all levels, from neighborhoods to the nation, and from the War on Poverty to the Cold War. In this environment, public affairs programs grew and flourished. Now a global transformation in higher education is displacing this vision with a new and much narrower one. As the vision has narrowed, the regard for programs of public affairs education, research, and public service has eroded. The longer-term threat is that the erosion of support may accelerate in the decades ahead. If so, the outlook for most public affairs programs is not encouraging. The good news is that there is no inevitability about this outcome, so long as programs act, individually and collectively, to develop and adopt strategies that both adjust to the global transformation in higher education and effectively counter the erosion of public and institutional support.

The Changing Political Economy of Higher Education The key driver of the global transformation in higher education is a long-term shift in the underlying political economy that shapes costs, revenues, markets, and priorities. The emerging environment of higher education is more turbulent, more competitive, and more threatening than was the case only a few decades ago. Across the nation, the political priority of higher education has declined. A half century ago, state political leaders strengthened their reputations and garnered votes by supporting investments that would dramatically expand college access and increase advanced research, thereby accelerating economic prosperity. Today, the role of universities as an asset for economic development has become even better recognized than it was a half century ago. Despite this, the political priority of higher education at the state level is in decline—and so is the funding. State funding has been a declining fraction of public university budgets for decades, and the downturn in state support long predates the recent economic malaise. Even when state coffers were more robust, higher education funding usually was eclipsed by other priorities and also squeezed by mandated, nondiscretionary obligations for Medicaid, K–12 education, and other programs. State funding as a percentage of university revenues has declined to single digits for many institutions,

264 Journal of Public Affairs Education The Changing Political Economy of Higher Education now known as the “public privates” or by the acronym PINO (public in name only). Indeed, the boundaries between public and private universities, which were never very well defined, seem increasingly irrelevant. Even while public funding has declined, public demands to restrain increases in tuition and fees have intensified, and political capital now lies with those elected officials who promise to hold the line on tuition increases. Universities have been pressured to demonstrate greater public account ability on issues of access, fees, and learning outcomes; in the wake of the economic recession, student employment prospects and high levels of student debt have been added to that list. At the same time, the costs of delivering higher education continue to rise at a rate that outpaces traditional sources of revenue, breeding increased competition for new funding opportunities. The economic downturn slashed university endow ments, thereby increasing the gap between costs and revenues. Some of that loss has been recovered, and many institutions have become much more aggressive in their private fund-raising efforts. Even so, the reliance on private fund-raising and anticipated returns on endowments is a risky strategy in the face of global economic uncertainty. Moreover, growth in alumni donations and endowments, which usually are directed to restricted purposes, will not replace the continuing loss of public funding for general operations. For research universities, lagging endowments and state support have sometimes been balanced with increased federal research funding. Nonetheless, these funds are not equally available to all universities and programs—certainly not to public affairs programs—and they do not pay for core operations. In fact, large-scale federal funding often requires major infrastructure and core research investments that add to the university’s overall economic burden. Given the federal budget situation, major increases in research funding are unlikely; indeed, sustaining current funding levels might be problematic. As a result, more institutions are likely to chase a relatively fixed amount of federal support; those that receive a greater share and ramp up to higher levels of research infrastructure will then need to fight for federal dollars simply to justify their investments. This is only part of the story. The entire landscape of higher education is undergoing change. New information technologies have generated online and frequently profit-oriented higher education alternatives that escalate competition and also drain public resources. Congressional committees are evaluating the problem of debt without degrees: for-profit programs that use large amounts of federal financial aid to support marginal and nontraditional students who then accumulate substantial debt but rarely graduate or find a job that enables them to pay back their loans (U.S. Senate Committee, 2010). The community college system, the fastest growing component of U.S. higher education, is competing directly for state and federal funding. In sum, more institutions are competing for the same sources of revenue at the same time as the stability of those sources is declining. More institutions also are competing for academically talented, tuition-paying students, and the projected demographic decline in the size of the U.S. college-age pool means that competition will intensify.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 265 D. Rich

Profound challenges also are unfolding internationally. On a global scale, both the need and demand for higher education are increasing. From one perspective, that is good news for U.S. universities. Viewed as a national economic asset, U.S. higher education is arguably the nation’s most successful industry. Indeed, U.S. higher education remains the envy of the world and a model to emulate; other nations are doing precisely that. China and India already greatly surpass the United States in university graduates per annum and are investing aggressively in expanding the size, quality, and research capacity of their higher education sector. America ranks tenth among nations in the percentage of citizens aged 25–34 with postsecondary degrees (Christensen & Horn, 2011, p. 1). As Senator Lamar Alexander (2009) has suggested, congratulating ourselves now about the United States having the best higher education system in the world may be akin to those in Detroit in the 1960s who congratulated themselves on the United States making almost all of the world’s best automobiles. The threat to U.S. leadership in higher education is particularly applicable to graduate education and scientific research. U.S. higher education, particularly graduate education, has been a global magnet for many decades. Now it is clear that the long-term dominance of the U.S. higher education industry is under challenge. In 2005, a report of the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine already cautioned that unless corrective actions are taken swiftly, U.S. leadership in science and technology may not continue (p. 4). In a techno logically flat world, all universities, but especially research universities, now must compete more aggressively; U.S. universities are clearly still in the lead, but they are losing ground. Friedman (2005) points out that this challenge amounts to a “quiet crisis,” reflecting a steady erosion of America’s scientific and engineering base at the same time as other nations are increasing their investments and commitments and strengthening their educational systems, including their higher education systems. The current budget woes of the state and federal governments do not generate optimism about any major corrective action in the near or midterm. Ironically, the U.S. higher education industry may be losing its global market position at the very time when global demand is increasing and the link between higher education and long-term economic development is better recognized than ever before. A decade ago, former Cornell University president Frank Rhodes proclaimed that the “business of higher education is undergoing a fundamental restructuring and no university is immune.” The “knowledge business” is “exploding in size, becoming global in scope, highly differentiated, and intensely competitive” with the result that it is driving a “wrenching restructuring comparable to that experienced by health care, manufacturing and other industries” (2001, p. 230). For American universities, these changes are dramatic and destabilizing; they are changing higher education values and priorities, how resources to support higher education are generated and allocated, how and by whom academic programs are provided, and against what criteria programs are assessed.

266 Journal of Public Affairs Education The Changing Political Economy of Higher Education

The Entrepreneurial University Although university responses to this emerging transformation vary, one general model has informed most strategies, particularly for research universities: the entrepreneurial university. Advocates of this model translate the turbulent, competitive, and threatening political economy of higher education into an environment of opportunity for universities that are willing to adopt a new institutional identity as engines of innovation that will drive the knowledge-based global economy. In this view, universities must become more self-reliant, self-directed, and self-conscious of their competitive identity and market position. The underlying assumption of this model is that universities are essential for sustaining economic development and prosperity in the 21st century: generating new intellectual property that may lead to commercialization; strengthening the science and technology labor pool; incubating and jump-starting new businesses that attract investment and create jobs; mobilizing the knowledge assets of universities to address emerging challenges of a global political economy; and serving as a hub of 21st-century innovation and culture. Fulfilling these roles requires a new calculus for evaluating priorities and performance. Investments must be focused on supporting initiatives likely to produce high-impact innovations that confer a competitive advantage in the higher education marketplace and beyond. The entrepreneurial university also requires an institutional makeover, adopting methods and practices from the private sector to transform an ossified and bloated academic organization into a streamlined and agile global competitor. According to Holden Thorp, president of UNC, Chapel Hill, and Buck Goldstein, UNC entrepreneur in residence, an entrepreneurial mind-set must be infused throughout the academic culture: a mind-set that “views big problems as big opportunities” and that focuses on taking initiatives that drive innovation and change (2010, p. 6). Thorp and Goldstein portray entrepreneurship as the missing ingredient that keeps universities from meeting their own challenges as well as society’s expectations. The infusion of entrepreneurial thinking is expected to enable universities to “emerge as true engines of innovation—just what society expects of them” (p. 21). The appeal of the entrepreneurial university model has been overwhelming. Backed by a self-sealing logic of economic imperative and inevitability, the focus on high-impact solutions to “big problems” and, most of all, a promise of prosperity, is virtually irresistible—all the more in an economic downturn. Indeed, the public role of universities is now focused almost entirely on their expected contributions as engines of innovation in the new knowledge-based, global economy. It is an attractive argument to all those who yearn for a viable strategy to create new jobs, new businesses, and sustained economic growth for their city, state, and nation. To exploit the potential of the entrepreneurial university model, university leaders often look to the private sector for guidance. Privatization of university operations is frequently advocated as a strategy for transforming universities into more successful regional, national, and global competitors. Copying business practices from the private sector and actively marketing and selling their products are hardly new to universities. What is changing, however, is the scale of the

Journal of Public Affairs Education 267 D. Rich commercialization and marketing efforts, driven by the desire to imbue the entire university with the entrepreneurial spirit and mind-set. The entrepreneurial university is one in which university leaders increasingly view the challenges to higher education as business problems requiring business solutions. In search of formulas for competitive success, administrators import the newest business ideas and methods to contain costs, increase revenues, improve performance, and strengthen self-reliance. As David Kirp (2003) documents, universities have adopted diverse marketing techniques to increase their competitiveness and enhance their image in the eyes of prospective student customers and investment partners. Further, Thorp and Goldstein suggest, for innovation and entrepreneurship to become part of the fabric of research universities, entrepreneurs must be brought inside the institution, “sprinkled in the mix, ideally throughout the university community” (p. 153). The themes and expectations associated with the entrepreneurial university model echo many of the pronouncements of the reinventing government zealots who have sought to remake government bureaucracies into dynamic organizations by injecting competition, incentives, and other private sector performance enhancements (Osborne & Gaebler, 1993). As Kamarck (2007) has proposed, stripped to “its essence, reinvented government is entrepreneurial,” and it is “run as much like a private-sector business as possible; the literature and practice of reinvented government is replete with praise for competition, flexibility, employee empowerment, and customer service” (p. 63). For advocates of the entrepreneurial university, the recipes for success are much the same. The dedication to the entrepreneurial university model has become so intense on some campuses that, as former Harvard president Derek Bok has argued, it has become a self-sealing imperative, largely immune from criticism and challenge. Driven by diverse internal and environmental forces but enabled most of all by the “rapid growth of money-making opportunities provided by a more technologically sophisticated, knowledge-based economy,” the drive for commercial advantage has become self-reinforcing; increased competition “in turn produces greater effort to find resources” (Bok, 2003, p.14–15). Some of the underpinnings of the entrepreneurial model are difficult to challenge. Universities are big businesses, and they must succeed as businesses or they will not succeed at all. The idea of a predominantly state-supported university seems more relevant to the past than the future. Universities are making important economic development contributions, and such contributions will be even more important in the future. Those acquainted with the embedded and almost petrified structures of higher education, both administrative and academic, can readily applaud a strong dose of entrepreneurialism and innovation. The problem with the entrepreneurial university model is not that it lacks a coherent and logical foundation of assumptions or a compelling rationale. Rather, the problem lies in the narrowness of its vision, and in the exclusivity that often accompanies that narrowness. That narrow vision represents a turning away from the public role of universities that supported more than a half century of expansion of higher education, including the development of most public affairs programs.

268 Journal of Public Affairs Education The Changing Political Economy of Higher Education

The Economics of Public Affairs Education For some public affairs programs, the rise of the entrepreneurial university represents a welcome opportunity for innovation and growth in both programs and resources. These are generally comprehensive schools of public affairs that offer diverse programs of instruction, research, and service; compete nationally and internationally for students; and have relatively high levels of autonomy in allocating resources and undertaking and sustaining new initiatives. Yet, these comprehensive schools represent a small subset of the more than 275 NASPAA-accredited programs. Moreover, the expansion of these comprehensive schools as profit centers, with increased enrollments (on-site, at satellite campuses, or online) is likely to come, at least in part, at the expense of the much larger number of small state and regional programs. For most public affairs programs, the rise of the entrepreneurial university represents a challenge that will be difficult to meet. Most public affairs programs are simply not designed to be successful under the entrepreneurial university’s calculus of value, and the opportunities for redesign are much more limited than the rhetoric of innovation and entrepreneurship would suggest. Modeling the logic of efficient business practice, new university budget models encourage net-revenue evaluation of academic units and decentralize fiscal respons ibility to the academic unit level. These models make the financial limits of most public affairs programs more visible than in the past. On the positive side, most public affairs programs are relatively low cost compared with the science, engineering, and other technology programs that often are the priority of the entrepreneurial university. Public affairs faculty, like other social science faculty, have relatively modest salaries, minimal needs for facilities and space, few demands on technological support and other infrastructure, and virtually no start-up costs (as compared to costs in the hundreds of thousands to millions for faculty in the sciences, medicine, and engineering). However, the revenue generation of many public affairs programs is meager. Most of NASPAA’s accredited public affairs programs do not offer undergraduate degrees that generate large numbers of tuition-paying students. Even the largest of NASPAA’s public affairs programs probably do not generate enough graduate tuition revenue to meet the full costs of the program. Put another way, most graduate public affairs programs (and many undergraduate programs) are and likely always have been loss leaders from a tuition-generating, cash-flow perspective. These programs have prospered either by generating other sources of external revenue (contracts and grants, private giving, certificate and executive training programs) or through the allocation of funds from the larger university pool of resources. Such university subventions may have been in place under the traditional budgeting models, but they are made more visible under the new models. For some programs, the level of subvention is not a compelling issue since they will continue to be priorities at their universities. Reporting the results of a NASPAA survey, Teicher (2010) cites program directors who claim that their units have been insulated from cutbacks at the state and university levels.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 269 D. Rich

However, only a modest—and likely decreasing—number of NASPAA programs will remain in such privileged status, and the changing political economy of higher education makes it risky to depend on the longevity of such institutional endorse ment. Even so, given the challenges faced by many other public affairs programs, these high-priority programs will enjoy an increasingly strong competitive advantage in attracting high-quality faculty and students. For programs at most public universities, the situation is likely to be quite different. An important part of the rationale for university subvention of public affairs graduate programs at land-grant and other public universities was the expectation that such programs were fundamental to the partnership between state governments and their state-assisted universities. As public funding of universities has declined, the case for support of public affairs programs has often weakened. The new budgeting systems are intended to make programs more innovative and entrepreneurial as well as more cost conscious and cost effective. For many programs, however, it will be easier to proclaim these objectives than to produce them. On the expense side, some programs are already operating with reduced expenses in order to absorb cutbacks in university budget support (Teicher, 2010). The major cost item is the funding of faculty salaries and benefits. Reducing these costs requires cutting back on the number of faculty or the salary and benefits that faculty receive. More directly, this likely translates to substituting adjunct and non-tenured faculty with higher teaching loads for research-oriented, tenured faculty. As Schultz (2005) points out, the impacts of such labor cost reduction go far beyond the expense ledger to include significant implications for faculty governance and the content of academic programs. Clearly, there is a limit to this type of cost cutting beyond which programs will be unable to deliver education that meets the standards of quality they expect and NASPAA requires. There also is a limit beyond which such increased reliance on non-research faculty directly conflicts with the expectations of innovation and creativity at an entrepreneurial university. Additional expense reduction that doesn’t reduce quality likely requires a major reformulation of program objectives and design. That is precisely what has been undertaken at the University of Washington, according to Sandra Archibald, dean of the Evans School of Public Affairs. She argues that such efforts helped keep her program in business. The initial university challenge to the existence of that program was met through a concerted political mobilization, but program innovation enabled the projection of a stable fiscal outlook going forward. The new economics of that MPA program, Archibald claims, is made possible by “practicing what we teach: working with a decentralized organization, using technology to streamline operations, and constantly evaluating and improving program performance” (Kerrigan, p. 1). On the revenue side, the infusion of entrepreneurial values and methods to seek out new revenue opportunities may not be easy to achieve. Most public affairs programs are not comprised of faculty who joined the profession because of their strong entrepreneurial interests, energies, or experience. Nor is it likely

270 Journal of Public Affairs Education The Changing Political Economy of Higher Education that a wave of entrepreneurship suddenly will be released once the incentives of a new business model are adopted. What should not be underestimated is the dramatic culture change required for a makeover into a more entrepreneurial program. Entrepreneurial achievement does not appear among the key standards for NASPAA accreditation, nor is it part of the embedded faculty reward system. Most public affairs programs are faced with these options to enhance their overall revenue generation: gifts from private fund-raising; externally sponsored contracts and grants; scaling up tuition-paying graduate students; consolidation with revenue-generating academic programs; and development of new or expanded undergraduate academic programs.

Private Fund-Raising One positive attribute of programs oriented to public service is that they often have features attractive to socially concerned foundations and individual donors. Further, the low cost of public affairs programs means that modest amounts of investment from one-time gifts may provide sufficient resources to start up new initiatives. However, funding from gifts is not a reliable source of recurrent operating support for most programs. Offsetting operating costs requires more than an occasional donation or grant; it requires either the development of a substantial endowment, which few programs are in a position to generate, or the maintenance of a consistent flow of annual unrestricted giving, which most programs find difficult to sustain without hiring additional development staff. Graduate public affairs programs do not have a large alumni base, and most graduates pursue careers that are not known for generating significant wealth. Further, public affairs programs that are not university priorities for subvention will most likely not be among the top university development priorities. In sum, private funding may provide resources to supplement operating budgets, but rarely will they dramatically change a program’s overall revenue/cost profile.

Contracts and Grants State and local governments and some federal agencies are being pressed to contract out more work since they cannot make recurrent budget commitments to hire new staff. Some public affairs programs have precisely the mix of faculty knowledge, skills, and professional experience to carry out these contracts. However, sustained success in this domain requires a well-developed grants infrastructure that often involves significant additional investments in professional and support staff to supplement faculty capacity. Moreover, external funding from grants and contracts is restricted and generally does not pay the operating expenses for instructional programs. Further, most public affairs grants and contracts are for short-term projects that usually carry low or no overhead. This type of work also carries fixed deadlines that are matched to the client’s timetable rather than the academic calendar or the prevailing culture of many public affairs programs.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 271 D. Rich

Graduate Tuition Revenues Under the new budget models, the fiscal viability of graduate public affairs programs depends most directly on the ability to increase tuition-generating enrollments. In principle, a variety of options are available for accomplishing this objective: Seek new domestic markets or compete more effectively in current markets for traditional students; modify programs to appeal to nontraditional or international applicants; add online or blended (online and on-site) delivery options; expand executive education or certificate programs; open satellite locations in the United States or overseas. In practice, few programs can increase revenue by tapping latent or underserved demand from large numbers of tuition-paying students. For one thing, it is not clear that the public and nonprofit sector labor markets will support a significant increase in job seekers with a graduate degree in public affairs. The demographics linked to public sector employment are encouraging for the next few decades, given the anticipated retirement of large numbers hired during the earlier decades of government growth. But the impact of the economic recession, combined with the contraction of government funding and anticipated downsizing of government agencies in the face of debt crisis, leave few with the expectation of expansive public employment opportunities. In the nonprofit sector, the pattern is similar; demands for services in many segments of the nonprofit sector are growing, particularly in human and social service agencies addressing those affected most severely by the recession. However, those institutions are also facing growing fiscal challenges and limited opportunities to add positions. Increasing the number of unemployed graduates who have accumulated substantial tuition debt is hardly a recipe for long-term public affairs program success. It is likely true that substantial global demand remains to be tapped, but doing so in an aggressive and cost-effective manner is not easy without modifying program designs and possibly redefining program objectives and standards. Satellite programs in overseas locations have yet to demonstrate broad sustainability. In 2005, George Mason University opened a campus in the United Arab Emirates with substantial local subsidies, only to close it in 2009 as the subsidies were withdrawn. Similarly, in 2009 the University of Delaware signed a planning agreement to establish a campus at the Inchon Free Economic Zone in South Korea, partnering with other U.S. universities, and subsequently withdrew once it became clear that the financial arrangements were unsustainable. Even when attractive on fiscal grounds, satellite programs tend to drain resources from home programs by redirecting faculty efforts away from the main campus. They also raise issues of compromising quality because satellite programs are often staffed by temporary, adjunct faculty. The strategy of increasing tuition-paying graduate students also faces limits based on the price elasticity of demand; few prospective students expect to generate high enough incomes from an MPA degree to justify accumulating higher debt from rising tuition. Indeed, for all the efforts at branding, the MPA degree and its MPP counterpart are not unique requirements for employment and advancement in either the public or nonprofit sectors.

272 Journal of Public Affairs Education The Changing Political Economy of Higher Education

The development of expanded programs for part-time students is an option, but only for programs in large metropolitan markets or those willing to embark on predominantly online or remote site programs. Few programs can take on such new initiatives with constant, if not declining, resources without compromising overall quality and effectiveness. The more entrepreneurial orientation of some programs will encourage innovative designs that include blended degree programs that combine or replace on-site instruction with online instruction, remote, site- based programs (domestic and global), additional credit for public and nonprofit sectors work-related projects, advanced standing for experienced practitioners through portfolio analysis, and many others. Innovation with MPA delivery has significant implications for NASPAA, which now must determine if it will re-orient the traditional and still prevailing definition of the MPA brand not only to allow, but to actively encourage a wider range of program designs and delivery options.

Program Consolidation Fighting to save graduate public affairs programs as stand-alone entities is likely to become increasingly difficult given the inability of many programs to generate positive net revenues or to make a sustainable claim on university subvention as a separate entity. In fact, the separate identity of programs may make them a more vulnerable target of downsizing budget decisions than would be the case if they were part of a broader program mix representing a stronger institutional alliance. NASPAA’s 2010 study of the effects of the recession and state deficits on public affairs programs identified institutional reorganization driven by cost savings as “the biggest threat to member programs in the future” (Teicher, p. 15). Even so, some public affairs programs have taken the initiative to merge with other units that provide a broader and more sustainable fiscal profile and also a stronger institutional identity to support claims on university resources. Perhaps the best recent success story is the University of Arizona’s new School of Government and Public Policy. The MPA program was previously housed in the business school and was a target for university budget cutting. “The plan was to get rid of us, to literally end the school,” according to Brint Milward, now director of the new school (Kerrigan, p. 1). Milward forged an alliance with the head of the political science program to merge the two programs, leading the university to withdraw the threat of elimination. The equally significant outcome, however, is that under the new arrangements, the MPA program has doubled in size. Now the program is more visible to political science undergraduates, and it has been reconfigured creatively to become more accessible to employees of government agencies in the metropolitan Tucson region, to engage practitioners on its faculty, and to keep its tuition rates low and thereby make it more competitive (Kerrigan, p. 1). Milward points out that the greatest benefit is the longer-term stability and opportunity delivered by the merger (personal communication, September 19, 2011).

Journal of Public Affairs Education 273 D. Rich

Undergraduate Programs Short of consolidation, some graduate public affairs programs may develop undergraduate programs that add tuition-generating enrollments and also provide the opportunity to recruit students for graduate programs. Beyond this, under graduate programs strengthen citizenship education, combat the negative vision of government and public administration, and more visibly affirm the importance of public service values within the university community. Adding undergraduate programs poses some distinct challenges. Conversion of graduate faculties to undergraduate teaching is not easy. Further, new undergraduate public affairs programs often threaten already existing undergraduate social science units, all the more given the cash-flow focus of the new university budget models. From a college or university perspective, unless there is a net growth in undergrad uates at the university, attracting new public affairs majors simply reallocates existing revenues. About one quarter of NASPAA’s programs have undergraduate degrees. For some programs, undergraduate student numbers are still modest. Public administration and public policy are not well-known undergraduate majors; “most students have never heard of ‘public administration,’ much less understand what it encompasses” (Dougherty, p. 325). Historically, as Laundicina (2011) points out, NASPAA has been equivocal about, if not directly hostile to, undergraduate public affairs programs (p. 321). Dougherty claims that “NASPAA is generally unsupportive and occasionally antagonistic to undergraduate education in public administration” (p. 325). Some graduate public affairs programs have worked to overcome the historical graduate/undergraduate divide. The University of Delaware’s School of Public Policy and Administration, an exclusively graduate unit for most of its 50-year history, now has two undergraduate majors and two minors. Beyond the benefits to the program mix and overall fiscal profile of the School, these new undergraduate programs attract highly motivated students to prepare for careers in public and community service; some enroll in the School’s MPA and other public affairs degree programs. In this and other cases, undergraduate and graduate public affairs programs are mutually enriching.

The Limits of the Entrepreneurial University Pursuing new program and revenue options will strengthen some programs, but they will not address the longer-term and broader threat posed by the erosion of support for public affairs education and the public service values it embodies. To reverse this erosion of support, a two-pronged approach is needed. First, the limits of the entrepreneurial university as a guide to 21st-century universities need to be made apparent through rigorous analysis. Public affairs faculty and students have the expertise to conduct that examination. The second prong is the formulation of a more expansive vision of the public role of 21st-century universities.

274 Journal of Public Affairs Education The Changing Political Economy of Higher Education

A good starting point for analysis of the limits of the entrepreneurial university model is with an examination of its embedded claims, beginning with the expectations tied to its core idea of entrepreneurship. The romance of entrepreneurship is so widespread that it has clouded assessment of what entrepreneurship means and what it delivers. Thorp and Goldstein claim that entrepreneurship is the defining feature of our era in history, and practically boundless in its applications: “The fundamental entrepreneurial mindset, and the techniques that go with it, are the same no matter what your interests, dreams, and values happen to be” (2010, p. 8). Yet this view muddles the very features that underpin the concept. Entrepreneurs are not only innovators and change agents, they are risk takers, and the risks they take are usually the ones that most established institutions will not take. Entrepreneurship is a risky business, or it is not entrepreneurship. Economists recognize entrepreneurship as a force of creative destruction that renews capitalist economies. However, in this effort, most entrepreneurs fail most of the time at most of what they do. It is mystifying to comprehend how entrepreneurship qualifies as the missing ingredient that will enable universities to do more with less, increase the impact and efficiency of all they do, and enable them to solve society’s “big problems.” In economic theory, an entrepreneur is personally accountable for his or her own success or failure; that is the driving incentive, and it is a given that failures will greatly outnumber successes. Who will be held accountable when the mind-set of entrepreneurship is infused throughout the campus and entrepreneurs are “sprinkled in the mix”? How much entrepreneurship is too much? An analysis of the limits of the entrepreneurial university model also needs to include an examination of its claimed contributions to 21st-century economic development. The link of higher education to economic prosperity is hardly a novel idea. Such expectation was associated with the creation of most public universities and was an important rationale for public funding, including the creation of the land-grant system 150 years ago. Further, the historical record clearly demonstrates that American universities have made a critical difference in the economic and social well-being of their communities as well as the nation. However, the methods used by universities to make these contributions were far more diverse than is reflected in the currently prevailing mind-set. Thus, for example, in the half century following World War II, universities—and especially public universities—provided unprecedented access to higher education for a broader segment of the population than was the case in any other nation, leading to the creation of the most highly educated labor force in the world. That kind of contribution to economic development and prosperity is not a part of the logic model of the entrepreneurial university. Schultz (2005) points out that historically, U.S. higher education has embodied both democratic and marketplace ideas and responsibilities, but recent economic forces have pushed colleges and universities toward becoming corporatized entities that are focused on serving the marketplace to an extent that dominates and displaces their responsibilities

Journal of Public Affairs Education 275 D. Rich to serve democracy. Similarly, Christopher Newfield points out, the competitive and financial demands associated with the role of the university in the new political economy eclipses the public university’s democratizing mission and, specifically, its commitment to keeping students’ costs low. The growing “vision of the university as a privatizable knowledge factory,” Newfield contends, coincides with “a decline in the vision of broadened access and egalitarian development” (2008, p. 10). An equally important focus for analysis is whether entrepreneurial universities can actually deliver on their promises as engines of innovation that will generate 21st-century prosperity. It is one thing to recognize the importance of universities to knowledge-based economic development within an increasingly competitive global environment. It is quite a different matter to expect that a particular community or state will appropriate the benefits of the university’s global entrepreneurship. The commercialization of the intellectual property produced at U.S. universities may do little to help job growth in the local or state economy if the products are manufactured by factories in China or India. The same types of risks apply to expectations that economic benefits will accrue to those universities who are the leading knowledge factories of the 21st century. For the most part, university investments in commercialization of intellectual property have been loss leaders; most patents don’t lead to any revenues, but the costs of filing are substantial and are borne by the institution. As universities become more focused on entrepreneurship, privatization, revenue generation, and economic development, it is inevitable that these dimensions become standards for judging the worth of university programs, people, and public responsibilities. It may be intended that academic quality will not be evaluated by the benchmarks of entrepreneurial success, but it is difficult to avoid that outcome. University leaders may claim that high-quality programs that are loss leaders in revenue are still to be valued and supported, but how many of these heavily subsidized domains can any entrepreneurial university afford? Even the most traditional measures of academic quality, such as the publication of books and journal articles, may become valued less for their long-term contribution to learning than for their economic value—greater market recognition that brings higher national and global rankings. As Harvard President Drew Faust (2009) put it:

As a nation [we] have embraced education as critical to economic growth and prosperity, [but] we should remember that colleges and universities are about a great deal more than measurable utility. . . . Higher education has a responsibility to serve not just as a source of economic growth, but as society’s critic and conscience.” (p. 19)

Fulfilling that responsibility equiresr something more than an entrepreneurial mind-set.

276 Journal of Public Affairs Education The Changing Political Economy of Higher Education

Rediscovering Public Engagement The model of the entrepreneurial university is narrow and risky, but it will not be abandoned without a compelling alternative. Developing an alternative should start from the premise that, over the long term, the only meaningful bottom line for 21st-century universities is the academic bottom line; any other bottom line ultimately undermines a university’s reason for existence. In addition, other institutions can and do conduct entrepreneurial activities more effectively and efficiently than universities. The first and foremost measure of academic success remains the success of the students; all other measures are derivative. Universities committed to academic success must generate the resources needed to support that success; academic success is not possible without business success. Adding the ingredient of entrepreneurship will likely strengthen the latter, but it is not a substitute for the former and should not be a university objective in its own right. What is needed is a model of university public engagement that projects a compelling case for public reinvestment that is grounded in more than transient economic advantage. One promising path is to build upon a model proposed a decade ago by the nation’s land-grant universities. The work of the Kellogg Commission on Higher Education was driven by many of the changes that are now better recognized as dimensions of the global transformation of the political economy of higher education. Through six reports, the Commission evaluated the challenges and proposed strategies to address them, focusing most of all on a new model of the engaged university, an institution that builds upon the land-grant tradition and the previous half century of public investment in higher education, but would reinvent itself to become even more public-regarding in its outlook, organization, and the wide range of constituencies it serves (Kellogg Commission, 2001). Like the advocates of the entrepreneurial university, the Commission recognized that the university’s comparative advantage in a dynamic global society is a product of the breadth, depth, and scope of its knowledge base and its ability to innovate and create new ideas that are responsive to society’s needs. However, the Commission proposed a much more diverse set of strategies for pursuing that advantage, and a much broader vision of the public role and responsibilities of the engaged university (2001). The engaged university, according to the Commission, is an institution that builds upon the expansive public role that research universities have played over the last half century by engaging its faculty and students in addressing emerging social needs and priorities and engaging the resources of the university to become a more integral part of the communities it serves. The engaged university opens up the campus to become a more vital part of the fabric of its community. Engagement is viewed as a two-way process for the definition of needs and priorities and the flow of ideas and resources (Byrne, 2006, p. 7). An engaged university is devoted to creating usable knowledge and sharing that knowledge with the many publics it serves through partnerships that bridge the campus and the community. As advocated by the Commission, the engaged

Journal of Public Affairs Education 277 D. Rich university establishes broad societal impact as a benchmark of achievement, and it expects to be amply supported from public funds for doing so (Kellogg Commission, 1999, p. 46). This is the land-grant tradition writ large, magnified, and diffused into a campus-wide mission that mobilizes students as well as faculty, staff, and university leaders to make engagement a central part of the institution’s teaching and scholarship. The model of the engaged university offers a conceptual antidote to the model of the entrepreneurial university. The model proposed by the Kellogg Commission seeks to do for engagement what the advocates of the entrepreneurial university seek to do for entrepreneurship; in both cases, the objective is to infuse that dimension throughout the university. For public affairs programs, it is clearly a preferred option. Indeed, many public affairs program exemplify the ideals of the engaged university. However, like the entrepreneurial university, the engaged university model is subject to challenges for its own narrowness of vision and incapacity to serve as a dominant vision for 21st-century universities. For one thing, the current infrastructure for public engagement at most “land-grant” institutions is heavily focused on engagement with local and state communities at a time when state support is declining and the vision of higher education is being refocused on national and global competition. The even more compelling question, however, is about resources. Is it viable for universities to dramatically expand public engagement when they are already struggling to match revenues to current commitments? Are there any limits on engagement? Will growing social responsibilities swamp university capacities, divert resources from core responsibilities, and put universities focused on responding to diverse constituencies at a competitive disadvantage? Perhaps the major limit of the engaged university model is that it took as its touchstone the idea of “returning to our roots;” that is, returning to the land-grant tradition. Looking back for its point of reference, the engaged university model does not respond sufficiently to the global transformation in the political economy of higher education. More practically, if the vision and pursuit of the engaged university were intended to regenerate public and political support, the effort has generally been a failure, all the more in light of the budget cuts following the recession of 2008. In principle, there is no necessary conflict between the entrepreneurial university model and the engaged university model; some would argue that they must be reconciled. Indeed, some advocates argue that the entrepreneurial university is the 21st-century version of an engaged university, and that it is “fully consonant with the aims of the modern university, in all its many and varied parts” (Thorp & Goldstein, 2010, p. 6). In practice, the reconciliation of entrepreneurship with the ideas of public engagement that shaped the last half century of university development is not easy to achieve or sustain. The entrepreneurial university model has often been pursued, not as an addition to or an improvement upon the earlier model of public engagement, but as a replacement for it.

278 Journal of Public Affairs Education The Changing Political Economy of Higher Education

Neither the entrepreneurial university model nor the engaged university model as currently proposed is sufficient as a comprehensive and reliable guide for the development of 21st-century universities. What is needed is a more robust, balanced, and sustainable model of university development that is compelling because it incorporates important features from both the entrepreneurial and engaged models, combines them with elements needed to preserve and improve academic as well as competitive success, and projects a broader and more inclusive vision of public responsibilities.

The Path Ahead The transformation of the political economy of higher education will surely intensify in the decades ahead. By any reasonable calculation, we are only at the beginning of the process of restructuring the global topography for both supply and demand. Although it is risky to hazard predictions on the mid and long-term prospects, some elements seem nearly indisputable. Global and national competition will almost surely increase, and the decline in state funding of public universities will not be reversed. Universities that have been responding to fiscal pressures by dramatically increasing tuition and fees will begin to price themselves into a corner if not out of the market; they also will face increasing challenges resulting from growing levels of student debt. Unable to compete on price or further jack up tuition, they will be in a defensive position facing increased competition from lower-cost alternatives, many with attractive attributes for nontraditional learners. One can also anticipate additional competition from new multinational online universities that provide global access to top-flight faculty and a vast array of program options far beyond what any single institution now delivers on-site or online. In this environment, the scramble for resources by U.S. universities will intensify as will the sorting out and greater stratification of the U.S. higher education industry. Thus the pressures on public affairs programs will not abate and are likely to grow long after the current economic recession and global debt crisis are past. Even programs that have successfully navigated the gauntlet of recent challenges to their viability are likely to encounter further challenges in the years ahead. Given these prospects, waiting for local storm clouds before acting will be increasingly risky. Many programs will do far better by taking the initiative to promote changes even before they are faced with direct challenges. NASPAA should actively encourage and support such initiatives. For some programs, new opportunities will emerge from the changing higher education marketplace. Exploiting these will likely require that public affairs programs and NASPAA expand their own horizons beyond what they have devoted themselves to over the last few decades. That means, thinking beyond the MPA brand, at least thinking beyond how that brand has been conceived and advocated in recent decades. It also means moving beyond an accountability/standards mind-set to

Journal of Public Affairs Education 279 D. Rich promote a broader innovation mind-set that encourages a more diversified set of public affairs programs, graduate and undergraduate. A major step for NASPAA is to promote a much greater complementarity of undergraduate and graduate public affairs education, and infuse the importance of such complementarity into the definition of a truly comprehensive public affairs program. At research universities, many more opportunities will emerge for new connections with units in the sciences, engineering, health professions, and domains other than the social sciences. Some opportunities are already being driven by market demand and growing employment prospects in areas such as technology manage ment and health administration. Others will be a result of substantive product differentiation by research universities to gain advantage by establishing a specialized niche in the crowded marketplace. More than a matter of establishing priorities, product differentiation will concentrate resources to establish a unique institutional identity that serves a distinctive sub-market. Some of these niche areas (energy, biotechnology, and information sciences) have important dimensions related to public decision making, policy development and implementation, and program management, enabling creative public affairs programs to align with emerging institutional priorities. These opportunities will be exploited only by public affairs programs that take the initiative to stretch beyond the current array and structure of programs, and build new partnerships on campus and beyond. A key factor influencing long-term opportunities is the growing demand for research universities to adjust to major shifts in the topography of scholarship. It is no secret that for decades, traditional fields of scholarship have been converging, diverging, intersecting, and reconfiguring; patterns differ, but the phenomenon is notable across most academic domains. At most universities, faculties are still simply not effectively organized to pursue scholarship or education on some of the most important subjects of our times, such as energy, the environment, information, cognition, and human learning. In other established areas, such as the health sciences, material sciences, and biotechnologies, the content is evolving and shifting so rapidly that it does not fit well with the current academic organization or the faculty composition. As a result, many universities are initiating new centers, institutes, and instructional programs in these emerging areas. Many of these create opportunities for public affairs programs to form new alliances and garner additional resources, since the emerging priorities for scientific and engineering scholarship usually pose significant issues of social and economic impact, policy development and evaluation, program management and design, or performance assessment and evaluation. In fact, most large-scale federal and foundation funding for scholarship in emerging fields of science and engineering includes requirements for exploration of at least some of these issues. While individual public affairs programs sort out the challenges and opportun ities on their campuses, NASPAA can do a great deal to strengthen the capacity of the field as a whole. Here are some initial steps.

280 Journal of Public Affairs Education The Changing Political Economy of Higher Education

First, openly affirm the priority of addressing the challenges and opportun ities posed for public affairs programs due to the transformation of the political economy of higher education. NASPAA should commit to working on behalf of programs, individually and collectively, to help identify and support initiatives that will make public affairs programs more valued assets of 21st-century universities. Second, initiate a national dialogue among public affairs educators and scholars on the development of a strong and sustainable vision of the public role and responsibilities of 21st-century universities and the role of public affairs programs in fulfilling those responsibilities. NASPAA is the logical organization to initiate a broad coalition with other national organizations (including the American Society for Public Administration, the Association of Policy Analysis and Management, and the National Academy of Public Administration) to sustain the dialogue, and to serve as a voice that communicates the products of that dialogue to both university and government leaders. Make the development of this vision a key item on the agenda of NASPAA and other public affairs organizations, and promote research and publications that address the emerging challenges and opportunities facing public affairs education, scholarship, and public service. Third, create an ongoing observatory on program innovation that will gather and disseminate information from NASPAA members on program options and strategies, sponsor workshops on what works and what doesn’t work, and continuously highlight viable program opportunities. As past president Jeffrey Raffel has suggested, NASPAA should be a leader in evaluating the cost effectiveness of options and strategies (personal communication, August 29, 2011). Finally, develop recommendations and strategies for strengthening the connections between undergraduate and graduate public affairs programs, including what NASPAA should do to further support the complementarity of undergraduate and graduate public affairs education, and to lead in the areas of civic engagement, citizenship, and service learning. The actions outlined are only a beginning and will not change the fortunes of public affairs programs, individually or collectively. However, they will express the determination of NASPAA to play an active leadership role in helping its members to address emerging challenges and opportunities. Beyond that, these steps will begin to mobilize the public affairs community to take positive action to confront and reverse the erosion of support for public affairs programs. Surely, this is a far more constructive path than spending our energy justifying the existence of our programs. Much more than the viability of particular public affairs programs is at stake. The longer-term challenge is to reinvigorate the national commitment to public service as the foundation of a democratic society. That remains the larger purpose that all public affairs programs must serve.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 281 D. Rich

References Alexander, L. (2009, October 16). The three-year solution. Newsweek. Retrieved from http://www. thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/10/16/the-three-year-solution.html

Berry, F. (2010, October 1). The changing climate for public affairs education. NASPAA President- ial Address.

Bok, D. (2003). Universities in the marketplace: The commercialization of higher education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Byrne, J. (2006). Public higher education reform five years after the Kellogg Commission on the future of state and land-grant universities. Washington, DC: National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges and the W. K. Kellogg Foundation.

Christensen, C., & M. Horn. (2011). Colleges in crisis: Disruptive change comes to American higher education. Harvard Magazine, 7(21), 1–4.

Dougherty, Jr., G. (2011). A place for undergraduate public administration education. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 17(3), 325–341.

Faust, D. (2009, September 1). The university’s crisis of purpose. New York Times Book Review.

Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux.

Kamarck, E. C. (2007). The end of government…as we know it: Making public policy work. Boulder, CO: Lynne Reinner.

Kellogg Commission on the Future of State and Land-Grant Universities (Kellogg Commission). (1999, February). Returning to our roots: The engaged institution. Washington, DC: National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges.

———. (2001). Returning to our roots: Executive summaries of the reports of the Kellogg Commission on the future of state and land-grant universities. Washington, DC: National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges.

Kerrigan, H. (2011, August). Fighting to save the MPA. Governing. Retrieved from http://www. governing.com

Kirp, D. (2003). Shakespeare, Einstein, and the bottom line: The marketing of higher education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Laundicina, E. V. (2011). Remembrance of things past: NASPAA and the future of undergraduate education. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 17(3), 317–323.

National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine. (2005). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter future. Washington, DC: Author.

Newfield, C. (2008).Unmaking the public university: The forty-year assault on the middle class. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1993). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. New York: Plume.

282 Journal of Public Affairs Education The Changing Political Economy of Higher Education

Rhodes, F. H. T. (2001). The creation of the future: The role of the American university. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Schultz, D. (2005). The corporate university in American society. Logos. http://www.logosjournal.com/ issue_4.4/schultz.htm

Teicher, P. (2010). The effects of the recession and state deficits on graduate public administration and affairs programs. Washington, DC: NASPAA.

Thorp, H., & Goldstein, B. (2010). Engines of innovation: The Entrepreneurial University in the twenty- first century. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. (2010). The return on the federal investment in for-profit education: Debt without diploma. Washington, DC: Author.

Daniel Rich is university professor of Public Policy in the School of Public Policy and Administration at the University of Delaware. From 2001 to 2009, he served as university provost; from 1990 to 2001, he served as dean.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 283 284 Journal of Public Affairs Education Collaborative Partnerships: A Case Study of the Executive Master of Public Governance Program in Copenhagen, Denmark

Carsten Greve Copenhagen Business School

Abstract This article gives an introduction to the Executive Master of Public Governance degree program in Copenhagen, Denmark—a joint effort by the University of Copenhagen and Copenhagen Business School, aided by Aalborg University— which in the winter of 2012 had enrolled 600+ public managers from Denmark as executive master students. The average age of participants is 45 years. The degree program itself began its first intake of participants in August 2009. To understand the context of the program, the article gives an introduction to the background of the establishment of the program that was a result of a government reform—the Quality Reform—agreed upon by the Danish Parliament in 2008. The second part of the paper describes the organization and purpose of the program. The third part presents the content of the program. The article ends by pointing to lessons learned. Four lessons are highlighted: (a) Sustained dialogue is important; (b) Engage in a multiple sector project to improve public management; (c) Public funding helps fuel enthusiasm; and (d) Efficient organizing and alignment with faculty interests are crucial to success.

How can governments and universities work together in innovative ways to create collaborative partnerships in executive education programs for public managers? This article gives an introduction to the Executive Master of Public Governance degree program in Copenhagen, Denmark—a joint effort by the University of Copenhagen and Copenhagen Business School, aided by Aalborg University— which in the winter of 2012 had enrolled 600+ public managers from Denmark as executive master students. The average age of participants is 45 years. The degree

Keywords: public governance, innovation, public management reform, executive education

JPAE 19(2), 285–307 Journal of Public Affairs Education 285 C. Greve program itself began its intake of participants in August 2009. The first participants got their degree in January 2012. A total of 94 public managers had concluded their studies by January 2013. The program’s main focus was informed by these ideas: the need for real-world knowledge to supplement theory in an executive master program, access to consulting professionals to ensure the practice-oriented element of the program, flexibility in the program design to participate no matter what kind of working schedule public managers had, opportunities for a diversity of public employees to network, interact with each other, and share knowledge and learn from each other. To understand the context of the program, the article gives an introduction to the background of the establishment of the program, which was a result of a government reform—the Quality Reform—agreed upon by the Danish Parliament in 2008. The second part of the article describes the organization and purpose of the program. The third part presents the content of the program. The article ends by pointing to lessons learned and the generalizability for other institutions and collaborations.

Establishing a Flexible Master Program in Public Governance in Denmark In 2006, the Danish government began an ambitious process for a new government-wide reform of the public sector in Denmark—the so-called Quality Reform (Regeringen, 2007). The government’s aim was to propose a new reform that would “produce better quality of services and more job satisfaction.” The government would later seek a broad backing in Parliament for a number of proposals, including the proposal for a new executive public management master degree program. The Danish welfare society is consistently ranked among the most efficient and effective in the world in well-known indexes such as the World Bank Governance Indicators (World Bank, 2011), Transparency Index (Transparency International, 2011), and the recent Better Lives Index by the OECD (OECD, 2011). Danish public management has undergone a number of different reforms during the last decades, including reforms of local governments, the police force, the universities, and digital era governance (see, for example, Greve, 2006; Hansen, 2011). The government invited a large number of organizations, including the trade unions, to participate in the formulation process leading up to the new reform. In early 2007, the government’s progress with the reform was stalled and in need of a new impetus. The trade unions seized the opportunity and called upon the government to begin tripartite negotiations. The government conceded to the demands—not least because a general election was looming later in that year— and the government needed to be on good terms with the trade unions and the voters, many of whom work in the public sector. Remember that 2007 was the last year before the global financial crisis set in. Resources were being allocated for many different purposes, and the times were generally seen to be good. The

286 Journal of Public Affairs Education Case Study of Master of Public Governance Program negations ended in an agreement in the summer of 2007 between the trade unions, the employers, and the Danish government. The price of the combined proposals for the Quality Reform was 10 billion DKK (2 billion USD) for various initiatives, including elderly care and health, and a new “quality foundation” with 50 billion DKK (10 billion USD), half of the money from the foundation being earmarked for new hospitals and other health care proposals. The proposals later formed a part of the budget bill for 2008, which was finally put to the vote on March 5, 2008. In the agreement was a line saying, “The government will provide resources for establishing a flexible executive master program in public governance” and allocated 75 million DKK (15 million USD) for that purpose. Most of the 75 million DKK (15 million USD) was earmarked for direct support for subsidies for individual participants. Five million DKK (1 million USD) was put aside as funds for developing the new flexible master program. The proposal for an executive master was part of a much larger packet of initiatives concerning training and management education initiatives. In the Quality Reform, it was one part of 9 main areas of interest, and it was under the heading of “management reform.” The 75 million DKK (15 million USD) easily represents the biggest boost for executive training for public managers in the history of the Danish state (see the Appendix for a timeline of key decisions). The government delegated decision-making authority for overseeing the program to a new steering group consisting of the members of the tripartite neo-corporatist negotiations. The Danish Ministry of Finance’s State Employer’s Authority was the chair of the group (State Employer’s Authority, 2013). The steering group consists of State Employer’s Authority (chairman), Local Government Denmark (employer organization), Danish Regions (employer organization), the Danish Confederation of Professional Associations AC (trade union), Danish Lawyer and Economists’ Association (trade union), LO the Danish Confederation of Trade Unions (trade union), and FTF (trade union). The steering group decided that the Danish universities interested in the project for the new flexible executive master should form consortia to bid for offering the program. The steering committee indicated that it wanted to have two consortia. All universities in Denmark were invited to bid. Negotiations began between universities and business schools. Eventually, two consortia were formed: A “West consortium” was formed between Aarhus University and University of Southern Denmark. An “East consortium” was formed between University of Copenhagen and Copenhagen Business School. Aalborg University joined the East consortium at the last minute, and geographically they are located in the north of Denmark on the top of the peninsular Jutland (Roskilde University did not seek to become part of the new programs). Because University of Copenhagen and Copenhagen Business School had done all the preparation work before that time, the East consortium decided that Aalborg University could get a separate agreement with the East consortium in order for them to be able to offer the program in Aalborg and the surrounding regional area.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 287 C. Greve

The steering group had a couple of demands that they would like to be reflected in the program. First, it should be more practice oriented and not only be concerned with theory. Second, the program should seek active cooperation with consultancy firms for parts of the program related to personal development of public managers in order to secure the practice orientation. Third, the programs should be offered in a flexible manner so public managers could participate in the program as much as they saw fit. Fourth, the program should be open to many public managers with various backgrounds. This point was of particular concern to some of the trade unions, who wanted their members to enjoy the benefit of the program without necessarily having formal university degrees. An agreement about having at least two years of management experience was specified as a minimum demand for entry. In Denmark, there exist a small number of Master of Public Administration (MPA) programs that offer a cohort-model education for public managers. MPA programs existed at the time at Copenhagen Business School, University of Southern Denmark (where it was called Master of Public Management); Aalborg University; and Roskilde University (where it was called Master of Public Policy). The MPA/MPM cohort model still exists in Copenhagen, Southern Denmark, and Aalborg with a usual intake of 20 to 40 students per cohort. The MPG program has affected the MPA programs, so there are now around 24 MPA students for each cohort. Two programs on Master of Public Policy (Roskilde) and Master of Health Management (Copenhagen Business School) have been canceled temporarily due to lack of demand as a result of the interest in the MPG program. One issue centered on what the new degree should be called. Denmark already had an MPA, an MPM, and an MPP, and there was a sense that the new program should not be confused with the existing programs. Taking its cue from the recent development in research, where there was increasing use of the term governance or public governance (see, for example, Kennedy, 2009; Osborne, 2009), it was agreed to call the new program the executive Master of Public Governance (MPG) program, and that was approved by the ministry. There was also inspiration from the Australian and New Zealand School of Government degree program (Fels, 2005). The new programs had their study program approved by the ministry, and the new flexible master program was the first program to be accredited by the new official Accreditation Institution ACE Denmark, established by the Danish government (http://www.acedenmark.eu). The new flexible executive MPG degree program is part of the wider effort to educate and train public managers in Denmark. The government made the priority of educating public managers very clear in the documents and the agreements in the Quality Reform. Denmark needed better educated and trained public managers if it was to implement new reforms and further develop the Danish public sector. Public management training and education is therefore part of a systematic effort by the Danish government to improve the structure and processes of the Danish public sector, and not an accidental or insular program that is detached from its context.

288 Journal of Public Affairs Education Case Study of Master of Public Governance Program

The remainder of this paper is concerned primarily with the Copenhagen program. The two consortia were under the same government rule that authorizes the program, but has chosen two different paths in formulating the program. The Copenhagen program developed all new modules and courses for their program. A task force was established that prepared the Copenhagen program with members of both the University of Copenhagen and Copenhagen Business School. An agreement of cooperation was drawn up and eventually signed by the rector (vice chancellor) of the both the university and the business school. The agreement set out the governance structure of the cooperation. The study board (consisting of faculty and students) was established in accordance with Danish university education rules. A coordination group meets annually to discuss more strategic matters. The administration and marketing was delegated to Copenhagen Business School for the period of the agreement (2009–2012). The program is run in practice by the executive master unit at Copenhagen Business School, whose head of secretariat is the daily manager of the program. The agreement could be terminated with 6 months’ notice by any of the partners. The agreement stated that Copenhagen Business School should appoint the first academic director or the program, and the University of Copenhagen would provide a vice director for the program. A new agreement has been signed for 2013–2014.

The Purpose and the Organization of the Executive Master of Public Governance Program The Executive Master of Public Governance was established because of the need to provide high-quality education and training for public managers in the public sector. The degree is targeted toward public managers in central government (including the armed forces and the police), regional government, and local govern ment. The purpose of the MPG, according to its official statutes (“studieordningen”), was “to qualify and develop the public manager’s capability to conduct professional management in a political directed public sector context with the aim of strengthening the public manager’s competence in reflecting and further developing his or her own management practice” (paragraph 1 of statutes). It is said that

The education program is an internationally recognized further education within the social sciences for managers with a considerable management responsibility and personnel responsibility within the central government, regional government, local government, state owned enterprises, private companies with public service tasks or other organizations with strong relationship with the public sector. (paragraph 2, statutes)

In practice though, the subsidy for the educational program can be paid to government employees only. “The program should enable executive students to use a wide range of methods, theories, and perspectives which contribute to the practice of professional management in a political and public context, including”:

Journal of Public Affairs Education 289 C. Greve

• Think and act strategically, understand institutional contexts nationally and internationally, diagnose challenges and dilemmas, and understand how public organizations and policy areas function and how they can be changed. • Transform vision, strategies, and political objectives to practical objectives and success criteria; implement and follow up on actions and initiatives. • Create and communicate visions, goals, and different diagnoses of various contexts and their actors, challenges and solutions; and be able to influence, transmit, and involve (people) through dialogue and feedback. • Create and develop trust-based relations for employees, networks, corporations, citizens, users, and international partners; and be able to facilitate cooperation, allocate tasks, motivate, and develop employees. • Think and act normatively; assess problems, people, and policies from a value-based and ethical perspective; show personal and professional integrity in different contexts. The document also mentions a number of competencies that public managers should be educated in: • Contextual knowledge • Theoretical/analytical competence • Reflection competence • Practical management competence • Personal competence The MPG program can be taken in a flexible manner—lasting from 2 to 6 years. Entry levels were set at having at least two years of management experience and a bachelor’s or master’s degree, and competences in English equivalent to “level B” in the Danish high school system. How did we get sufficient faculty to teach in the course? First, the MPG program was a popular program to teach. Many professors from the faculty chose to teach MPG because they could teach in their own core topics and develop new modules within their field of interest. Second, pay is flexible. Professors can choose to have their hours transformed to real income if they go beyond regular teaching commitments. Third, most of the classes had the possibility of having two professors in each class, and there was funding for inviting guest professors to come and teach. Extra faculty and consultancy firms were also hired for some of the teaching.

Key Features of the Executive Master of Public Governance program The following are some of the key features of the new MPG program when it began in 2009.

290 Journal of Public Affairs Education Case Study of Master of Public Governance Program

1. Orientation toward strategic management. The program was clearly oriented toward the strategic and management aspects of a public managers’ job. Other programs may have focused more on a broader social science educational profile. In the Copenhagen MPG program, there were new models (see item 3). None of the models were based on discipline only, such as economics, political science, sociology, psychology, and so forth. 2. Relevance to the practical world of public management. There was an emphasis from the beginning on relevance for practice. The steering group of the tripartite organizations especially emphasized this point. While practice orientation is nearly always a key target for executive master programs around the world, the steering group felt a need to make this point very strongly. Thus it was decided by the steering group that the universities should involve private consultancy companies for part of the delivery of training. In Copenhagen, this was done by subcontracting with private consultants for the two introductory courses, especially for the 360-degree test (in Copenhagen this test was performed as 270 degrees, following the model for that specific company). The contract was competitively tendered once the magnitude of the program became apparent. 3. Cooperation between universities. Several universities would work together and deliver the program. As already mentioned, the University of Copenhagen (38,000 students) and Copenhagen Business School (19,000 students) worked together in the Copenhagen program. This was the first time the two universities had worked together on such a project. The initial agreement of cooperation has been quite important in determining responsibility. Previously, the Copenhagen Business School had offered the MPA program for 15 years and had considerable experience in executive programs in other management areas as well. The impetus to form consortia was the brainchild of the steering group and not something the universities initially had prepared. However, both institutions are located in the central Copenhagen area. Meetings could be held at either institution. The only meetings that needed more careful travel planning are meetings with Aalborg University, located more than 400 km from Copenhagen, but easily accessible by plane in 45 minutes. 4. International dimension. The statutes emphasized that the program should have a distinct international dimension (paragraph 14). This could be as memoranda of understanding with other institutions, as an international summer school, as sending executive students to program in other countries, to invite guest lectures and professors to come to Copenhagen, and to involve internationally oriented topics

Journal of Public Affairs Education 291 C. Greve

in the classroom. An agreement in the form of a memorandum of understanding was signed with the Hertie School of Governance in Berlin quite early in 2009. The cooperation with the Hertie School of Governance meant that Hertie could send students to the English- speaking modules in Copenhagen, and that Copenhagen could send students to elective modules in Berlin (mainly in the spring semester). This cooperation has worked quite well, and Copenhagen and Hertie regularly hold meetings. Talks have been going on with Warwick University/Warwick Business School in the United Kingdom, where Copenhagen Business School already had considerable connections. Talks also were held with Sciences Po in Paris, France, in the beginning. 5. Funding through the Danish government and Parliament. The financial foundations for the program were largely secured through the funds in the national budget that were set aside for both consortia. The aforementioned funding was dedicated toward subsidizing program fees for public managers. The size of the subsidy was decided by the tripartite steering group on an annual basis. Until now, the subsidy has been for 2000 DKK per European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) point. The whole program is 60 ECTS points (1 year of full-time student work). So for a module that cost 10,000 DKK (an elective module), the public manger’s organization would receive 6,000 DKK in subsidy, which left 4,000 DKK to be paid by either the student or the organization. Mostly, the organization pays the last part. In essence this means that the MPG program is largely 100% government financed. The subsidies are allocated as follows: The steering group has divided the funds in proportion to an organization’s size. The funds are allocated in a precise manner, so each public organization knows the exact amount of funds available to it. This list is public and can be viewed on the State Employer Authority’s website (now the Agency for the Modernization of Public Administration). So, for example, the Danish Foreign Ministry or the Ministry of Justice can see from the list that they have x amount of resources earmarked for the program, the Capitol Region of Denmark can see the amount of resources they have been allocated, and the Gribskov local government can see the amount of resources they have been allocated. How they allocate funds internally in each organization is up to them. We know that the principles vary. Some organizations use them strategically and align the resources with their own strategic human resource management (HRM) policy or leadership training policy. Other organizations might not even be aware that they have an account where funds are to be spent.

292 Journal of Public Affairs Education Case Study of Master of Public Governance Program

Student Intake and Profile Because the program has been fortunate enough to be eligible for government funding since 2009, it has managed to attract a fairly substantial number of executive students. People can apply two times a year: once in May and once in November. Roughly 120 public managers have begun each semester, making the annual intake around 240 executive students. These students come from all areas of the public sector: from central government, regional government, and local government as well as the armed forces, police, and other organizations. The number of students in the summer of 2011 was 520 executive students (see Figure 1), rising to 600+ in January 2012. The average age is 45 years. The participants range from 31 years of age to 61 years of age. There are 61% women and 39% men. A total of 54% have a university degree in law, political science, economics, or other; 28% have a medium-term degree (nurses, for example); 7% have a diploma degree; 4% are from the armed forces or police; 3% have a PhD; and 3% have a bachelor’s degree (see Figure 2). A total of 48% are from local government, 33% are from central government, 16% are from the regions, and 2% are from other organizations (see Figure 3). By any standard, the MPG is the largest executive public management program in Denmark. As a new feature, a couple of “key accounts” are beginning to show. The Capitol Region of Denmark has sent many public managers, as has the Copenhagen city municipality. The Capitol Region and Copenhagen city

Figure 1. Number of Applications for the MPG Program in Copenhagen

600

500

400

300

200

100

0 E09 F10 E10 F11 E11

Note. E = Autumn/Fall; F = Spring

Journal of Public Affairs Education 293 C. Greve

Figure 2. Educational Background of Participants in the MPG Program in Copenhagen, Denmark

60% 54% 51% 50%

Autumn 2011 40% Spring 2011 30% 30% 28%

20%

10% 7% 7% 8% % 4 % % % 2% 3 3 3 0% Master Bachelor Diploma Defense/police PhD Other

Figure 3. Level of Government—Distribution Among Applicants for the MPG Program in Copenhagen as of Summer 2011

300

250 243 Autumn 2011 214 Spring 2011 200 182 169 Autumn 2010 148 150

110 100 89

Number of Applicants Number 72 54 50 21 8 10 0 Local government Regions Central government Other

294 Journal of Public Affairs Education Case Study of Master of Public Governance Program municipality are the two largest employers in the Copenhagen region, much larger than any private sector corporation in the area. Copenhagen city council has alone about 44,000 employees, and the Capitol Region has about 16,000 employees. Most recently, the Danish police force has made the MPG program its preferred executive master program. All future chief police inspectors are expected to go through the MPG program to get a degree. It is a huge responsibility, but one that is cherished by the program.

The Content of the Executive Master of Public Governance Degree Program The MPG degree program is offered jointly by University of Copenhagen and Copenhagen Business School (and Aalborg University in northern Jutland). It is a public management and governance program of an international standard designed to meet the requirements of public managers in order to improve their management practice. The program developed a strategy early on that emphasized the following: The MPG program aims to educate public managers to further develop the Danish welfare society. That way, the MPG program is not only improving practice but also serving a wider purpose: the continuing development of the Danish welfare society. This purpose will be measured in the years to come by focusing on the actual impact and outcome public managers make. It serves to remind both faculty and public managers that the essential task is to improve the public sector outcome in the long run. As yet there are no well-developed metrics that will tell exactly how this impact is made, but the program is outcome-oriented in its focus. The MPG curriculum was developed by an initial group of public management and governance researchers from Copenhagen Business School and University of Copenhagen. They were also responsible for the first classes and modules that were taught. A decision was made early on to try to develop new modules, and not be content to copy existing modules in normal masters’ programs in political science or management. This decision was made because the faculty wanted to seize the opportunity to be innovative and to create new curriculum topics. The faculty planning the new program saw it as a window of opportunity to come up with modules that had not been a part of an official master of public administration or policy before—like the modules on personal leadership. The workload is characterized in ECTS points. (For more information, go to the European Union website at http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/doc48_en.htm) The result of the initial task force was the following curriculum of modules: • Two introductory modules of 5 ECTS each = 10 ECTS • Six core modules (students choose 4 out of 6) of 5 ECTS each = 20 ECTS • Elective modules of 3 ECTS or 6 ECTS = 18 ECTS • A final master project = 12 ECTS

Journal of Public Affairs Education 295 C. Greve

There were few requirements attached to the running order, but both introductory courses had to be taken in order to complete a full master and to begin a master project. The steering group had emphasized flexibility, allowing the student the opportunity to “mix and match.” In practice, most of the students began by taking the introductory courses first. The introductory and obligatory modules were designed from various disciplines and also to allow for mix in disciplines. The following are the introductory modules: • Introduction to Management Studies • Personal Development The introductory module is 5 ECTS and lasts one semester, and the personal development module of 5 ECTS is spread over two semesters (previously three semesters). The core modules are as follows: • Coaching • Strategic Human Resource Management • Communication and Management • Leading Reform and Change • Public Governance • Strategic Management in a Governance Perspective The core modules came into existence after a prolonged dialogue with the steering group led by the Danish Ministry of Finance. The ministry and its partners had some suggestions for themes and topics that should be part of the program. Emphasis was on more Personal Development modules and management-oriented modules. The universities also had a list of relevant topics and areas of competence that could be provided, for example, in Coaching and in Public Governance. The universities proposed the final list that also was approved by the official Danish accreditation body for educational programs. The core modules were designed so participants had to choose four out of six modules. Some participants might have had long experience and formal education in strategy, so they could avoid taking the module in strategic management and instead focus on another topic, for example, the Leading Reform and Change module, if it better suited their interests and tastes. The elective modules are quite varied, which is to be expected. They are loosely grouped into three categories to make it easy for executive students to choose: (a) supportive electives, (b) advanced electives, and (c) contemporary issue electives. One example of the first category could be Organization Theory for Public Managers or Economics and Accounting for Public Managers, which were not in the original curriculum but have been sought-after modules. An example of the second category could be Advanced Communication Studies or

296 Journal of Public Affairs Education Case Study of Master of Public Governance Program

Performance Management, which builds on Communication and Management and Leading Reform and Change, respectively. An example of the third category could be Globalization and the Danish Public Sector, The Competition State, or Motivation of Knowledge Employees, or Existence and Public Management (based on more philosophical studies). A list of examples of elective courses is included here: • Trust-Based Management • Organizational Theory for Public Managers • Existence and Management • Innovation Management • Motivation of Knowledge Employees • Evaluation and Evidence Based Management • The Danish Public Sector Model and Globalization • Tracking Public Sector Leadership after the Financial Crisis • Social Science Methodology • Stakeholder Relations, Lobbyism and Public Affairs • Risk Communication • New Public Management • Public Governance in the Health Sector • Performance Management • Economics and Organizations • The Competition State • Ethics and Democratic Legitimacy • New Forms of Communication on the Web • Advanced Communication and Management • Organizational Psychology • Gender and Public Management When designing the catalogue of electives, efforts were made to include current topics and hot topics as well as more classic topics that some groups may need to take. For example, the Danish central government has many people educated in law who are highly effective, but who never had an organizational theory class before. People trained in law might therefore request our Organizational Analysis module. Danish local government and regional government are staffed by many professionals, or people with a social science background who lack formal training in psychology, so they might choose the Organizational Psychology class. For the hot topics, we have noted interest in Trust-Based Management, Motivation of Knowledge Employees, and Risk Communication, which may be understandable in times of austerity when public managers have to explain cutbacks and downsizing to their employees.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 297 C. Greve

Modules in English The MPG program has also offered modules in English, either alone or through our partners: • Strategic Change Management • Inside the Black Box: Advanced Strategy Making in Public Sector Organizations • Public Managers: New Identities and Roles in Challenging Times • Performance Management (Hertie School of Governance) • Cutback Management (Hertie School of Governance) • Organisations and Agencies (Hertie School of Governance) • International Summer School (the MPA program and international partners). The summer school held at a destination in Europe brings together executive master students from Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, South Africa, and the United Kingdom. For several of the modules, we have been able to offer more classes. We generally have 24 at a minimum number of executive students and a maximum of 40 executive students in the classroom. In the elective modules, there can be 15 executive students as a minimum. In Copenhagen, there have been three classes on Strategic Management in a Governance Perspective, two on Communication and Management, and two Leading Reform and Change. Popular core modules are Strategic Management in a Governance Perspective, Communication and Management, and Coaching, hotly followed by the other three modules. The introductory modules run at maximum capacity with four classes of 30 executive students each. Among the most popular elective modules have been Organizational Psychology, Motivation of Knowledge Employees, Trust-Based management, Innovation Management, and Organization Theory for Public Managers. The final master project capstone allows for three types of projects: a classic master thesis, an organizational development project, and a personal leadership project.

What Is Distinctive about the Curriculum? 1. The curriculum aims to support the objectives and purposes set out for the program in general. The curriculum focuses both on the contextual aspects of public sector management and governance as well as on the more personal perspectives for taking on management responsibility. The more contextual parts of the curriculum have to do with strategic management, leading reform and change, public governance, and to a certain extent communication and management. The more personal perspective parts of the curriculum focus on coaching, strategic HRM, and

298 Journal of Public Affairs Education Case Study of Master of Public Governance Program

personal development. The introductory course tries to capture both aspects. The master project with its three types also allows for a specific chosen profile. It is hoped that when the first candidates graduate from the program, they will appreciate this balance of the curriculum. 2. The curriculum tries to be in tune with the challenges public managers are facing today and tomorrow. The obligatory modules should cover the basic skills for contemporary public managers. The elective modules give more room for improvising, and here the topical issues can be changed from semester to semester. At the moment, the Organizational Psychology and Trust-Based Management modules are attracting attention, indicating perhaps a special need by Danish public managers in a time of financial austerity? It also seems clear that strategy and communication are two topics that the public managers are interested in knowing more about. 3. The curriculum is constantly being updated and being developed with guest lectures and international speakers. The program has been lucky enough to attract a number of high-class guest lectures. International guest lecturers and guest speakers have been a priority in the MPG program from the very beginning. Because of the government funding, the possibilities of inviting guest professors have been quite generous. Speakers from the Danish public sector have also been interested in making appearances in the classroom. International guest professors invited to speak have included Professor Beryl Radin (American University, USA), Professor Brad Jackson (University of Auckland, New Zealand), Professor Erik-Hans Klijn (Erasmus University, Netherlands), Professor Renate Meyer (WU–Wien), Professor Janet Newman (Open University, UK), and Professor Kjell-Arne Røvik (Norway). The Danish speakers include Erik Bonnerup, a former permanent secretary; Inger Marie Vynne, vice CEO for the local government Gribskov Kommune; and Kaj Kjærsgaard from the Ministry of Finance. Each semester is introduced with a special lecture, usually by one of the faculty members. In 2009, it was Ministry of Finance manager Elisabeth Hvas from the Danish Ministry of Finance on challenges for public services; in spring 2010, it was Professor Uffe Østergaard from Copenhagen Business School on the Danish state in a historical perspective; in the fall of 2010, it was Professor Reinhard Stelter from University of Copenhagen on coaching; in the spring of 2011, it was Professor Anker Brink Lund from Copenhagen Business School on communication for public managers; and in the fall of 2011, it was Associate Professor Anders Berg-Sørensen from the University of Copenhagen on ethics for public managers. In the winter 2012, it was Assistant Professor Anders Raastrup Kristensen on strategic human resource management for public managers.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 299 C. Greve

Course Delivery and Exams The modules are all delivered in semesters. The spring semester begins late January to early February. Summer exams are in May and June. The fall semester begins in late August and ends in November. Winter exams are in December and January. The semester is divided so that the introductory module and the obligatory modules are placed first in the semester, and the elective modules are placed in the second half of the semester. The hours in class requirement for a module of 5 ECTS is 32 hours. The hours in class for an elective module of 3 ECTS is 20 hours and 32 hours also for a 6 ECTS module. Classes are usually three 8-hour, full-day classes and two 4-hour, half-day classes (3 × 8 + 2 × 4 = 32 contact hours). An elective is usually five 4-hour, half-day classes (= 20 contact hours), or a block seminar of 2½ days for an elective module of 3 ECTS. Classes are normally scheduled during the daytime. A whole-day class will begin at 9:00 a.m. and end at 5:00 p.m. A half-day class will begin at 2:00 p.m. and end at 5:00 p.m. Students who are there for the day, are served a light lunch (usually a sandwich or Scandinavian-type open sandwiches). Students are also served coffee/tea and cake and assorted fruits during breaks. Coffee is especially important as most Danes drink lots of it! Exams are mostly of two kinds: A written assignment followed by an oral exam. The written part is usually 10 to 15 pages long and is prepared in part through the hours in class. The written exams are graded through the Danish grading system and graded by the lead examiner with an external examiner. The other type is a synopsis exam where the student presents a shorter synopsis in an oral exam. In the oral part, the executive student usually has 5 minutes to make introductory remarks. The whole session takes 30 minutes, all inclusive. The synopsis exam is graded by the leading examiner and an internal examiner (other member of faculty). The introductory module and the personal development module have both developed more interactive exams where the verdict is pass or fail. The master thesis is assigned to be around 80 pages long and will be followed by an oral exam. The grading is according to the Danish grading system, and there will be a lead examiner and an external examiner.

Teaching Methods The teaching methods tend to vary a lot because of the different topics and their teaching styles. Teaching in a Coaching module can perhaps be different in style than teaching in Strategic Management in a Governance Perspective. Great care has been taken in encouraging faculty to use and experiment with new teaching methods. There are many prime examples, but no overall review yet of the methods used. An annual teacher’s seminar is bringing some of the teaching methods to the table. Others are shared between teachers. The program is blessed with having adequate resources so far, which means that there is the possibility of having two faculty members present for most of the time in the modules. There is also an amount earmarked for inviting guest lectures and speakers from outside.

300 Journal of Public Affairs Education Case Study of Master of Public Governance Program

Among the teaching methods used are the following: • Lectures • In-class discussions • Guest lectures • YouTube clips followed by discussions • Small tests • Teaching cases (more on that later) • Group presentations by students • Small-group discussions • 270-degree tests of participants • Small assignments • Interviews on leadership style in home organizations The MPG program has been striving to develop a more coherent program for the teaching case method. Several faculty members have followed the case-based teaching course offered by Copenhagen Business School. A course on case writing is being planned for the spring of 2012. Special funds have been allocated for improving and promoting the teaching case method in the classroom. Students use the e-learning platform of Copenhagen Business School (CBS) for their courses. The platform is called CBS Learn, based on the international program Moodle. It offers a broad variety of interactive tools.

Teaching Evaluation There is a comprehensive teaching evaluation after each semester. Each and every module is evaluated through an electronic survey. The electronic teaching evaluation is administered by the Evaluation Unit at Copenhagen Business School. The teaching quality is graded on various items on a scale from 1 to 5. Up to now, the teaching evaluations have been satisfactory and quite good. The response rate fell in the fall semester of 2010, which was of some concern; but every effort is made to get the response rate up again, and it was improved in spring 2011. Each evaluation is delivered to the teacher in question directly for his or her information. The combined evaluation report is reviewed by the academic director and vice director and the staff involved. The evaluation report is also reviewed by the study board. A version of it is also presented to the advisory board of MPG. At the end of each semester, there is an evaluation meeting for all relevant faculty members where the results of the evaluation report and other issues related to evaluation are discussed.

MPG in the Media There has not been so much active media promotion done yet from the MPG program’s side. But the MPG program has been featured in various media. In the beginning it was thought to be important to establish some kind of brand

Journal of Public Affairs Education 301 C. Greve presence. A brochure with a distinct design and advertisements were planned in connection with a media bureau. The advertisements were target at specialist journals and magazines of public sector manager unions, especially DJØF-bladet, the magazine for the union of the Danish Lawyers and Economists, which organized many of the central government and other government-level public managers. The advertisement was focused on the design of the name MPG and did not contain photos. The advertisements were also placed in one of the big Danish daily newspapers, Politiken, which we know are being read by public sector managers. This approach has seemingly paid off, because the advertisement drew a lot of attention and has helped in attracting public managers to the program. MPG has been featured in other media and by the government. The Ministry of Finance magazine Incitament (“Incentive,” 2013) has run a story in several issues where the magazine follows one particular public manager’s (Lone Frosch) journey through the program. The public manager in question is from the Danish Patent Office. The magazine is nicely edited with a good graphic design, and the articles feature interviews with the public manager and sometimes her boss. The Ministry of Finance’s State Employer’s Agency has also featured a small number of executive students on their website, including the MPG executive student who is the director of a prison in Denmark. MPG was also featured in articles in Boersen, a business paper in Denmark. The Copenhagen program is ready to be developed even further. A number of different projects and ideas are lined up already, and more are bound to come soon. Here are some of the present projects: • Teaching case program. As already mentioned, we are trying to get a more ambitious case-teaching and writing program off the ground. We are very inspired about developments elsewhere, for example, the case program associated with the Australian and New Zealand School of Government (ANZSOG). We have experienced case teachers at CBS and hope to connect to other inspirational persons as well elsewhere. We would like the teaching case method to be one of the defining features of the Copenhagen MPG program. • Social media. So far, the Copenhagen MPG program has not been strong on social media, but a LinkedIn profile and platform was launched in September 2011 and already has 300+ members. The LinkedIn site will exclusively connect executive students associated with the Copenhagen MPG program. • Research related to the MPG program. Although funding must be used for subsidies only and not for research, it is clear that research on public management and governance will take inspiration from many of the examples, experiences, and connections that the program brings forward. More connections are bound to be made between researchers and MPG students. One suggestion is to write some textbooks based on the experiences and examples presented in the classroom.

302 Journal of Public Affairs Education Case Study of Master of Public Governance Program

• International partnerships. There is a growing interest from executive students to gain more international insight and opportunities. Many of the bigger groups represented, for example, executive students from the Danish police force, have an expressed interest in being more internationally oriented. The cooperation with the Hertie School of Governance has been rewarding and inspirational, and there is no doubt that further international partnerships will be beneficial to the program.

Concluding Remarks: Lessons Learned The Executive Master of Public Governance program has existed since August 2009. The program is funded partly by the Danish government and Parliament and is supported by major stakeholders in the Danish public sector. The program in Copenhagen currently has 600+ public managers enrolled as executive students. They come from all areas in the public sector: central government, regional governments, and local governments. Evaluations are favorable so far. Copenhagen Business School and University of Copenhagen collaborate on delivering the program. There is an affiliated program in Aalborg University, a regional university in Denmark. There is a thriving international collaboration with Hertie School of Governance in Berlin and talks with Netherlands School of Public Administration in the Netherlands. The first graduates got their degree in January 2012. Some preliminary lessons are being learned that other universities can learn from: 1. Sustained dialogue is important. There has been a very constructive and intense dialogue between the steering group representing the original tripartite negotiators and the universities and other partners. The group has annual meetings as well as more informal discussions and consultation. When the ministry has needed new figures, the secretariat has provided them with the requested information. The dialogue has continued throughout the program, and the support from the ministry, and employers, the unions, and the entire public sector has been amazing. The dialogue and constructive alliance with the international partners have also been outstanding. A key lesson here is that dialogue pays off and that sustained dialogue needs to be nurtured. 2. Engage in a multiple sector project to improve public management: The MPG program shows that multiple sector programs can help improve government. Supplemental training, learning of new skills, and sharing of knowledge can offer long-term gains for society. The program reinforced decision making in government. Stakeholders in local, regional, and central government had unique strengths and weaknesses to be explored. The MPG program offers a quality learning experience for managers throughout government. The key lesson here

Journal of Public Affairs Education 303 C. Greve

is that decision making and management are supported if managers from different sectors and different levels of government are brought together and get to know each other’s work and outlooks. 3. Public funding helps fuel enthusiasm. The incoming executive students have shown tremendous enthusiasm for the program. The MPG program can be seen as a branding tool to show how public funding can help improve public management. The executive students have not only been able to formally evaluate the modules but also shared information and experiences in the classroom and during and after exams. The enthusiasm has been present in the classroom, where executive students have provided examples and experiences that have aided the teaching and raised the bar for the issues and types of discussion that were possible. It remains to be seen whether this is first-time enthusiasm or whether the involvement will continue, but so far it has boosted everyone’s engagement in starting up a new program. The key lesson here is that infusions of public funding can help to start a new program and to get actors enthused about and involved in developing new ideas and relevant modules. 4. Efficient organizing and alignment with faculty interests are crucial to success. Faculty members have been active in formulating new teaching plans and developing new modules, including new elective modules. We have been lucky to receive interest and backing from a wide range of faculty across the involved institutions. Faculty members get adequate resources (e.g., by teaching two professors in each class) and can have extra pay bonuses by teaching in the program. Faculty members have expressed keen interest in coming to teach the executive students. And there has been an additional advantage: Faculty members have later been hired as consultants and guest speakers for various public sector organizations. Faculty members have been greatly aided in their planning by a helpful, service-minded, and efficient secretariat that is essential for this kind of new program to work. A key lesson here is that efficient organizing and alignment with faculty interests are important ingredients in making a new program function from day one. Among the big questions: What will happen after the initial government funding runs out? And how much will the financial crisis affect the program in the short run? The number of applications was still high for the spring semester of 2011 and continued so in 2012. Probably two or more points are relevant to that discussion for the future. The first one is that initiative for establishing an executive master program was not an accidental decision, but a part of a more systematic effort in developing the competences of public managers in Denmark to further improve the Danish welfare society. The trade unions and other organizations all

304 Journal of Public Affairs Education Case Study of Master of Public Governance Program have a vested interest in the effort becoming or being a success. The second point is that there is now beginning to be a solid foundation to build the program on for the future. Modules are established; the faculty members and secretariat have put effort into making a good, coherent program; the brand is gradually getting better known in public sector organizations. Most important of all, public managers are seeking out the program because they tend to find it can help them build their competences and help them strive for the greater aim of securing and improving the Danish welfare society in turbulent times.

References Fels, A. (2005, April 9). Globalization and public policy education and research: The Executive Master of Public Administration degree program of the Australian and New Zealand government. Paper presented at the Association of Public Policy Analysis and Management, Spring Conference, Washington, D.C.

Greve, C. (2006). Public management reform in Denmark. Public Management Review, 8(1), 161–169.

Hansen, H. F. (2011). NPM in Scandinavia. In T. Christensen & P. Lægreid (Eds.), The Ashgate research companion to new public management (pp. 113–129). Aldershot, Hampshire, England: Ashgate.

Incitament (Danish Ministry of Finance, Danish Agency for Governmental Management magazine). (2013). Continuing story on Master of Public Governance student Lone Frosch as she takes her MPG modules —website in Danish). Retrieved from http://www.oes.dk/Servicemenu/Incitament/Lone-Frosch

Kennedy, S. S. (2009). The pedagogy of “governance.” Journal of Public Affairs Education, 16(4), 607–619.

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2011). Better lives index. Retrieved from http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/

Osborne, S. (Ed.). 2009. The new public governance? London: Routledge.

Regeringen (Danish Government). (2007). Kvalitetsreformen—Bedre velfærd og større arbejdsglæde [The Quality Reform—Better services and greater job satisfaction] Copenhagen: Schultz. Retrieved from www.kvalitetsreform.dk

State Employer’s Authority, Denmark. (2013). Retrieved from http://perst.dk/Service%20Menu/ English.aspx

Transparency International. (2011). Retrieved from www.transparency.org

World Bank. (2011). The Worldwide Governance Indicators project: Govindicators.org

Journal of Public Affairs Education 305 C. Greve

Websites Accreditation Denmark ACE Denmark: http://www.acedenmark.eu

Copenhagen Business School, Denmark: http://www.cbs.dk

The Executive Master of Public Governance Program, Copenhagen, Denmark: http://www.mpg-flex.dk

University of Copenhagen, Denmark: http://www.ku.dk

Aalborg University http://www.mpg.aau.dk/

Carsten Greve is a professor of Public Management and Governance at Copenhagen Business School in Denmark. He is academic director of the CBS Public–Private Platform and study director of the executive Master of Public Governance program. His main research interests include public management reform and public–private partnerships.

306 Journal of Public Affairs Education Case Study of Master of Public Governance Program

Appendix

A Timeline of Decisions August 2006: Talks begin between Ministry of Finance and universities. Danish government first proposes idea for new Quality Reform.

March 2007: Trade unions ready to make agreement with government. Demands for funding for educational initiatives, including executive education at the master level.

July 2007: Agreement reached in tripartite negotiations, which includes proposal for a new flexible master in public governance.

August 2007: Government officially launches the proposal for the Quality Reform, which includes the flexible master proposal.

March 2008: Danish Parliament votes for funding for the MPG program.

2008–first half of 2009: Extensive preparations of the new program. Establishment of steering group chaired by the Danish Ministry of Finance.

August 2009: Universities welcome first batch of executive students.

January 2012: First Master of Public Governance executive students get their degree.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 307 308 Journal of Public Affairs Education A Public Service Education: A Review of Undergraduate Programs With a Community and Service Focus

Tony Carrizales Marist College

Lamar Vernon Bennett Long Island University-Brooklyn

Abstract Public service education has been a continued area of research, specifically at the graduate level. At the undergraduate level, programs have focused primarily on public administration and public policy education. However, a growing number of undergraduate programs today underscore service and community in addition to the more traditional areas centered on the policy process and management of public organizations. Undergraduate programs now offer bachelor degrees or a major in public service with program missions that are distinct from process and management. This paper reviews the current trends of undergraduate public service programs and outlines the program missions, requirements, and structure that emphasize service and community as their core values. The paper contributes to the exploration of undergraduate public affairs education and provides an early review of programs that prioritize service and community over other values.

Public service is a critical component to a public administration education. Through service learning, students learn management skills and policy processes as well as public values. Public service as a practice for public administration students in MPA programs adds value to their education, typically with an internship or service-oriented project. The importance of public service and its practice is also well established in programs throughout the country at universities and colleges designed to give students opportunities to conduct service projects. Although these programs may not be integrated into specific MPA or degree major programs,

Keywords: public service, community service, undergraduate education

JPAE 19(2), 309–323 Journal of Public Affairs Education 309 T. Carrizales & L. Bennett they are often a curricular component. A public service education, traditionally associated with management and policy processes, also encompasses the practice of community involvement and appreciation for the values of service. For the purposes of this research, we narrowly define a public “service” education to focus on community and service. Based on this working definition, many programs offer a degree in service, by name, but only a few offer an education founded on values of community and service. This is especially the case at the undergraduate level, where only a limited number of public service programs have missions and curricula that reflect the importance of service for, and involvement in, local communities. This paper discusses the existence of current undergraduate public service programs and outlines the program missions, requirements, and structure that emphasize service as their core value. This focus on service as the primary mission at the undergraduate level is critical, because programs of public administration and public policy education have historically underscored the policy process and management of public organizations. This review of programs contributes to the exploration of undergraduate public affairs education and provides an early review of programs that prioritize service over other values. We begin with a literature review of service education and the value in public service, helping to frame the driving force behind programs that have chosen to establish undergraduate programs in the field. Following the literature review, we present a search and summary of existing programs outlining where and how undergraduate programs are underscoring public service. We conclude the paper with recommendations and considerations for the future of undergraduate public service education.

Literature Review Public Service The link between public service delivery and an appreciation for the value of service is critical to the future of public affairs education. Recent public sector reforms underscore private sector management values and principles. A shift away from a public service ethic in education can have a lasting impact on public service delivery. Noting an emerging challenge to the public service ethic, Perry and Wise call for further research to clearly define and understand the motives of public servants amid the “crisis in government service” (1990, p. 372). These authors point out how national initiatives may be the needed trigger for public service motivation, such as a charismatic leader’s call for public service or legislation that provides opportunities for young adults who want to pursue public service occupations (p. 372). Such efforts may best be exemplified by the recent legislation, Serve America Act (2009), which reauthorizes and expands national service programs. This act also promotes the use of specific efforts in engaging youth and putting them on a path of service. Public service values that include, but are not limited to, accountability, integrity, and impartiality are distinct from private sector values such as profitability, inno vation, and enterprise. As Rayner, Williams, Lawton, and Allison (2010) note,

310 Journal of Public Affairs Education Undergraduate Programs With a Community and Service Focus public sector reforms that shift toward private sector management have significantly and negatively affected the public service ethos, leading to a renewed focus on the importance of service (p. 28). Haque argues that in the academic discourse of public administration, the “publicness” of public service has diminished with regard to the representation of public interests when compared to business management (2001, p. 65). Haque further suggests that a market-driven mode of governance has become the primary focus diminishing the concern for the status of public service worldwide in what has become a businesslike transformation for public service. Addressing the challenges facing the publicness of public service can, in part, be done through academia. Haque concludes that academics and practitioners need to introduce “serious critical studies and debates on the use of private sector concepts, values, structures, and techniques in public service” (2001, p. 75). Based on Haque’s assessment that market-driven public sector reforms have undermined the meaning of public service, it could be argued that a renewed focus of the public sector ethos can improve the quality of public service education. In part, Rayner and colleagues define the public service ethos as “a function of individual motivation and values, such as honesty and altruism, organizational rules and process that accomplish accountability and impartiality, and goals that enhance the common good” (2010, p. 29). They have developed a multidimen sional framework for a public service ethos based on belief, practice, and public interest—a framework that can help further research and the study of public service. The study of values and principles associated with service are well integrated in graduate MPA programs and curriculum. At the undergraduate level, however, they remain marginalized due to the importance of management skills and policy process knowledge. This study highlights the importance of integrating the public service ethos in the goals of any public service educational program. Newcomer and Allen define the goal of public service education as preparing students to serve in the public interest. This is a distinct view of public service education; it underscores “serve” and “public interest,” especially when compared to goals such as effectively “managing” in the public sector. Newcomer and Allen provide a “Model of Learning Outcomes for Public Service Education” that can assist in furthering efforts to assess student outcomes as they conclude with the importance of public service education programs measuring the “right things, in the right way, to ensure that outcome assessment is credible” (Newcomer & Allen, 2010, p. 224).

Service Learning Dicke, Dowden, and Torres also highlight the growing interest in service learning among public service education, noting its support in furthering the missions of many MPA programs. They outline a framework of four distinct perspectives on using service learning: community service, moral, political, and instrumental (Dicke et al., p. 201). In their paper, Dicke and colleagues also argue that successful service learning projects go beyond community-based projects but are best designed

Journal of Public Affairs Education 311 T. Carrizales & L. Bennett with clear learning objectives. Field and hands-on experience are critical to achieve deeper understanding of what it takes to succeed in public service (Karl & Peat, 2004). Moreover, educators have an opportunity to advise students to establish a “person-environment fit,” and ensure that the students’ awareness of their own values is in line with their chosen career field (Karl & Peat, 2004, p. 272). Although Lambright (2008) questioned how much affect service learning had on learning outcomes for students in MPA programs, he also found some evidence that service learning can be more effective than traditional classroom assignments in helping students master course material. Integration of service-learning experiences with traditional classroom education has some promising potential for furthering student learning (Killian, 2004). D’Agostino (2008) notes the benefits of service learning in advancing civic engage ment by suggesting that through MPA programs, universities can play an active role in local communities and that service learning allows students to become involved in community projects. D’Agostino concludes that MPA programs could further establish specific courses designed for service learning and also underscore civic engagement as a core program objective. Strong collaborative relationships with local community organizations also can enhance the service-learning experience and strengthen public service programs. Whitaker and Berner (2004) contend that “doing meaningful projects for real clients challenge students to produce high quality work,” while underscoring the importance of working for the public good (p. 280). Campbell and Lambright (2011) note that when instructors design course projects, engaging with community supervisors and partners along with faculty will help maximize the project impact for community organizations. Nishisbiba, Nelson, and Shinn (2005) find that a sense of control over community outcomes can help in developing civic engagement among students. They call for providing students with success stories of civic engagement, supplying resources and information about civic leadership, and exposing students to diverse communities to develop diversity awareness (p. 276). Bryer (2011) highlights how service learning can help in developing collaborative relationships between universities and communities furthering students’ pursuit of public work. Finally, Carpenter (2011) calls for further research in service learning for nonprofit graduate students. Federal initiatives have also fostered service learning. The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act is administered by the Corporation for National and Community Service, the federal agency created in 1993 and now responsible for the expanded service programs. As the Corporation notes, in outlining new and updated provisions of the Act, there is now a purpose statement for school-based funding under Part I, tying service learning to demonstrating impact on community needs while enhancing students’ academic and civic learning, and building infrastructure including the training and professional development of teachers, to expand service opportunities. (Current Law and Serve America Act, 2011, p. 1)

312 Journal of Public Affairs Education Undergraduate Programs With a Community and Service Focus

Public Policy and Affairs Education Brown and Behrman (2007) build on service-learning research for political science majors, whereby the reflection on a service activity may increase an understanding of course concepts. Their research found that the political science student participants gained from their experience, but the group was small due to the challenge of integrating an undergraduate service-learning course into the curriculum. Brown and Behrman’s service-learning course for political science majors included interviewing prominent city leaders and local officials. Smith (2008) notes the evolving challenges for schools of public affairs, “especially in the design of a curriculum appropriate to the new mixed world of public and private services” (p. 116). Major shifts in public service have created challenges for MPA curriculum, Smith points out, concluding that MPA programs need to make key changes to their curriculum that reflect the changing world. Such changes include (a) restructuring the core curriculum; (b) broadening elective offerings; (c) developing new case materials; (d) offering more concurrent or joint programs; and (e) expanding executive education (p. 122). Besides addressing the challenges of integrating service learning into public service programs, schools of public affairs and policy have sought to teach under graduates the skill and values needed to generate long-lasting social change. Nickels, Rowland, and Fadase . (2011) provide a pedagogical framework for public admini stration faculty in educating and developing undergraduate students to be effective agents of social change. They underscore the integration of intellectual content and identity development, offering the Social Change Model of Leadership Development (SCM) within public administration programs. As Nickels and colleagues point out, the SCM seeks “to enhance student learning and facilitate positive social change” by promoting service and activism (p. 46). As they further note, applying SCM to public administration education furthers the call for public servants to recognize the importance of social equity and social justice. Through self-awareness, group/ community-building projects, and engaged activism, the public administration curriculum can set the foundation for graduating “leaders who effect social change through transformative service” (p. 51). The National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA) provided an initial guideline report in 1976 for baccalaureate degree programs in public affairs/public administration, followed by revised and updated guidelines two decades later (NASPAA, 1997). The guidelines are intended for professionally oriented undergraduate programs whose objective is “the education and training of persons for positions in the public service, with special emphasis on administrative and managerial functions” (p. 2). The guidelines further underscore the focus “upon the process and substance of public policy” and call for public administration programs to provide a “strong component of analytical and management skills relevant to the field of public management” (p. 2).

Journal of Public Affairs Education 313 T. Carrizales & L. Bennett

Methods A review of existing programs in the United States that offer an undergraduate degree in public “service” was conducted. Data collected on these schools were summarized and are presented in the next section. The methods for collecting this information began with identifying schools that could be considered as offering a degree in public service whereby service is a primary or core value of the program. As discussed earlier, public service can differ from other public administration core values of management, leadership, and policy process. Identifying schools began with the name and type of degree offered. Any school that listed public service as part of a bachelor’s degree was sought. We used the following approach to determine whether a program could be considered a public service program with service as a core value. A review of two recent and popular college guidebooks produced no results, because public service is still not an indexed major or degree among these books. Next we reviewed the Global MPA (2011a) list of undergraduate programs that offer a degree in public affairs, specifically those associated with administration or policy. The Global MPA Web portal was created and is maintained by NASPAA. This resource is designed to provide objective and comprehensive information for potential international students seeking an MPA/MPP degree (Global MPA, 2011b). The list includes just over 60 schools that offer an undergraduate degree in the area of public affairs. We used the list as a starting point for possible schools that offer an undergraduate degree in public service. We also conducted an Internet Web search, which produced the most results. The Web search used various combinations of keywords focused on undergraduate education and service. We organized the list of possible programs. When no information was found via the website or college catalogues, we conducted follow-up communications with the programs. Communications were done via telephone, e-mail, and in person when possible. In general, because public service programs are relatively new to academia and no central resources are yet established, we encountered limitations to conducting a systematic review.

Findings In all, we found 15 institutions that included the name “public service” in their undergraduate degree program. Of these 15 schools, four programs were identified as offering a degree in public service for undergraduate students based on the working definition of this research (Table 1). The remaining 11 programs did not necessarily exclude community or service from their curricula, but they prioritized the educational values of management or policy over service. A review of their program missions, confirmed by assessing their program curricula, underscored their priority to educate students in management skills and policy processes. These 11 programs are included in Table 2 for reference and comparison of the distinct difference among programs identified as public “service.”

314 Journal of Public Affairs Education Undergraduate Programs With a Community and Service Focus

Table 1. Public Service Undergraduate Programs—Community and Service Focus

School Name Degree Type About the Program

Florida State Bachelor in Social The Social Science Interdisciplinary program University Science with a provides an opportunity for students to acquire a Public Service broad background for understanding public affairs Concentration and social problems with emphasis on public service. The program is not designed to give specific occupational training but rather to supply the generalist background that is, nevertheless, attractive to many employers, particularly in agency work at state and local government levels.

Providence College Bachelor of Arts with Consistent with the mission of Providence College a Major in Public and and the Feinstein Institute, the major in public and Community Service community service studies involves a systematic and rigorous study of the major conceptual themes of community, service, compassion, public ethics, social justice and social change, and leadership. The principal goal of the major is to provide students the tools with which to become fluent in these conceptual themes in both their academic and practical dimensions: Students will learn community building and sustaining skills as well as community action research skills, and they will become fluent with models of leadership.

Rutgers University– Bachelor in Public This program is an interdisciplinary degree Newark Service designed to bring students to a deeper understanding of their roles as public servants. It is not an undergraduate degree in public administration or public management. Rather, the curriculum is rooted in the concepts of civic engagement and the common good. It will help foster an understanding of the spirit of service already evident among many students, and it suggests a broad array of career and voluntary pathways to public service.

University of Bachelor of Arts with The College of Public and Community Service Massachusetts a Major in Human provides an empowering and effective education Boston Service to people who are committed to working for social justice, and who want to promote positive development in their communities. The Human service major provides essential knowledge and skills required for the effective delivery of human services with a priority on direct service practice. The curriculum focuses on the needs of communities, the workforce, and the human services profession.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 315 T. Carrizales & L. Bennett

Table 2. Public Service Undergraduate Programs—Management and Policy Focus

School Name Degree Type Public Service Programs With Management and Policy Focus

Arizona State Bachelor of Arts with The Bachelor of Science in Public Service and Public University a Concentration in Policy (PSPP) prepares students for work in govern- Public Service and ment at all levels and nonprofit organizations through Public Policy comprehensive coverage of topics in public policy, public leadership, and management and urban studies. Students discover the challenges of management and learn how to lead a public organization and understand the process of policy development. Hamline Univer- Bachelor of Arts with Hamline’s political science major is grouped into two sity a Major in Public programs: the standard major and public service Service major. A major oriented toward public service is designed for students who wish to prepare for careers in public administration or management; government service at various levels; or city, urban, and regional planning. The public service major prepares the student for respected graduate programs of public administration, planning, or policy analysis. Indiana University Bachelor of Arts in The Bachelor of Arts degree in Government and Pub- of Pennsylvania Government and lic Service opens for you employment opportunities Public Service in federal, state, and local governments and with private civic groups, interest groups, and political groups. You’ll take a selection of required courses in your major. Among them are Public Finance, Ameri- can Politics, Issues in Public Administration, Public Policy, and Political Sociology.

Indiana University Bachelor of Arts The goals of the program are to foster in our students Southeast in Political Science an appreciation of government and politics and to with a Public Service prepare them to assume the duties of citizenship; to Concentration provide special knowledge and skills useful to those who plan to pursue public service; and to lay the foundations for the scholarly study of government, politics, and the law for those who plan to pursue graduate study or a legal education. Macon State Bachelor of Science in The Public Service degree in Human Services prepares College Public Service students for entry into a variety of public and private sector situations. The degree is excellent preparation for students interested in pursuing graduate-level study, law school, and other professional endeavors. The fields of law, health, and business provide opportunities for other entry-level human services positions for which the degree is appropriate training.

316 Journal of Public Affairs Education Undergraduate Programs With a Community and Service Focus

Table 2. Public Service Undergraduate Programs—Management and Policy Focus (continued)

School Name Degree Type Public Service Programs With Management and Policy Focus Ohio State Bachelor of Arts in At the John Glenn School of Public Affairs, the University Public Affairs Bachelor of Arts in Public Affairs undergraduate program will provide you with the knowledge, skills, and values required for public service. The degree is built on a liberal arts foundation with a professional orientation in public affairs—the interconnection between applied public policy and the management of the organizations and networks that tackle public problems. Southern Bachelor of Arts in Southern New Hampshire University offers a Bachelor New Hampshire Public Service of Arts in public service for criminal justice graduates University and law enforcement officers seeking to advance their careers. Concentration options include accounting, business, communication, leadership, political science, psychology, and education. University of Major in Political Political science majors develop research, analytic, and California Davis Science and Public communication skills relevant to many professional Service fields. Major in Political Science: Public Service, your curriculum will help you focus specifically on how policy is formulated, implemented, evaluated, and inter- preted. Or focus on a specific area of policy, such as urban or environmental policy. University of Bachelor of Arts The coursework in the public service emphasis focuses California Santa in Political Science on the fields ofpolitics and public administration and Barbara with Public Service includes work in sociology and economics. Students Emphasis in this emphasis are required to serve a one-quarter, full-time internship in a governmental or political office during their senior year. University of Bachelor of Science This program provides knowledge and skills in Houston Clear in Public Service management, strategic planning, conflict resolution, Lake Leadership organizational communication, and other leadership skills. The program can point the way to many careers, but they all have something in common: leadership opportunities in a changing world. University of Bachelor of Arts in The major is designed to prepare students for a broad Pittsburgh Public Service range of careers that are focused on the resolution of public problems or the delivery of public services. The major serves students who are interested in public issues as concerned and interested citizens and prepares students for a wide range of graduate programs related to public policy and management.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 317 T. Carrizales & L. Bennett

A review of the language used by the programs at Florida State, Providence College, Rutgers University Newark, and University of Massachusetts Boston are quite distinct. The four programs also vary in the type of degree offered. Florida State’s program is a Bachelor in Social Science with a Public Service Concentration, and Providence College offers a Bachelor of Arts with a Major in Public and Community Service. Rutgers University–Newark offers a Bachelor in Public Service. Finally, University of Massachusetts Boston has a College of Public and Community Services with various degrees, notably a Bachelor in Human Service. Florida State reports that their program “provides an opportunity for students to acquire a broad background for understanding public affairs and social problems with emphasis on public service. The program is not designed to give specific occupational training but rather to supply the generalist background [emphasis added]” (Florida State University, 2011). Although Florida State notes that its program offers a generalist background, the program aims to provide an understanding of social problems emphasizing service. Similarly, Providence College provides “a systematic and rigorous study of the major conceptual themes of community, service, compassion, public ethics, social justice and social change, and leadership [emphasis added]” (Providence College, 2011). Rutgers University–Newark specifically notes that its program “curriculum is rooted in the concepts ofcivic engagement and the common good, and will help foster an understanding of the spirit of service already evident among many students, and suggests a broad array of career and voluntary pathways to public service [emphasis added]” (Rutgers University—Newark, 2011). Finally, the University of Massachusetts Boston’s College of Public and Community Service provides an empowering and effective education to people who are committed to working for social justice, and who want to “promote positive development in their communities” (University of Massachusetts Boston, 2012a).

Program Overviews

Florida State University Of the four programs, Florida State University’s degree in public service is the only one that represents a concentration, rather than a major or bachelor degree. The concentration was part of a larger degree in social sciences that dates back to the 1960s. Because the program is a component of a large degree, specific data on concentrations were not available. Although internships are available for students in the degree program, it is not a specific requirement of the concentration. Furthermore, students are able to participate in public service projects coordinated by the university but not necessarily sponsored by the concentration program.

Providence College The Department of Public and Community Service at Providence College offers a major and minor covering the central theme and issues in “democratic

318 Journal of Public Affairs Education Undergraduate Programs With a Community and Service Focus community, service, and social justice.” Courses in their program require students to participate in 2–4 hours of community service per week. The department is housed within the Feinstein Institute for Public Service, which was established in 1993. The Institute was developed with the intent to establish an “innovative academic program that would educate community leaders by integrating community service with academic study.” The Institute provides numerous means for community- student collaborations. The Institute offers reflection-based seminars and professional development opportunities for community leaders, students, and alumni. Community partner leaders are also invited to co-teach courses. The Institute also provides resources to meet community partner needs in the form of student/faculty research and consultations. Finally, they “manage a 1,500 square-foot storefront in the local neighborhood used as a ‘free space’ by Providence College and neighborhood residents for meetings, programs, events and gatherings that build leadership capacity and strengthen community” (Feinstein Institute, 2012).

Rutgers University–Newark The most recently established of the four programs is Rutgers University– Newark, which offered its first courses in the fall of 2008. The undergraduate bachelor’s degree is offered by the School of Public Affairs and Administration. With the most recent graduation in May 2012, the program graduated 12 students, and their numbers increased in future classes. Currently, 100 students are enrolled in the undergraduate degree program. The program‘s curriculum aims to engage the entire community, helping students understand their environment and recognize the contributions they can make (AAC&U, 2012). The program places significant importance on internships and requires students to complete two 4-credit internships. The internships total 300 hours to go along with a seminar course associated with the internship. In addition, the school hosts an annual public service week that includes a community engagement event. Students and community organizations have opportunity to meet, network, and discuss issues, ultimately creating new volunteer and internship opportunities for students.

University of Massachusetts, Boston The program offered by the University of Massachusetts (UMASS)–Boston is a Bachelor of Arts in Human Services through the College of Public and Community Service. The College was founded in 1972 and notes that work beyond the classroom includes “service learning; internships; project-based learning; civic engaged research; learning in college/university-community partnerships; and other creative learning options” (UMASS, 2012b). It also offers a Community Studies major, which is in transition. The school started offering the major in 2006 as a completion-only program. This means that only students with 90 or more credits are allowed to enroll in the major. Due to lack of demand, the major was closed in 2010. The last students to complete a degree in community studies graduated in June 2012. Understanding the importance of

Journal of Public Affairs Education 319 T. Carrizales & L. Bennett offering their students opportunities to pursue careers in public service, the School of Community Studies restored and reestablished the major, which was set to begin in September 2012. The new major aims to require students to engage in community service projects.

The Future of Public Service Education Based on the analysis of the four public service programs, we conclude that all of the programs have a diverse approach to teaching public service and the type of degree offered. However, these programs have one thing in common: All of them require students to engage in community service projects in the local community. This evidence suggests that a central focus of public service programs is engaging the local community. Moreover, some general themes arise in reviewing program curriculums. Notably, the curriculum areas include topics such as citizenship and service, ethical public service, global and environmental, government and the nonprofit sector, leadership, and cultural diversity. We also concluded that an area for future research could be to evaluate the impact and success of students in the public service field with a public service degree. Do these programs prepare students adequately for employment in public service occupations? As Behn (1995) succinctly laid out in his analysis of public administration education, for students to succeed in the public sector, they must receive training in the core concepts of public administration. That would include public policy analysis, management of public organizations, and management of diverse workplaces. It could be concluded that an appreciation and knowledge in the areas of service combined with training in classical public administration and public policy concepts could do a great deal to prepare student for employment in public organizations. As we have noted, programs may focus on public service as their core mission and key principle for education, but this does not mean they exclude other areas of public service education such as management and policy. Likewise, programs that focus on the latter areas did not exclude an appreciation for community and service. Therefore, additional research can look at the success path of students from undergraduate public service programs as compared to traditional public administration programs. Although these programs are not undergraduate public administration programs per se, integrating these concepts into public service programs would go a long way toward helping to prepare students for productive careers in public service. Engaging the local community is an important step for students to understand how their work affects communities. However, an absence of training in core public administration and public policy skill will hurt students’ ability to effectively apply the core element of public service to their future careers. In conclusion, the research presented here highlights the existence of distinct programmatic goals and objectives for undergraduate degrees in public service. As noted, public service education has been an area of research, specifically at the

320 Journal of Public Affairs Education Undergraduate Programs With a Community and Service Focus graduate level. But at the undergraduate level, programs have focused primarily on public administration and public policy education that focuses on the policy process and management of public organizations. These programs are limited in number, but should more institutions choose to approach majors or minors in their undergraduate programs, they can learn from these existing programs. This research survey of public service programs can benefit faculty and administrators considering similar programs. First, this study recognizes that there are existing and successful public service programs. Although some are new, two programs have existed for over three decades. Second, faculty and administrators can reach out to these programs for further discussion on the curriculum and design of programs. Each of the four schools outlined here provides a distinct approach to a public service education, and schools can reach out to those most reflective of their efforts and intentions. Third, programs can institute internships for undergraduates that call upon service-oriented research and work that are both rewarding and educational. Although many schools have undergraduate internship requirements, these four schools have found a way to integrate multiple internships into the curriculum while underscoring the value of service. Finally, our research indicates that only a few undergraduate programs of public service currently exist. This means plenty more opportunities are yet to be established for undergraduate students throughout the country. Faculty and administrators can work toward establishing what may be the first program of its kind in their respective states or regions. We have presented an introductory review of current practices and goals of programs that underscore service and community in their curriculum. Although only a limited number of these programs now exist, as a greater appreciation of service education develops, we can look forward to future courses and programs across the country—programs reflecting an education that emphasizes the value of service.

References Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). (2012). Feature: Member innovations. AAC&U News. Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/aacu_news/aacunews12/may12/feature.cfm

Behn, R. D. (1995). The big questions of public management. Public Administration Review, 55(4), 313–324.

Brown, C. A., & Behrman, R. W. (2007). Capstone for political science majors: The content is service. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 13(3/4), 585–591.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 321 T. Carrizales & L. Bennett

Bryer, T. A. (2011). Linking students with community in collaborative governance: A report on a service learning class. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 17(1), 89–114.

Campbell, D. A., & Lambright, K. T. (2011). How valuable are capstone projects for community organizations? Lessons from a program assessment. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 17(1), 61–87.

Carpenter, H. (2011). How we could measure community impact of nonprofit graduate students’ service-learning projects: Lessons from literature. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 17(1), 115–131.

Current Law and Serve America Act. (2011). Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act: Public Law 111–13. Retrieved from http://www.nationalservice.gov/pdf/09_0519_serveact_sidebyside.pdf

D’Agostino, M. J. (2008). Fostering a civically engaged society: The university and service learning. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 14(2), 191–204.

Dicke, L., Dowden, S., & Torres, J. (2004). Successful service learning: A matter of ideology. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 10(3), 199–208.

Florida State University. (2011). Social Science Interdisciplinary Program; Public Service Concentration. Retrieved from http://www.academic-guide.fsu.edu/social_science_ interdisciplinary.htm

Feinstein Institute for Public Service. (2012). What We Do, Providence College. Retrieved from http:// www.providence.edu/Feinstein/Pages/default.aspx

Global MPA. (2011a). List of Undergraduate Programs. Retrieved from http://globalmpa.net/section/ degrees_details/undergraduate_degrees/list_undergraduate_programs

———. (2011b). Who We Are. Retrieved from http://globalmpa.net/section/_who_we_are.

Haque, M. S. (2001). The diminishing publicness of public service under the current mode of governance. Public Administration Review, 61(1), 65–82.

Karl, K. A., & Peat, B. (2004). A match made in heaven or a square peg in a round hole? How public service educators can help students assess person-environment fit.Journal of Public Affairs Education, 10(4), 265–277.

Killian, J. (2004). Pedagogical experimentation: Combining traditional, distance, and service learning techniques. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 10(3), 209–224.

Lambright, K. (2008). Lessons outside of the classroom: Examining the effectiveness of service learning projects at achieving learning objectives. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 14(2), 205–217.

National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA). (1997). Guidelines for Baccalaureate Degree Programs in Public Affairs/Public Administration. Retrieved from http://www. naspaa.org/principals/resources/document/guildelines_undergrad_programs_pa.pdf

Newcomer, K. E., & Allen, H. (2010). Public service education: Adding value in the public interest. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 16(2), 207–229.

Nickels, A., Rowland, T., and Fadase, O. (2011). Engaging undergraduate students to be agents of social change: Lessons from student affairs professionals. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 17(1), 45–59.

322 Journal of Public Affairs Education Undergraduate Programs With a Community and Service Focus

Nishisbiba, M., Nelson, H. T., & Shinn, C. W. (2005). Explicating factors that foster civic engagement among students. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 11(4), 269–285.

Perry, J. L., & Wise, L. R. (1990). The motivational bases of public service. Public Administration Review, 50(3), 367–373.

Providence College. (2011). Public and Community Service Program. Online Catalog. Retrieved from http://catalog.providence.edu/preview_program.php?catoid=6&poid=368&returnto=211

Rayner, J., Williams, H. M., Lawton, A., & Allison, C. W. (2010). Public service ethos: Developing a generic measure. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, 27–51.

Rutgers University–Newark (2011). Undergraduate Public Service Program. Retrieved from http:// spaa.newark.rutgers.edu/home/programs/publicservice.html

Serve America Act. (2009). Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act of 2009. Corporation for National & Community Service. Retrieved from http://www.nationalservice.gov/about/serveamerica/index.asp

Smith, S. R. (2008). The increased complexity of public services: Curricular implications for schools of public affairs. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 14(2), 115–128.

University of Massachusetts–Boston. (2012a). About the College of Public and Community Service. Retrieved from http://www.umb.edu/academics/cpcs/about_the_college/

———. (2012b). Beyond the classroom: College of Public and Community Service. Retrieved from http://www.umb.edu/academics/cpcs/beyond_the_classroom/

Whitaker, G. P., & Berner, M. (2004). Learning through action: How MPA public service team projects help students learn research and management skills. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 10(4), 279–294.

Tony Carrizales, PhD is an associate professor of public administration at Marist College School of Management. His research interests include e-government and diversity in the public sector. Dr. Carrizales is the editor-in-chief of the Journal of Public Management and Social Policy. Dr. Carrizales received his PhD from Rutgers University-Newark and MPA and BA degrees from Cornell University.

Lamar Vernon Bennett, PhD is an assistant professor of public administration at Long Island University-Brooklyn School of Business, Public Administration and Information Sciences. His research interests are e-government, public governance, and citizen participation and engagement. Dr. Bennett received his PhD from American University and MPA and BA degrees from Rutgers University-Newark.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 323 324 Journal of Public Affairs Education Internships Adrift? Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration

Abraham D. Benavides and Lisa A. Dicke University of North Texas

Amy C. Holt Texas Municipal Clerks Association

Abstract This article discusses how experiential knowledge has become institutionalized as “for credit” internships in schools of public affairs and administration. It presents an overview of the history of internships, along with associated research that has been conducted in this area. Following that review, the authors advance a model depicting the interdependent links between students, their university, and a government agency or nonprofit organization that hosts interns. The model offers a simplified tool for understanding the complex activities and collaborations necessary for creating successful internships. The processes described in the component parts of the model are substantiated by previous research and survey data derived from department chairs in NASPAA-accredited programs in 2010.

Graduate student internships often result in job offers from host organizations. The combination of theory (from the classroom) and practice (from an internship with a government or nonprofit organization) has become a recognized format for enabling students to transition successfully into the public sector workforce. The 112th Congress recognized the viability of internships for the purpose of helping to create employment by passing the Federal Internship Improvement Act, which President Obama signed on December 31, 2011. The act requires government agencies that have internship programs to create an internship coordinator position and publish information about available internships on their

Keywords: internships, collaboration, NASPAA, ICMA

JPAE 19(2), 325–353 Journal of Public Affairs Education 325 A. D. Benavides, L. A. Dicke, & A. C. Holt websites. The act also facilitates the noncompetitive transition of an individual with an internship into a career with the federal government. According to a study in 2007 by the Partnership for Public Service, the federal government hired only about 6.6% of its interns, AND the private sector hired half of its interns (Partnership for Public Service, 2009). Before signing the Federal Internship Improvement Act, on December 27, 2010, President Obama signed Executive Order 13562, “Recruiting and Hiring Students and Recent Graduates,” which established the Pathways Program. The program establishes three streamlined developmental programs: the Internship Program for students; the Recent Graduates Program for people who have completed a qualifying educational program within the preceding 2 years; and the Presidential Management Fellows (PMF) Program for people who obtained a graduate or professional degree within the preceding 2 years. Working in close partnership with National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA),1 the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) proposed regulations to provide clear paths to federal internships and potential careers for students, including graduate students. The Final Rule implementing the Pathways Program took effect on July 10, 2012. The transition period ended January 6, 2013. The efforts of many individuals, including MPA and MPP program coordinators, helped OPM structure a program that will be beneficial to recent graduates and have a strong internship component. The task for NASPAA and others now will be to assure that federal agencies actually design and implement strong internships and Recent Graduates Programs. Federal agencies are required to invest in participants’ development through “training, mentorships, and other means” (Federal Register, 2012). The Pathways Internship Program replaces the existing Student Career Experience Program (SCEP) and the Student Temporary Employment Program (STEP). The authority to execute the Executive Order 13562 is found at Schedule D, 5 CFR 213.3402(a), and 5 CFR 362.110. The program is targeted at students enrolled in a wide variety of educational institutions from high school to graduate level. It provides students with opportunities to explore federal careers while being paid for the work performed. Students who successfully complete the program are eligible for noncompetitive conversion to a federal career or career conditional positions. OPM states further:

Internship programs are essential by exposing students and recent graduates to jobs in the federal civil service at the beginning of their careers, and engage them at the outset of their work lives, before their career paths are fully established, and break through commonly held stereotypes about government work. (OPM, 2011)

Organizations such as NASPAA and the International City/County Manage- ment Association (ICMA)2 have contributed resources useful for the development of internships in the public sector. As an example, NASPAA provides internship

326 Journal of Public Affairs Education Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration guidelines for schools of public affairs and administration for the orientation of students and host agencies about internships. ICMA also provides guidelines and an internship toolkit that helps aid in the creation of mutually beneficial internship opportunities. Together, the guidelines and toolkit help to ensure that all parties are clear on the expectations for creating, maintaining, and promoting effective internship experiences. Beliefs about how students can be best prepared for the workplace have changed over the years as formal structures and standards have been implemented. Today many students in public affairs or administration programs have either participated in an internship-type program or have gained some type of professional work experience before graduation. Our study begins with a discussion of how experiential knowledge has unfolded and become institutionalized as “for credit” internships in schools of public affairs and administration. The article also presents a model that depicts the interdependent links between students, their university, and a government agency or nonprofit organization that hosts interns. The model offers a simplified tool for understanding the complex activities and collaborations necessary for creating successful internships. The processes described in the component parts of the model are substantiated by previous research and survey data derived from department chairs in NASPAA- accredited programs in 2010.

Apprenticeships and Internship Origins The opportunity to apprentice and learn from a “master teacher” is highly prized. Typically, the apprentice contract has duties assigned to each partner. The apprentice agrees to serve the master for a definite period of time in a particular art, trade, or business, and the master is bound to instruct the apprentice and teach the knowledge, provide the advice, and set the appropriate example.3 Garnett and Donovan (2002) explain that “masters passed on their expertise and helped socialize the apprentice into the values, customs, and norms of their profession or trade” (p. 3). It is still common today to find apprenticeships in carpentry, electricity, the arts, and some seafaring trades. There are similarities between apprenticeships and internships because each enterprise involves socialization into the field and the transfer of knowledge from an experienced supervisor to a trainee or beginner. Apprenticeships may establish formalized guilds to standardize the technology of the craft. Likewise, internships in the public sector may have third-party associations, such as NASPAA and ICMA in the public sector, to craft guidelines that help standardize and structure internship experiences. These guidelines may include standard components related to supervision, duration, academic training, evaluation, and compensation, etc.4 Internships have been used formally in the public sector for 80 years. At the federal level, during the 1930s and 1940s, predecessors of the modern internship programs required candidates to pass an exam before being placed on an eligibility list.5 Although mainly a recruitment technique, these federal internship programs were the forerunners of the many federal government internships that exist today.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 327 A. D. Benavides, L. A. Dicke, & A. C. Holt

At the local level, an experienced city manager, L. P. Cookingham,6 recognized the importance of on-the-job training as a component of higher education. Cookingham’s first experience with graduate students in public administration came in the late 1930s, “when a Midwestern university offered to send two students to the city for a year of practical experience at the local level where an opportunity for gaining experience in a good environment existed” (Murphy, 1973, p. 52). When he became a city manager, Cookingham started a formal internship program in Kansas City, Missouri, to help prepare future public servants. With academia willing to partner with practitioners, and practitioners willing to mentor students into the profession, the internship has today become a solid offering in the public administration curriculum. Internships as a type of experiential learning have fortified the link between education and the public sector. Today, the L. P. Cookingham Internship in Kansas City is named after this legendary public servant. In 1950, the City of Phoenix, Arizona, began its nationally recognized internship program. Its founder, former city manager Ray W. Wilson, brought the idea with him after serving as an assistant to Cookingham in Kansas City. Throughout the ’50s, ’60s, and ’70s, the number of internship programs developed and initiated both by cities and universities grew. For example, the State of Illinois began a number of public affairs internship programs for students in the 1960s and 1970s. It has been noted that these programs in Illinois improved the quality of public service (Villanueva, 1974). By the mid-1970s, internships had grown tremendously and were standard options in most MPA programs. Such internships strengthened the linkages between universities and governments and nonprofit organizations at all levels (Henry, 1979). InGovernment Management Internships and Executive Development, Thomas P. Murphy (1973) notes:

The public management internship is an educational innovation that is assuming increasing significance in academic programs whose purpose is to train and educate public administrators. The use of the term “intern” is intended to connote the transition between learning and practice. (p. 63)

Early Research on Internships—The 1930s–1970s As interest in internships grew, scholars began looking for tangible evidence to support their effectiveness. They also began to question their viability, applicability, and contributions to the education of the graduate student. The debates among scholars resulted in two separate symposiums in 1979. One, edited by Nicholas Henry for the journal Public Administration Review (PAR), was titled “Internships in Public Administration.” The other, edited by Thomas P. Murphy, appeared in the Southern Review of Public Administration—currently Public Administration Quarterly (PAQ). The title of this symposium was “Public Service Internships: The Continuing Evolution.”

328 Journal of Public Affairs Education Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration

These symposiums are significant because they marked for the first time a conscious effort to systematically understand the contributions of internship programs.7 The research discussed in the PAR symposium included a review of the then new federal-level presidential management internship program. That article outlined the implementation, intergovernmental cooperation, and impact of the new program (Campbell & Strakosch, 1979). A second article highlighted state government internships, describing them as “a situation in which an advanced college student gains supervised practical experience while employed in a professional administrative position” (Finkle & Barclay, 236). A third article highlighted the successes of the City of Phoenix management intern program (Andrews & Burch, 1979). Jerry McCaffery (1979) considered satisfactions and dissatisfactions with the internship experience in a fourth article, and Nicolas Henry’s article asked the question: Are internships worthwhile? Finally, Donald Haider’s (1979) article considered President Gerald R. Ford’s initiatives for improving executive manage ment via the Presidential Management Internship (PMI). In summary, the PAR symposium directly addressed the question of internship viability and demonstrated that this pedagogical technique was in fact a useful methodology to train students about the reality of public service. The research in the PAQ symposium argued for the development of relevant guidelines for internships. One article placed the student at the center of the research —a student responsibility model (Wolf, 1979). A second argued that the academic program content, instruction, and placement should conform to internship priorities identified by workplace supervisors (Honan & Day, 1979). Raymond Pomerleau’s (1979) research focused on employment and internships based in the San Francisco Bay area, and Cortus Koehler’s (1979) research identified important responsibilities for internship coordinators. The PAQ symposium also included the 1977 NASPAA Guidelines for Public Service Internships, which included details on how to structure an internship and provide for oversight; as well, the guidelines required programs to have monthly reports (NASPAA, 1977). These guidelines also advocated for a full-time coordinator for each program. In essence, this particular symposium helped build the structure for modern- day internships. Collectively, both symposiums showed the educational value of internships. They are of historical significance because it was the first time that the public administration profession looked at internships as a pedagogical teaching technique meriting symposium status. Few if any other teaching pedagogies have reached such a level.

Research on Internships—The 1980s In 1987, Gryski, Johnson, and O’Toole noted that published material on internships typically fell into three categories; think pieces, evaluations, and descriptions. Think pieces included articles that focused on benefits to interns,

Journal of Public Affairs Education 329 A. D. Benavides, L. A. Dicke, & A. C. Holt universities, and government and nonprofit agencies. These articles discuss role socialization and the skills learned by interns (that are not learned by those not participating in an internship). Evaluation research (the second category) used quantitative or qualitative research methodologies to explore the value of the internship experience. The third category of internship research was descriptive and discussed the design, administration, and operation of internship programs and how to structure and manage them. Research has also dealt with conflict about the internship experience and perspectives on traditional academic teaching and learning. James R. Alexander (1982), suggested that some faculty have been “circumspect about internship programs on the basis of a fear of vocationalism creeping into the traditional area” of academia (p. 128). Awarding credit for nonacademic endeavors was seen as questionable. The traditional conflict between theory and practice was alive and well, and academic purists did not believe that internships served a meaningful purpose. Some universities struggled at first with the idea of “experiential knowledge” being substituted for academic learning. Nevertheless, Gabris and Mitchell (1989) argued that internships did serve an important educational function, including grounding abstract learning in the realities of organizational life and helping students learn interpersonal skills that are crucial for a successful career. Today, most agree that internships are a significant part of educational learning and award academic credit toward their completion. Moreover, to add rigor to the internship experience, a number of university programs complement the internship with an academic component. These components range from written work or reading lists to evaluations and oral presentations (Table 1). For some in academia, the fears of vocationalism were reduced by the addition of these academic components and the improved cooperation between universities and workplaces.

Table 1. Additional Assignments for Academic Credit

Written Work Reading Lists Journals Oral Presentations Seminar Participation Oral Examinations Self-Evaluation Intern Host Evaluation Learning Agreements Faculty Evaluation Coordinator Evaluation Contracts Internship Class Internship Paper Source. Adapted from Alexander (1982, p. 129).

330 Journal of Public Affairs Education Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration

Internships as experiential learning for adult learners are extremely valuable. Although today no one theory can explain adult learning completely, adults do learn differently than children. One theory that gained traction in the 1970s and continues to have adherents today is a theory of adult education called andragogy. Malcolm Knowles (1968) “proposed [andragogy as] a new label and new technology of adult learning to distinguish it from preadult schooling” (p. 351). The European concept of andragogy means “the art and science of helping adults learn, [which] was contrasted with pedagogy, the art and science of helping children learn” (Knowles, 1980, p. 43). Knowles’s main principles were based on assumptions of how adults learn. For instance, adults were self-directing, had numerous experiences, were ready to learn, were ready to apply knowledge, had internal motivation, and needed to know why they were required to learn something. The value in Knowles’ conceptual framework of how adults learn, or andragogy, lies in revealing to the profession a broader and deeper understanding of how to reach and understand those we teach. It has direct applicability here, because internships are an ideal type of experiential learning for adult learners.

Collaborative Work—The 1990s and Beyond The focus of recent research on internships is on collaboration (Finn, 1997; Freeland, Marini, & Weighart, 1998; Hall, 1999; Hutcheson, 2002; Itin, 1999). The emphasis is on “developing interdependent collaborations with employers— industries, businesses, public organizations and organized labor groups—to move towards excellence in higher education” (McGlothlin, 2003, p. 41). In 1977, NASPAA published its internship guidelines to standardize the internship process. This was a key step in the development of “interdependent collaborations” among the partners shown in Figure 1. As NASPAA proactively set out to standardize the design of the public service internship, it laid the groundwork for the public administration community to accept and adopt a common set of best practices. The guidelines addressed the purpose of an internship, its duration and timing, an academic component, placement, supervision, compensation, and evaluation. In 1992, NASPAA’s influence was expanded when it helped to develop urban management education guidelines. These guidelines were drafted in cooperation with ICMA, the most recognized association for practitioners in local government. The preamble of the document noted that the guidelines were developed to “address directly the need for competent, responsible local government leadership” (1992, p. 1). It provided to colleges and universities a detailed outline of the essential curriculum that should be covered in any local government management program. It stated that internships “provide the critical opportunity to test and expand classroom learning under the guidance and teaching of a practitioner supervisor” (p. 1). Together, NASPAA and ICMA agreed that mutual collaboration through experiential learning was the key ingredient to provide students with a superior public sector education.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 331 A. D. Benavides, L. A. Dicke, & A. C. Holt

In 1999, NASPAA initiated a program to encourage students to enter the public service and included guidelines for practitioners on how to mentor. Once again, NASPAA served as a link between theory and practice. Harris and Emerson (2001) argued that “the goal [of] mentoring and internships is to guide students in developing a coherent framework for the integration of theory and practice and in understanding some of the ambiguities and contradictions that arise” (p. 31). Another example of collaboration are the Model Internship Guidelines adopted by the NASPAA Urban Management Education Committee and by the ICMA Advisory Board on Graduate Education in 2003. On this occasion, the organizations joined forces to develop standards for internships that would be a resource for NASPAA-accredited programs, and an internship toolkit for cities and counties. A partial aim of the joint effort was to create guidelines that could be used by MPA “program directors and faculty and encourage local governments to establish internships” (p. 1). In 2004, collaboration efforts expanded and included a partnership between NASPAA, ICMA, the International Hispanic Network (IHN), and the National Forum for Black Public Administrators (NFBPA). These organizations joined efforts to create the Local Government Management Fellows (LGMF) program in response to the projected shortage of local government executives. The LGMF program is a 1-year fellowship that places graduates of NASPAA-accredited schools of public affairs, public policy, public administration, management, or a related area in paid, full-time, local government management track positions. Under the mentorship of senior government leaders and with assignments to various departments on a fixed rotation, the students are exposed to a wide variety of experiences. Since its inception, the program has been highly successful and continues to seek participation by local governments.

A Cohesive Model Universities, government agencies, and nonprofit organizations have partnered to provide valuable internship experiences for students. These relationships have developed gradually over time, and some universities have established strong partnerships with public and nonprofit organizations. In some instances, these partnerships have evolved into mutually cooperative long-term associations. Craig Donovan (2002) notes that “government agencies and nonprofit organizations use internships to forge broader, long-lasting relationships with schools, which can branch out into training, research, degree programs, and the like” (p. 13). Berman, Bowman, West, and Van Wart (2006) argued that “ties between master of public administration programs and local and regional agencies enhance academic curricula and are appreciated by both students and agencies” (p. 72). Our model of cooperation is inspired by Murphy’s (1973) work, which discussed the division of responsibilities among universities, governments, and student interns. In Figure 1, we unite the three areas discussed by Murphy to create a model that incorporates these three distinct entities, but more fully

332 Journal of Public Affairs Education Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration demonstrate the overlapping relationships needed to produce successful internships by using concentric circles. Our model is similar to research that discusses inter dependent networks and partnership collaborations (Emerson & Murchie, 2010, Kim, 2010; Pardo, Gil Garcia, & Luna-Reyes, 2010). The model represents a cooperation that should exist between all constituents involved, and it includes tasks to be accomplished by all participants. The internship component is at the nexus of the three concentric circles, and a successful internship depends upon the strength and cooperation of all three areas.

Figure 1. Interdependent Collaboration Model

Student

Professor Supervisor Intern Mentor Coordinator Internship

University Government Collaborators Agency or Partners Nonprofit Organization

Source. Adapted from Murphy (1973, p. 4).

We argue that the current structural system that is set up for internships, where students are connected with internships and participate in an academic component is not enough. For the internship experience to be a meaningful

Journal of Public Affairs Education 333 A. D. Benavides, L. A. Dicke, & A. C. Holt educational component as well as a professional stepping-stone, there must be quality collaboration between all the parties. To illustrate this collaboration, we draw upon the six essential areas for a successful internship: duration and timing, academic component, placement, supervision, compensation, and evaluation. The duration and timing of internships are designed in a number of ways and occasionally are structured with only the student in mind—summer internships; the school in mind—during the academic semesters; or the host agency in mind —40 hours a week. The collaboration model suggests that this process is too exclusive and that the three interested parties should cooperate to find an optimal solution for all the parties. Perhaps one of the preceding three suggestions is the ideal outcome for all parties. Maybe 20 hours a week for 15 weeks can be agreed upon. In short, the cohesive model would argue for collaboration by all three parties to come to a consensus on the duration and timing of the internship. The same could be said for the academic component. Although it could be argued that the host agency has very little say or influence in the academic component, an inclusive approach would involve the agency and thereby gain their support for student involvement in interviews, attending various meetings, presenting at board meetings, and assisting in writing meaningful reports for the agency. The cooperation here would also ensure that the student is not just making photocopies or being assigned menial tasks like answering phones or filing papers, but is actually engaged in the work of the agency and having a meaningful internship experience. Additionally, topics such as mentoring and management experience can also be discussed as part of the student’s experience. A key to any successful internship is the breadth and depth of the assignments given. Placement of interns is another area where collaboration is essential. A number of schools have internships with specific government entities. These internships are the result of mutual agreements that have developed over several years. The school can be influential in marketing students to various agencies, and agencies can respond by indicating their particular needs. Furthermore, in many cases it is necessary for the student to do considerable leg work to find an internship. By drawing upon the resources of the school and those of governments and nonprofit organizations, the student more than likely will be successful in obtaining an internship. The area of supervision can also be a joint effort to assure a quality internship. This collaboration is most necessary when particular issues may arise with certain interns. A joint effort by all three parties to resolve an issue is more likely to lead to a successful outcome than action on the part of only one party, which may lead to conflict. Regarding compensation for internships and what MPA programs expect, and what host agencies are willing to pay, there is a wide variation. The spectrum ranges from MPA programs requiring internships to be paid to MPA programs accepting volunteer work. Here too, collaboration is highly recommended. A number of programs have been able to cooperate with host agencies to obtain

334 Journal of Public Affairs Education Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration paid positions by coming to distinctive arrangements. For instance, the standard or ideal is that the agency pays the whole salary. However, other arrangements include some cities paying only half the intern’s salary while the school pays the other half. In other cases, some programs have been able to establish a named endowment (often for a prominent alumnus) that pays a stipend to the student. In still other cases, the school has been able to fund an internship through the federally funded work-study program. As the public sector continues to deal with issues of a sluggish economy and the tendency for some public agencies to emulate the private sector’s abuse of free labor or (unpaid internships), it is essential that collaboration be the norm and not the exception. The final area that necessitates collaboration is evaluation. If long-term relationships are to be built and maintained, a solid evaluation that has the agency not only evaluating the intern’s performance but also evaluating the relationship with the school is best. By the same token, the student should evaluate the host agency and the school; and finally, the school should also evaluate the student and the government entity. This 360-type evaluation is an effort at improving and retaining relationships and truly focusing on the whole process of the internship and not just a single independent piece.

NASPAA Survey and Qualitative Findings Supporting the Model In 2003 and 2010, NASPAA conducted online surveys to obtain more information regarding the practice and management of internship programs at NASPAA’s membership institutions. In 2010, the organization distributed 276 surveys and 156 were returned, for a response rate of 56%. No distinction was made between MPA and MPP programs. Among the NASPAA institutions participating in the survey, 93% had an internship component built into their degree program. Among these programs, 52% required students to complete an internship unless it was waived for professional work experience. The range of professional work experience required to waive an internship went from a minimum of 15 months to a maximum of 2 years. The average minimum number of hours required for the internship was 288 but ranged from 10 to 768 hours. About 65% of the respondents had a dedicated internship coordinator at their institution, and about 61% used a faculty mentor to help supervise the internship program. Finally, it appears that 63% of the internships are being completed both in the summer and during the academic semester; 24% of the respondents indicated that the internship is offered in the summer only; and 6% specified they are taken only during the academic semester. In all internship programs, student performance is monitored through an evaluation process. Typical evaluation processes include written evaluations from the host site, student papers or other assignments, and course grades. Internships are a nearly universal feature of MPA/MPP programs, as demonstrated by the NASPAA surveys. MPA/MPP programs demonstrate a great deal of professionalism

Journal of Public Affairs Education 335 A. D. Benavides, L. A. Dicke, & A. C. Holt in their internship policies and operations by providing significant supervision, staff dedicated to the internship program, evaluations of the interns, and course assignments related to the internship experience. NASPAA institutions confirmed, through the survey, that university support was essential; that host agencies with meaningful internships were indispensable; and that student enthusiasm and proper communication with host agencies are the key ingredients to successful internship programs. As we reviewed the survey data, it appeared that all of the indicators confirm support for the interdependent collaboration model presented earlier. The variation in terms of range of responses, for instance with the duration of the internship, can be attributed to the distinction of programs and the various relationships that have been established. The NASPAA survey appears to sub stantiate a collaborative approach to internship programs. In an effort to further document a cooperative process, we obtained written statements from individuals who had ties to internship programs during the 2010–2011 academic year. The qualitative information was obtained from evaluations conducted at the end of the internship experience by both the intern (at a single institution) and multiple host agencies. Names and identifying school information was omitted. Because our model focuses on the student, the university, and the government agency or nonprofit organization, we looked at typical comments from each of the segments of the model. Here are some of the student comments with respect to their internships:

My experience was wonderful. It was a great opportunity and I am glad that I was able to participate. I learned so much about how things work. I have learned that to get things done in a decision making process, it takes time and patience. It was great to be able to relate my class work to real-world scenarios. I enjoyed the fast paced atmosphere and trying my best to get things completed. I enjoyed all of the people that I worked with and the knowledge that I was able to obtain from them. Overall my internship was great!

Completing my internship with the hospital turned out to be a valuable experience where I obtained information I can take with me on my career path in the field of emergency management. During my internship, I obtained knowledge and understanding of the Hospital Incident Command System. I was able to see firsthand the role of the hospital in emergency management. In addition to learning the hospital’s role, I became familiar with the grant funding process with hospitals and homeland security. I attended many meetings in the hospital that pertained to emergency management which allowed me to network and gain valuable knowledge about the industry.

336 Journal of Public Affairs Education Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration

As we analyze these comments, a couple of obvious themes appear to emerge. First of all, both students acknowledge how much they have learned from their internships. The ability to relate class assignments to real-world scenarios as well as learn and understand new information presented during the internship is apparent. Second, a socialization process appears to be taking place whereby the interns begin to see how the organization functions and understand the interplay between personalities in the agency. Working with people, networking, decision making, getting things done, are all invaluable experiences. From the viewpoint of the government agency or nonprofit organization, we also included some comments that basically describe the value that the intern brought to the organization that he or she worked for. Here are some employer’s comments:

She is very capable in performing the work she is doing for our department. I am very pleased with the skills she possessed prior to beginning her work with us.

In general he was an effective and highly motivated worker. He showed great facility in shifting from assignment to assignment, organizing his own work, and tracking his own progress. In addition, he showed excellent command of our area of expertise. He was resourceful, capable, and an asset to the work of our agency.

She is very soft spoken but provides insight and suggestions far beyond her experience level. She has good technical skills and has demonstrated this by contributing to several projects. She seems eager to accept new assignments or to receive changes to projects. She maintains effective and amiable working relationships with all the staff and customers she serves. She writes well and is quickly learning our writing style. She should be careful to acknowledge greetings when concentrating on her work.

He effectively made decisions he was empowered to make and asked questions if he needed help. He had the opportunity to shadow two investigations with the human resource consultants. Both consultants were impressed with his ability to assess the situation and to offer workable solutions to difficult problems.

As we look at the employer comments, it is notable that most of the comments, in terms of the evaluations, are geared toward intern performance. The intern was capable, possessed skills, was resourceful and insightful, had good technical skills, and so on. There was, however, another underlying indication that employers were observing more than demonstrated skills. Additional comments included an asset

Journal of Public Affairs Education 337 A. D. Benavides, L. A. Dicke, & A. C. Holt to the work of the agency, offered workable solutions to difficult problems, made decisions, and so forth. There was a general sense that the intern was a valued contributor to the organization. Finally, universities have come to recognize the need for, and the value added, that are derived from an internship program. A key position in this structure is the internship coordinator. A few comments are included here to show the importance of this position. One observation describes the internship coordinator, who is a professional staff member in many public affairs programs. The other statement refers to a professor who serves in this capacity. Note that not all MPA/MPP programs have the budget to staff a full- or part-time professional staff internship coordinator, and thus a faculty member is called upon in these cases to fulfill this duty.

The coordinator of an internship program helps to shape students into working citizens. That transition from a student into a professional should be monitored allowing the student time to grow. Providing suggestions to improve the outcome for both the student and the agency was helpful. The only way to do this is through the role of an internship coordinator.

Due to the dedication of my internship professor, I was able to gain the confidence necessary to find an internship. My internship professor was my liaison to the professional world and has become my mentor. Without the guidance from someone who knows what it takes to make dreams a reality, it would have been impossible to become a successful professional. Now, through this internship program I was able to gain a better, outside the classroom, understanding of what exactly my choices were with regards to my field of study.

Considering the comments made here, it is clear that the school, via an internship coordinator or professor, has a vital role in the success of the internship program. Students value the assistance afforded them through this link, and the coordinator can serve as an additional mentor, supervisor, advocate, and friend. Thus we can see that an internship is tied to all three parts of the cohesive model. The few qualitative comments provided here demonstrate the connections that exist within the model. An obvious student–university relationship is evident in the satisfaction of the students and the link between the student and the university via the internship coordinator position. The supervisor–mentor relationship that links the student and the government agency or nonprofit organization is illustrated by the comments of the employers. Additional student comments could be added here characterizing the reciprocal relationship. Finally, it should be noted that many types of cooperative relationships already exist between universities and government agencies or nonprofit organizations. Building upon these existing relationships can forge a stronger

338 Journal of Public Affairs Education Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration association that can have positive connections for an internship program. It is clear that an interdependent relationship exists between all three parties in the model, as indicated by the concentric circles. The challenge now is for all three parties to move to the center so that the internship experience for the student can become a strong one.

Conclusion As we consider the various methods available to socialize individuals into a particular profession or field of study, the internship still ranks at the top as a comprehensive pedagogy/andragogy for such a purpose. It was proposed that an internship as an experiential learning methodology was a necessary prerequisite for pre-career students seeking a public sector career. After years of constant trial and error, internship is still the best full-emersion experience for students to learn the inner workings of government. The degree of experience provided for the adult learner is incomparable to classroom learning. The internship has allowed multiple opportunities for those in the public administration profession to develop students academically and provide practical, professional public service experience. The first purpose of this article was to look at how internships have developed over time, and how NASPAA and ICMA jointly formalized internship programs. In essence, the study focused on the evolution and collaborative nature of the internship experience in public affairs graduate programs. Although much of the historical information presented here is not new for a number of academics in public administration, its value lies in its accessibility for a younger group of core faculty who are beginning to fill the ranks of academia. As the torch is passed to this new, technologically advanced group with online learning experience, we felt it necessary that the interpersonal skills obtained via an internship not be overlooked. Additionally, perhaps because of the struggling economy, an increased number of MPA students are now pre-career and are in need of government work experience. Therefore, we believe it is essential that properly established internships continue to be a solid cornerstone of graduate MPA/MPP education. Summarizing the essential features of an internship program and framing our argument within a simple yet congruent cohesive model was our next task. We presented a model to show how the student, the university, and the government agency or nonprofit organizations are connected via a sophisticated network to result in a strong internship program. The model presented reflects the current practice in many MPA/MPP programs and helps frame the ongoing relationships being used. The paper also described the crucial links that exist between the model participants and that are necessary to make an internship program successful. It was argued that a strictly academic environment fell short of providing students a complete picture of work in the public sector and that hands-on experience was essential. In summary, some of the specific factors that have been identified by researchers to be necessary for a successful internship include (a) a specific time and

Journal of Public Affairs Education 339 A. D. Benavides, L. A. Dicke, & A. C. Holt duration of an internship; (b) an academic component to bridge the experiential learning back to academics; (c) a placement portion to help students obtain internships; (d) adequate supervision by both the host agency and the MPA program, which is usually done by an internship coordinator or faculty member; (e) compensation or stipend for the intern; and (f) an evaluation piece that ideally obtains feedback from the intern, the host agency, and the school. We have found that the internship guidelines are an excellent resource for those interested in starting or strengthening an internship program (see the Appendix). As mentioned previously, the Obama administration recently updated and reorganized the former Presidential Management Internship (PMI) program to better reflect the needs of federal agencies and the realities of the new workforce. According to demographers, 51% of civil service employees will be eligible for retirement by 2012. Some believe that this number may rise to 61% by 2016 (OPM, 2008). Therefore, the reorganization established three streamlined developmental programs: the Internship Program for students; the Recent Graduates Program for people who have completed a qualifying educational program within the preceding 2 years; and the Presidential Management Fellows (PMF) Program for people who obtained a graduate or professional degree within the preceding 2 years. Today, internships in the public sector and in NASPAA-accredited programs have grown from a tool used by governments for recruiting purposes to an indispensable pedagogy or andragogy for universities, students, and host agencies. As part of this paper, we have included the Public Service Internship Guidelines developed by the NASPAA Committee on Public Service Internships and the Model Internship Guidelines that were adopted by the ICMA Advisory Board on Graduate Education and the NASPAA Urban Management Education Committee. We considered it essential to include these guidelines as part of this paper. Note that ICMA recently created an internship task force that is currently in the processes of combining its internship guidelines with the internship toolkit to produce one document. According to ICMA, the main addition to the combined document will be a section on how to fund internships—which is currently missing from both existing documents. Our research has shown that internships are a feature of nearly all MPA programs, and there is increased ingenuity and expertise in the structure, collaboration, and policies of internships. We suggest that a level of professionalism not seen in previous years exists in the administration of internships. As to future research, we suggest that evaluation comments from a selected sample of NASPAA institutions be collected to further verify the cohesive model. Additionally, we propose that NASPAA should consider surveying its member intuitions to determine the value of expanding NPASAA standard 4.3 support for students, to include additional language on internships versus the current “internship placement and supervision.” As we have seen in the paper, almost 100% of programs offer internships, and elevating the NASPAA internship guidelines to standard status would simply reaffirm in policy what is occurring in actual practice.

340 Journal of Public Affairs Education Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration

Finally, we close with the words of an intern:

Overall, I would sum up my life as an intern with one word: enlightening. I learned many things about the workings of this agency. I gained a more extensive knowledge of human nature. I understand more thoroughly the interaction between personality, perception and power. I also learned a great deal about myself and my relationship with the people around me. Much of this new knowledge was welcome. There were a few things I would have preferred to remain ignorant about but everything I learned (the good, the bad and the ugly) will be extremely useful to me in whatever the future holds.

Footnotes 1 NASPAA, the National Association for Schools of Public Affairs and Administration, is a nonprofit membership organization with a mission of serving as a national and international resource for the promotion of excellence in education and training for public service.

2 ICMA, the International City/County Management Association, was founded in 1914 and is a nonprofit membership organization for public managers.

3 See the Lectric Law Library’s Lexicon on Apprentice and Apprenticeship: http://www.lectlaw.com/ def/a199.htm

4 The current guidelines, the Public Service Internship Guidelines, can be accessed at http://www. naspaa.org. They are almost identical to those published in 1977. A few changes have been made to accommodate style. Additionally, in 1978 the NASPAA Executive Council added a sentence defining part- and full-time internships as well as language indicating that internships should not be a large part of the student’s total academic plan.

5 See, for instance, The Junior Civil Service Examiner 1934–1936; The Junior Professional Assist ant Examination 1939; The Junior Administrative Technician Examination 1939; The Junior Management Assistant Examination 1948; and the Federal Service Entrance Examination 1956. In 1949, the Civil Service Commission took over the Management Internship Option and the National Institute for Public Administration’s (NIPA) internship program, which began in 1935. Also see James P. Jadlos, “The Federal Management Interns,” Chapter 10 in Thomas P. Murphy, Government Management Internships and Executive Development (New Britain, CT: Lexington Books, 1973), pp. 157–178.

6 Laurie Perry Cookingham, “the Dean of City Managers,” served as city manager of Kansas City, Missouri, for 19 years. This distinctively long tenure earned him the respect of many of his colleagues (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L.P._Cookingham).

7 The following is a short list of examples of the diversity of topics on internships: Henckley (1963), The Internship in Administrative Preparation; Bassow (1968), The Legislative Internship Program; Hennessy (1970), Political Internships: Theory, Practice, and Evaluation; and Profughi, Thompson, and Warren (1972), “Rhode Island State Internship Program.” Additional articles could be added, but the point is that internships during this time period began to be studied more intensely.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 341 A. D. Benavides, L. A. Dicke, & A. C. Holt

References Alexander, J. R. (1982). Institutional design of public service internships: Conceptual, academic, and structural problems. Teaching Political Science, 9(3), 127–133.

Andrews, M. A., & Burch, J. (1979, May–June). The Phoenix management intern program. In A mini-symposium: Internships in public administration. Public Administration Review, 239–241.

Bassow, W. (1968). The Legislative Internship Program: A report to the Ford Foundation. Unpublished report.

Berman, E. M., Bowman, J. S., West, J. P., &Van Wart, M. (2006). Human resource management in public service: Paradoxes, processes and problems (2nd ed.). New York: Sage Publications.

Campbell, A. K., & Strakosch, L. D. (1979, May–June). The Presidential Management Intern Program: A new approach to selecting and developing America’s future public managers. A mini- symposium: Internships in public administration. Public Administration Review, 232–236.

Donovan, C. (2002, April). Local government internships. Public Management, 12–16.

Emerson, K., & Murchie, P. (2010). Collaborative governance and climate change: Opportunities for public administration. In The future of public administration around the world: The Minnowbrook perspective (pp. 141–161). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Federal Register. (2012, May 11). Final rule: Excepted service, career and career—Conditional employment; and Pathways programs. Office of Personnel Management, 77(92), (p. 28194).

Finkle, A. L., & Barclay, W. M. (1979, May–June). State government internships. In A mini-symposium: Internships in public administration. Public Administration Review, 236–238.

Finn, K. (1997). The spaces between: Toward a new paradigm for cooperative education. Journal of Cooperative Education, 32, 36–45.

Freeland, R. M., Marini, R. C., & Weighart, S. (1998). Moving partnerships between co-op institutions and co-op employers into the next century. Journal of Cooperative Education, 33, 17–27.

Gabris, G. T., & Mitchell, K. (1989, Winter). Exploring the relationship between intern job performance, quality of education experience, and career placement. Public Administration Quarterly, 484–504.

Garnett, J. L., & Donovan, C. P. (2002, October). The new old way to launch a career in public service. PA Times (Educational Supplement), pp. 3–4.

Gryski, G. S., Johnson, G. W., & O’Toole, L. J., Jr. (1987, Summer). Undergraduate internships: An empirical review. Public Administration Quarterly, 150–170.

Haider, D. (1979, May–June). Presidential management initiatives: A Ford legacy to executive management. In A mini-symposium: Internships in public administration. Public Administration Review, 248–259.

Hall, J. (1999. Cooperative education for the future. Journal of Cooperative Education, 34, 9–15.

Harris, M. E., & Emerson, S. (2001). Graduate education and public service internships: A theoretic framework to guide learning. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 7(1), 31–38.

Henckley, S. P. (1963). The internship in administrative preparation. Ohio and Washington, DC: The University Council for Educational Administration and the Committee for the Advancement of School Administration (joint publication).

Hennessy, B. C. (1970). Political internship: Theory, practice, and evaluation. University Park: Pennsylvania State University.

342 Journal of Public Affairs Education Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration

Henry, N. (1979, May–June). Are internships worthwhile? In A mini-symposium: Internships in public administration. Public Administration Review, 245–247.

Honan, J. C., & Day, H. T. (1979, September). Linking public affairs internship experience and academic study: A strategy for program design. In Public service internships: The continuing evolution—A symposium. Southern Review of Public Administration; currently Public Administration Quarterly, 146–163.

Hutcheson, P. (2002). Educating a globally productive citizenry: The role of higher education in the integration of learning and work. Boston, MA: National Commission for Cooperative Education.

Itin, C. (1999). Reasserting the philosophy of experiential education: A vehicle for change in the 21st century. Journal of Experiential Education, 22, 91–98.

Kim, S. (2010). Collaborative leadership and local governance. In The future of public administration around the world: The Minnowbrook perspective (pp. 111–116). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Knowles, M. S. (1968). Andragogy not pedagogy. Adult Leadership, 16(10), 350–386.

———. (1980) The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy, 2nd Edition, New York, Cambridge Books.

Koehler, C. T. (1979, September). The responsibilities of internship supervisors. In Public service internships: The continuing evolution—A symposium. Southern Review of Public Administration; currently Public Administration Quarterly, 137–145.

McCaffery, J. L. (1979, May–June). Perceptions of satisfaction–dissatisfaction in the internship experience. In A mini-symposium: Internships in public administration. Public Administration Review, 241–244.

McGlothlin, C. W., Jr. (2003, June). OS&H internships: What graduates are saying about their experience. Professional Safety, 41–50.

Murphy, T. P. (1973). Government management internships and executive development: Education for change. New Britain, CT: Lexington Books.

———. (1979a, September). Public service internships: The continuing evolution—a symposium. Southern Review of Public Administration; currently Public Administration Quarterly, 123–195.

———. (1979b, September). State legislative internships: The evolving reality. In Public service internships: The continuing evolution—A symposium. Southern Review of Public Administration; currently Public Administration Quarterly, 175–188.

National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA). (1977). NASPAA Guidelines for public service internships. See Public service internships: The continuing evolution—A symposium. Southern Review of Public Administration; currently Public Administration Quarterly, 189–195.

———. (1992). NASPAA Local government management education ICMA/NASPAA task force on local government management education, 1992. Retrieved from http://www.naspaa.org/ accreditation/seeking/reference/guidelines.asp#local

———. (2003). NASPAA Model internship guidelines, adopted by the ICMA advisory board on graduate education and the NASPAA urban management education committee. Retrieved from http://www.naspaa.org/principals/resources/modelintern.asp

Journal of Public Affairs Education 343 A. D. Benavides, L. A. Dicke, & A. C. Holt

Office of Personnel Management (OPM). (2008). An assessment of federal employment retirement data. Retrieved from http://www.opm.gov/feddata/RetirementPaperFinal_v4.pdf

———. (2011). Hiring authorities: Students and recent graduates. Retrieved from http://www.opm. gov/hiringreform/pathways/

Pardo, T. A., Gil-Garcia, R., & Luna Reyes, L. F. (2010). Collaborative governance and cross-boundary information sharing: Envisioning a networked and IT-enabled public administration. In The future of public administration around the world: The Minnowbrook perspective (pp. 129 –139). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Partnership for Public Service. (2009, April). Leaving talent on the table: The need to capitalize on high- performing student interns. Washington, DC: ourpublicservice.org cfc# 12110.

Pomerleau, R. (1979, September). Employment studies internship: The San Francisco State experience. In Public service internships: The continuing evolution—A symposium. Southern Review of Public Administration; currently Public Administration Quarterly, 164–174.

Profughi, V. L., Thompson, O. L., Jr., & Warren, E. G. (1972). Rhode Island State internship program. State Government, 45, 187–191

Villanueva, A. B. (1974, May–June). Public affairs internship programs in Illinois. Public Personnel Management, 185–192.

Wolf, James F. (1979, September). The student responsibility model of public service internships. In Public service internships: The continuing evolution—A symposium. Southern Review of Public Administration; currently Public Administration Quarterly, 127–136.

Dr. Abraham David Benavides is an associate professor and assistant chair in the Department of Public Administration at the University of North Texas. His research interests include local government, human resources, cultural competency, ethics and leadership, and immigration. He currently serves as a national council member for the American Society for Public Administration.

Dr. Lisa A. Dicke is an associate professor in the Department of Public Admini- stration at the University of North Texas. Her research interests include nonprofit management, nonprofit professional associations and accountability.

Dr. Amy C. Holt is the Education Director for the Texas Municipal Clerks Association. Her research interests include public policy, equity in access to public services, professionalism, and leadership.

344 Journal of Public Affairs Education Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration

Appendix

Professional Internship Guidelines from NASPAA and ICMA

PUBLIC SERVICE INTERNSHIP GUIDELINES

Developed by the NASPAA Committee on Public Service Internships and Approved by the NASPAA Executive Council November 1977

Introductory Statement Most universities and colleges granting degrees in public administration and related fields require the student to have practical field experience. Using medical school terminology, most institutions call this field experience an internship. However, unlike the medical school requirement, there have been no generally accepted guidelines and standards for public service internships. As a result, the term public service internship denotes many varied field experiences. Criticisms of internships are many. A common one is that interns are assigned clerical-type chores rather than more meaningful learning experiences. Often students are on their own, they receive little supervision from either on-the-job personnel or university faculty members. Another criticism, from the public service side, is that the students are not properly trained and motivated. From the university side, the criticism is made that internships are not integrated into the academic curriculum. In response to these and other criticisms, and to supplement other standards and guidelines developed by NASPAA, the Committee on Public Service Internships took as one of its first assignments the development of NASPAA guidelines for public service internships. We want to make several points before proceeding with our suggested guidelines. We think that public service internships are an integral part of the public service student’s professional education, but we also believe that those in charge of such programs must make every effort to see that the internship is conducted in such a way that it is indeed a true learning experience. The internship should not be primarily a means of recruitment for the public service. Nor should it be an after- thought or an add-on. Although we think that the internship can be a valuable part of a public administration program, we take no position that it must be part of all programs. There are alternatives.

Purpose The public service internship provides the student with a work experience to give him/her a realistic exposure to an organizational-bureaucratic environment. This experience should develop the student’s awareness of the internal dynamics of an organization and of the value and attitudes of public employees to both their clientele and their administrative-political superiors.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 345 A. D. Benavides, L. A. Dicke, & A. C. Holt

The internship should give the student the opportunity to become aware of his/her obligations as a professional and to the public. The internship may be one of the few opportunities the student has to test the skills and attitudes development discussed in his/her academic program. Although the intern should handle real work assignments, it should be remembered by all supervisory personnel-both on the job and academic—that the major reason for the internships is to provide a learning experience. The internship should be carefully integrated into the student’s overall academic program. The following guidelines are for the general development of internships. Other models may exist and are encouraged.

Duration and Timing An internship should be related to an academic calendar. A full-time internship should last a minimum of ten weeks and a maximum of 12 months. At a minimum, part-time internships would utilize the student for at least 20 hours per week for 15 weeks. Undergraduate internships vary somewhat from this general description. NASPAA standards and guidelines adopted for the baccalaureate degree state: “Part-time internships should require a minimum of twenty hours per week for at least one term or semester. Full-time internships should not be less than eight weeks in order for the student to have a meaningful experience.” (Added by the NASPAA Executive Council, July 14, 1978.)

Academic Component As set forth in the NASPAA guidelines and standards for professional degree programs, experiential learning should be considered an indispensable element of public affairs/public administration programs. For public administration programs which include internships as part of their academic programs, an internship or related field experience may be required of all students. Academic credit should be given for the internship. The internship should be graded on a basis consistent with the policies of the institution (either a pass-fail or a letter grade). Because undergraduate programs typically involve more academic credit than the master’s degree, the baccalaureate standards and guidelines have defined limitations on credit, as follows: “Academic credit awarded for internship experiences should not exceed twelve and one-half% of the total credits required for the baccalaureate degree. “An additional twelve and one-half percent of total credit may be allowed for appropriate professional experience when such experience is validated through examinations or other established procedures which demonstrates mastery of the content of specific academic courses…These limitations do not apply to the granting of academic credit through the College Level Entrance Program (CLEP).”

346 Journal of Public Affairs Education Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration

In developing a curriculum plan with the student, an academic adviser should take care that credit for internships in public service is not a large part of the student’s total academic program, both undergraduate, and graduate. (Added by the NASPAA Executive Council, July 14, 1978.) Students who have had considerable experience in the public sector, or who are currently in the public sector, and are students on a part-time basis, may be permitted to waive the internship requirement by demonstrating equivalent experiential learning expected of the intern. To strengthen the academic component of the internship, where practical, an academic seminar during the internship should be arranged. At the minimum, the student should be required to prepare an academic paper based on his/her practical experience. The paper should be evaluated as a regular seminar paper. For programs with a thesis requirement, students should be encouraged to use the internship as an opportunity to develop thesis documentation. The MPA program faculty should assume responsibility for the development of policies governing the curriculum and academic aspects of internships programs; responsibility for the implementation of those policies should be assigned to a member of the MPA faculty, who may be the MPA director. The development, maintenance, and evaluation of individual internships and the day to day operation of the internship program may be delegated to non-academic professional staff. When such duties are assigned to a member of the MPA faculty, they should be recognized as part of the teaching load or service contribution of that faculty member, and should be appropriately evaluated and rewarded.

Placement One of the most important components of internships is the nature of the assignment given the student. The primary responsibility for evaluating the adequacy of the placement of the intern should rest with the academic coordinator, not with the student. Ideally, the academic coordinator should offer several placement possibilities in the public sector for the student, and in cooperation with him/her should determine which position would give a particular student the best learning experience, given the student’s interests and talents. The student should have the right to refuse an assignment. Most students will be placed in governmental agencies, but other assignments in the public sector are acceptable. Among the other agencies in which placements would be acceptable are political parties, government relations sections of labor unions and management groups, and such organizations as the League of Women Voters and Common Cause. When a student is placed, there should be a formal understanding between the public service agency, the academic coordinator, and the student, including a clear understanding of the obligations and responsibilities of all parties. (Usually an agreement can be reached by a discussion among the academic coordinator, the agency representative, and the student, or students.)

Journal of Public Affairs Education 347 A. D. Benavides, L. A. Dicke, & A. C. Holt

Supervision Both the Agency and the academic coordinator should supervise the intern. The agency should designate an intern supervisor. There should be as much contact with the student as necessary by both the agency supervisor and the academic internship coordinator. The intern should not be left on his/her own. The agency supervisor should spell out work assignments for the intern, and should follow up to see that these assignments are completed satisfactorily. When in doubt, the agency supervisor should feel free to discuss assignments with the academic coordinator. The agency supervisor should be regarded as a partner in the learning experience of the student. Before and during an internship assignment, where practicable, there should be a series of sessions attended by the student, the academic coordinator, and the agency representative (in most cases this should be the intern supervisor) to discuss their mutual expectations of the internship program. In such sessions, attention should be given to the agency representative to make sure that he/she is aware of the special needs of student interns.

Compensation The participating agency should, where practicable, be encouraged to provide a stipend or salary to the intern. However, the availability of compensation should in no way impinge on the academic validity of the intern experience.

Evaluation Evaluation should be a continuous, on-going aspect of the internship program. The evaluation should include statements on each student from the agency intern supervisor, preferably during as well as at the conclusion of the internship. This evaluation should be an important component in grading the intern for academic credit. Interns should be required to submit self-evaluations of their experiences. Both agency supervisors’ and interns’ statements should include evaluations of the program’s effectiveness. This should aid the academic coordinator in determining which agencies have not given desirable supervision and learning experiences. If written statements by the students are requested, they should be in addition to the academic paper mentioned earlier. It may also be desirable to require that students submit an additional evaluation six months or a year after their internships have ended. This will provide a means of assessing the long-term impact of the internship. These guidelines were developed by the following NASPAA Committee on Public Service Internships. They were approved by the NASPAA Executive Council at Colorado Springs, Colorado, November 10, 1977.

348 Journal of Public Affairs Education Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration

MODEL INTERNSHIP GUIDELINES

Adopted by the ICMA Advisory Board on Graduate Education and the NASPAA Urban Management Education Committee October 2003

Introduction The International City/County Management Association (ICMA) and the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA) have a mutual interest in ensuring that high-quality internships are available for MPA students. NASPAA provides Internship Guidelines as a resource document for its accreditation program, and ICMA provides an Internship Toolkit to help cities and counties develop internship opportunities that benefit both the student and the local government. In the early 1990s, the two organizations collaborated on a set of Guidelines for Local Government Management Education, which also included internship guidelines and models for use by schools. In 2002, the Internship Subcommittee of ICMA’s Advisory Board on Graduate Education, with input from representatives of the NASPAA Urban Management Education Committee, identified a need to adapt and flesh out the NASPAA Internship Guidelines so that they can be used by program directors and faculty to encourage local governments to establish internships. To that end, the guidelines that follow are designed to help local government managers and MPA programs work together to create meaningful internship experiences. While internship content, duration, and other factors may vary, internships should not only benefit the student but also serve as a good investment of time and resources for the sponsoring jurisdiction, which should gain from the knowledge and skills of graduate students. Internships also help ensure that professional local government management practices are passed on to future city and county leaders.

Purpose of Internships An internship that integrates the student as an operating member of a management staff is a critical component of the local government management education of graduate (MPA) students. The local government internship provides students with a work experience to give them a realistic exposure to an organizational/ bureaucratic environment. This experience should enhance the student’s awareness of the internal dynamics of an organization and the values and attitudes of public employees toward both their clientele and their administrative/political superiors. The internship should give students the opportunity to become aware of their obligations as professionals and to the public. The internship may be one of the few opportunities students have to test the skills and attitudes developed and discussed in their academic program. A second benefit of internship programs, particularly those of a year or more in duration, is the opportunity to take advantage of the knowledge and emerging skills of students.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 349 A. D. Benavides, L. A. Dicke, & A. C. Holt

Graduate interns represent an intellectual resource for the local government as it addresses the needs of the community. In a very real sense interns are “part-time” or “temporary” employees and should be treated as such. The assignments and responsibilities of the intern should reflect the needs and priorities of the local government. Interns are a resource, not unlike other positions and functions. The position of “intern” should be integrated into the organizational structure as any other position would be. When the intern is treated as an “employee” both the student-intern and the local government gain the most from the work assignment. Although the intern should handle real work assignments, it should be remembered by all supervisory personnel—both on the job and academic—that the major reason for the internship is to provide a learning experience. The internship should be carefully integrated into the student’s overall academic program. The internship experience is, first and foremost, an educational experience. Both the faculty internship coordinator and the internship supervisor in the local government must function as educators in their dealings with the intern. In particular, supervisors should be conscious of their educator role and should assume responsibility for mentoring the intern (i.e., application of theoretical knowledge from the classroom to real world situations, demonstration of how knowledge affects problem-solving, interpersonal interactions, communications, and task achievement).

Duration and Timing Internships come in many forms and formats. Most internships that occur as part of the course of study of a student are part-time (typically 20 hours per week). They may last from three months (a summer internship), to the nine months of the academic “year,” or even a full year. Full-time internships, which most often are available after the degree is awarded, generally run for twelve months, though a few run for two years. While many internship programs are available only in the summer, a long-term experience, preferably at least six months full-time or one year part-time, is better. Shorter programs may not give the student a sufficient range of experience in observing and participating in diverse activities; they provide too little time for the student to grasp adequately the organizational and political cultures of the employing local government. One difficulty in establishing internships is coordinating them with the academic calendar of the institutions from which interns will be drawn. Internship sponsors should be aware of the starting and ending dates of the school terms and, to the extent possible, synchronize the period of the internship with school calendar. Schools usually have a great deal of flexibility in allowing students to continue in internships before and after the official start/end of a term, but student interest and availability are often tied to the school terms. A variation on longer, but part-time, internships now used by MPA programs is to establish a formal link between the MPA program and a local government

350 Journal of Public Affairs Education Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration whereby students are hired as “interns,” but placed on graduate research assistantship contracts. The students work part-time for the local government, but are otherwise treated like research assistants, gaining tuition reimbursement and other academic benefits as a full-time student. Under such arrangements the intern is available approximately 20 hours a week during the two semesters of an academic year. Often such an arrangement can last the two years of a typical MPA program.

Placement One of the most important components of internships is the nature of the assignment given the student. The primary responsibility for evaluating the adequacy of the placement of the intern should rest with the academic coordinator, in conjunction with the local government administrator. The placement process should to some extent mimic the job application process. Both the student and the local government should have the right to refuse a placement. When a student is placed, there should be a formal understanding among the local government, the academic coordinator, and the student, including a clear understanding of the obligations and responsibilities of all parties. While not necessary, we recommend that a brief, formal “agreement” be developed that outlines the responsibilities of the academic unit, the local government, and the student. Intern assignments should involve diverse responsibilities. Management interns should be exposed to a broad range of management problems; given diverse work assignments; expected to perform daily management tasks as well as long-term research and report preparation; required to interact with other professionals inside and outside the local government and with constituents; given exposure to political meetings and processes; and provided opportunities for interaction in professional association activities. Intern assignments should also allow for the use of a variety of communication skills: written memos and reports as well as oral presentations to groups of various size and composition.

Supervision Both the local government and the academic coordinator should supervise the intern. The local government should designate an intern supervisor. There should be as much contact with the student as necessary by both the intern supervisor and the academic internship coordinator. Interns should not be left on their own. The supervisor should spell out work assignments for the intern and should follow up to see that these assignments are completed satisfactorily. When in doubt, the supervisor should feel free to discuss assignments with the academic coordinator. The supervisor should be regarded as a partner in the learning experience of the student. Before and during an internship assignment, where practicable, there should be a series of sessions attended by the student, the academic coordinator, and the government representative (in most cases this should be the intern supervisor) to discuss their mutual expectations of the internship program.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 351 A. D. Benavides, L. A. Dicke, & A. C. Holt

Compensation Internships are in many cases one of the methods for the student to finance his/her education. While it is not always feasible, every effort should be made to create “funded” internships. The old adage “you get what you pay for” is true for many internships. Local governments that contribute financially to the support of the internship are more likely, over time, to make meaningful use of the intern, to provide the intern with good supervision, and to demand more from the intern in terms of professional productivity. The more the intern is treated as a temporary or part-time employee, the more valuable the internship will be to the student and the local government. Providing financial support to the internship is also likely to increase the pool of potential interns from which the local government can choose.

Evaluation Evaluation should be a continuous, on-going aspect of the internship program. The evaluation should include statements on each student from the intern supervisor, preferably during as well as at the conclusion of the internship. The evaluation process is important feedback not only to the intern, but also to the jurisdiction sponsoring the internship and to the academic coordinator to ensure that the internship is meeting the expectations of all concerned. Intern supervisors should use the same performance evaluation system used for other employees and should provide the intern with a copy of the evaluation that is sent to the academic coordinator. Occasionally, the academic coordinator will provide the intern supervisor with a specific evaluation form that can be used instead of or in addition to the form used for other employees. The academic coordinator should make clear to the intern supervisor just how the evaluation will be used by the academic institution in determining the student’s grade. Interns should be required to submit self-evaluations of their experiences. Both supervisors’ and interns’ statements should include evaluations of the program’s effectiveness. This should aid the academic coordinator in determining which local governments have provided (or not provided) desirable supervision and learning experiences. If written statements by the students are requested, they should be in addition to any academic paper prepared in conjunction with the internship. It may also be desirable to require that students submit an additional evaluation six months or a year after their internships have ended. This will provide a means of assessing the long-term impact of the internships.

Key Principles Effective internship programs benefit both the student and the community. Internships are an excellent opportunity to make use of very talented people and

352 Journal of Public Affairs Education Anchoring Internship Programs in Collaboration to assess them as possible fulltime employees. They are also an opportunity for managers to demonstrate to interns the potential of a career in local government administration. The following is adapted from a description of the City of Phoenix Management Internship program. This post-degree program has been in existence for more than 50 years. The principles and perspectives expressed here are applicable to virtually any internship program. Thus, they can serve as the basis for judging the quality of any internship program. Practical Experience, Interns serve in an entry-level professional capacity and are responsible for completing a mix of key projects and assignments related to major issues facing the City. They observe and participate in the decision- and policy-making process, learn the fundamentals of the budget cycle, and recommend changes to existing policies and procedures based on thorough research analyses. Interns benefit from the same performance evaluation system as permanent employees and receive constructive feedback on their work. Mentoring Process: Informal mentoring takes place during and beyond the intern program year with the Budget and Research Director, the City Manager and other management and supervisory staff. Interns are encouraged to arrange informational sessions with department staff and other city officials to obtain first-hand knowledge of specific operations. Networking Opportunities: Interns are fully integrated into the network of local government professionals through participation in various professional association activities. These activities occur on a local and regional basis and provide interns with extensive exposure to a variety of key issues impacting other jurisdictions. Exposure to Council-Manager Form of Government: Interns are afforded the opportunity to obtain a working knowledge of how policies are developed and implemented within this form of government. Theories pertaining to the policy/administration dichotomy are further expanded by the realization that developing and administering effective policies requires a coordinated effort between elected officials and management staff.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 353 354 Journal of Public Affairs Education MPA Program Partnerships With Nonprofit Organizations: Benefits to MPA Programs, MPA Students and Graduates, Nonprofit Organizations, and Communities

Christopher A. Simon, Melissa Yack, & J. Steven Ott University of Utah

Abstract Service to community is a long-standing tradition in American democracy and society. Nonprofit public service organizations are key actors in the provision of public goods and services, as well as partners in the process of governance. MPA program curricula often incorporate coursework and service-learning opportunities to help students better understand the link between nonprofits and public sector organizations and functions. A case analysis of the University of Utah MPA program illustrates the benefits of tying MPA course curricula to community partnerships. Common barriers to creating and maintaining productive long-term community partnerships are identified. Lessons learned include maintaining consistent and well-funded outreach efforts, anticipating and managing faculty disinterest and resistance, employing multiple models of service learning, and linking nonprofit education to studies of democratic go vernance.

Organizations in the nonprofit sector are integral to the functioning of government in the United States (U.S. GAO, 2007) and in many other countries (see Salamon & Sokolowski, 2004; Read & Pekkanen, 2009). Frequently, nonprofit education is integrated into MPA education1 (see Mirabella, 2007); yet, seldom does one encounter reflections on the myriad ways that organizations in the nonprofit sector advance the practice of public administration in democratic settings (Boris & Steuerle, 2006; Clemens, 2006; Douglas, 1987; Mendel, 2010; NCCS, 2012; Smith, 1973; Speck & Hoppe, 2004; Smith & Grønbjerg, 2006; U.S. GAO, 2007;). MPA program partnerships with nonprofit organizations not only create employment opportunities for MPA students and graduates but also enrich an MPA program’s curriculum, teaching, and administration; provide MPA students

Keywords: service learning, nonprofits, mpa programs, democratic governance

JPAE 19(2), 355–374 Journal of Public Affairs Education 355 C. A. Simon, M. Yack, & J. S. Ott with cognitive learning experiences; develop public service values/ethics and, thereby, strengthen the public service and participatory democracy in communities (Campus Compact, 2001; Hunter, Munro, Dunn, & Olson, 2009). Yet, it requires a serious ongoing commitment to create and maintain these partnerships; nonprofit organizations cannot simply be asked to work with an MPA program when an internship or service-learning placement is needed. The paper briefly reviews contributions made by the nonprofit sector to the public service in a democratic society. The paper also examines different types and forms of partnerships and engagements between MPA programs and organizations in the nonprofit sector and how each alliance likely can benefit an MPA program, MPA students and graduates, nonprofit organizations, and public service in com munities (Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 2008; Weerts & Sandmann, 2010). The types of partnerships examined include variants of service learning; internships; faculty service (e.g., technical assistance, service on boards, and teaching training programs); continuing education and training programs; and the use of nonprofit leaders as adjunct instructors, guest speakers, and curriculum resources. Several specific examples of MPA–nonprofit partnerships are presented, followed by a discussion of the opportunities and the challenges often encountered in the nonprofit sector and by consideration of a few lessons the authors learned while implementing and sustaining community partnerships with nonprofit organizations.

Contributions That Organizations in the Nonprofit Sector Make to the Public Service in a Democratic Society Nonprofit organizations strengthen government through the delivery of public goods and services, often developing and testing new service innovations. Nonprofits deliver services under contract with government agencies in many fields: for example, mental health, developmental disability, youth/gangs, and family services—all of the aforementioned often focus special attention on victims of abuse (Flynn, 2012; Inglehart & Becerra, 2011; Ott & Dicke, 2012). Nonprofits also provide financial and political support for public services such as national parks, seashores, and rivers. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (U.S. GAO) cites “one estimate that the federal government spent about $317 billion on nonprofit organizations in fiscal year 2004” (U.S. GAO, 2007), and this is only federal government spending. It is important to note, however, that not all nonprofit organizations provide all of the benefits identified in the following list. • Nonprofit organizations tend to be more flexible and experimental than government agencies. Therefore, nonprofits are freer to experiment with innovative approaches to delivering public services and, through leveraging, partially funding services. “The voluntary sector has fulfilled the role of experimenter and initiator with distinction in the past. Almost without exception every major social service was originally undertaken by the voluntary sector” (Douglas, 1987, p. 48).

356 Journal of Public Affairs Education MPA Program Partnerships With Nonprofit Organizations

• Democratic governments are “categorically constrained.” They must ensure that benefits are distributed fairly and equitably. The democratic state must treat all its citizens equally under the law, and its distribution of benefits “must not only be equitable; it must beseen to be equitable [emphasis in original]” (Douglas, 1987, pp. 46–47). Equity calculi are made by political representatives, although nonprofit organizations can offer services to those independently judged to be underserved by public policy. “Public services or goods that gain support from a majority of constituents will be provided by public agencies; those that are more controversial or preferred by only a minority will be provided by nonprofits . . . albeit often subsidized by public funds” (Clemens, 2006, p. 207). • Nonprofit organizations that deliver services under contract to public agencies are constrained, but “the relative freedom of the private voluntary sector from bureaucratic constraints is so well established that governments frequently use the device of subsidizing existing voluntary bodies (or establishing new ones) to carry out functions somewhat protected from the usual requirements of political accountability.” (Smith, 1973, p. 50).

Some Contributions That Organizations in the Nonprofit Sector Make to Strengthening Democratic Society In addition to benefiting the delivery of government services, organizations in the nonprofit sector also help strengthen our democratic society in myriad ways (Edwards, 2009). A few examples: • Nonprofit organizations socialize citizens for democratic participation, especially nonprofit organizations using community volunteers (LeRoux, 2009, 2011 Putnam, 2001). “Associations are foundational to democracy insofar as they are sites for the cultivation of democratic values and skills. This contention is captured by the argument’s theoretical imagery: associations are ‘schools of citizenship’” (Clemens, 2006, p. 208). In a similar way, nonprofit organizations serve as training grounds for community leaders (Edwards, 2009; Hunter, Munro, Dunn & Olson, 2009). Citizens learn and test skills—and build credentials— that are needed to be competitive for elected and appointed leadership positions in public organizations and to be effective when they secure them. This contribution is particularly important for individuals and groups who have experienced educational and/or occupational discrimination and have not been able to rise in corporate settings. Nonprofits are loci for the development of “linking social capital” and “bonding social capital,” often spanning different ethnic, socio economic, and geographic sub-populations (Schneider, 2009).

Journal of Public Affairs Education 357 C. A. Simon, M. Yack, & J. S. Ott

Through volunteerism, people become actively engaged and committed to others and to their communities. The social capital that is built in nonprofit organizations brings together people, groups, and institutions that otherwise may have been in greater conflict or competition with each other (Edwards, 2009; Schneider, 2009; Smith, 1973). For example, . . . at regular meetings of a board of trustees to coordinate a neighborhood watch program or to help the local PTA offer children a safe Halloween experience; both are creating social capital. The benefits of social capital come later to the participating individuals, to the “networks” to which they belong, and to the community—as a side effect of association (Ott & Dicke, 2012, pp. 180–181). • A sizable number of nonprofit organizations assist with the integration and reintegration of denizens into society. Immigrants, political refugees, and prison parolees often receive support from nonprofit organizations (Inglehart & Becerra, 2011). • Nonprofits may represent unique worldviews, underrepresented by the majority of society (Clemens, 2006). The ACLU and Nature Conservancy are good examples of socially responsible watchdog groups. In a pluralistic society, like-minded and/or like-willed individuals coalesce in nonprofit organizations to affect public policy. In a pluralistic society, “there is not one will of the people but several, sometimes conflicting wills” (Douglas, 1987, p. 47). Nonprofit organizations give voice—power—to these conflicting worldviews and wills (Hrebenar & Morgan, 2009).

Nonprofits, Serving Learning, Community Engagement, and Public Administration Education Service to community is a long-standing tradition in the United States. In his well-known early 19th century travels in the United States, French observer Alexis de Tocqueville was taken with—captivated by—the civic mindedness of Americans. Neighbors came together to serve neighbors as a young, largely rural nation strove to overcome dilemmas through voluntary collective action (see Tocqueville, 2002). Fearful of a loss of personal freedom and equality, Tocqueville demonstrated strong preferences for collective voluntary social action at the community level. Over-reliance on government bureaucratic solutions was viewed as leading to potentially undemocratic decisions and outcomes imposed on citizens. Many scholars view Tocqueville’s Democracy in America as a template for the ideal civic community (Edwards, 2009; Foley & Edwards, 1997). Communitarian scholars—such as Benjamin Barber (1988), John Rawls (1996), and Robert Bellah and colleagues (1992)—have argued that strong modern democratic societies are built around civic institutions legitimized through active citizen involvement in the co-production of effective and responsive policy outcomes.

358 Journal of Public Affairs Education MPA Program Partnerships With Nonprofit Organizations

Mid-to-late 20th century developments in public administration theory refocused attention on the founding period of our nation. H. George Frederickson (1980), Dwight Waldo (1980), David H. Rosenbloom (1983), John Rohr (1986), Camilla Stivers (1993, 2000, 2001), Cheryl King (2011), and others have tried to revitalize our understanding of the legitimacy of the public administrative enterprise in light of Tocqueville’s views on American democracy. The question of how to build the modern administrative state while retaining the role of the community and the individual citizen remains an unresolved dilemma in theory and practice (see Lisman, 1998). The problem extends far beyond public admin istration education, touching on nearly all areas of academic study focused on meeting social needs (see Gronski & Pigg, 2000). Nonprofit organizations provide one potential means for linking citizens with the government (King, 2011). In public administration education, the linkages between liberal, technical, or professional education and civic engagement are particularly important. Student internships represent one commonly adopted strategy, but they have limitations. Internships bring students into a process and may offer a near-clinical perspective where curriculum is juxtaposed with live case studies enacted by agency “clientele.” In contrast, service learning involves “a set of pedagogical practices that [attempt] to synthesize and connect service experiences to specific spheres of knowledge for the dual purposes of mastering that knowledge and developing citizen skills that support one’s active participation in democratic processes” (Koliba, 2000, p. 825). The concept is “new” to the degree that it represents an ever-evolving and continually constructed and reconstructed concept (see Speck & Hoppe, 2004) in the Progressive paradigm of society, generally speaking, and in education, more specifically. Service learning brings key elements of descriptive and prescriptive social capital and civic community literatures into focus for formal educators and administrators pursuing unique pedagogies in K–12 education.2 Service learning is a “strong” form of community-engaged learning that takes the student outside of the profession (in this case, public administration) to provide them with a deeper understanding of and commitment to communities served. This “outside looking in” perspective gives students an understanding of and appreciation for professional “mission.” Additionally, service learning helps students overcome their “alienation” from the community, fellow learners, and clientele in a democratic society (see MacFarlane, 2007; Parsons, 1996; Wallace, 2000). Wallace argues that service learning can help students overcome self-alienation and thereby help to introduce students to civic life. The benefits of service learning and community engagement extend far beyond the student participant. They also benefit and educate a broad array of citizen stakeholders, community groups, and government institutions (Michener et al., 2008). Roschelle, Turpin, and Elias (2000) found that service learning helps to educate community service organizations and clientele about the role of professional education. Most significantly, Rochelle and colleagues (2000, p. 839) found that service learning creates “a long-term commitment to social justice [see Cipolle, 2010]

Journal of Public Affairs Education 359 C. A. Simon, M. Yack, & J. S. Ott and [former students] continue to work for social change years after leaving the university.” Their finding is particularly compelling given that public administration scholarship in recent decades has focused on the issue of public administration as an agent for promotion of equality, particularly for those individuals and groups historically underrepresented in the political institutions and lacking sociopolitical efficacy (consider Frederickson, 1980). The challenges facing universities and the role of service learning and community engagement are more acute than ever in view of the rapidity and depth of the dilemmas facing an evolving global society. Public administration of 19th- and 20th-century America operated under relatively uncomplicated circumstances compared with 21st-century public administration. Certainly the din of 21st- century globalism and the complexities of operating in a post-9/11 networked administrative environment have led to the emergence of administrative challenges on a nearly geometric scale. Education is a continual process, and individuals and organizations incapable of recognizing and addressing such challenges will fall by the wayside. The predictions of Alvin Toffler (1967) and Warren Bennis (1967) ring true in a celeritous world. Service learning offers the opportunity to help prepare students for the changes and the challenges faced during their evolving careers. Through all of the likely career changes facing young professionals, the moral values and principles under- girding democratic society must remain central to U.S. public and nonprofit administrators and should continually guide individual and institutional futures. How can “responsible” citizenship be maintained in a cosmopolitan and rapidly changing world? Service learning and the collaboration between universities and community partners represent a reasonable and workable solution.

Economic restructuring, characterized by global capitalism, can threaten the economic, political, and cultural security of communities and urban areas. Dismantling of government welfare services is exacerbated by a lack of empowerment and citizenship skills among people in affected areas. The ability to manage these social changes and deliberately improve society as a civic society is an urgent cause for the 21st century. (Gronski & Pigg, 2000, p. 782)

Wright (2000) emphasizes the importance of service learning and community engagement for helping 21st-century students become effective practitioners in a world where the social welfare functions of government continue to wither while the social needs become increasingly acute.3 Fulfilling the wants of a heterogeneous population demanding the equal outcomes promised by social justice is an enormous challenge in the postmodern democracy, which seeks to decant from Tocqueville those principles that best serve its purposes (Aberle-Grasse, 2000; Grusky, 2000).

360 Journal of Public Affairs Education MPA Program Partnerships With Nonprofit Organizations

Building Partnerships With Nonprofits The University of Utah (U of U) MPA program has many long-standing, deep, and close relationships with the nonprofit sector at both the individual and institutional levels. These long-standing relationships have yielded benefits for many years to our MPA students, to the nonprofit partners, to the engaged faculty, and to the MPA program curriculum and instruction. The MPA program has overcome a number of barriers and in the process has learned important lessons, a few of which are summarized in the next section. The most important connections with nonprofit organizations have been created and maintained through the following efforts: • The University of Utah MPA Program Concentration in Nonprofit Organizations. The MPA program’s relationships with the nonprofit sector started when the “Nonprofit Concentration” was launched in 1994. Two regular MPA faculty led the initiative, along with several MPA graduates with extensive experience and expertise in the sector. The MPA program soon began inviting selected leaders from across Utah’s nonprofit sector to serve as guest speakers and, in a few cases, as instructors. The program’s visibility, credibility, and networks of relationships snowballed rapidly. Faculty members then began receiving invitations to serve in leadership positions in the nonprofit community, and the resulting relationships have created gratifying opportunities for MPA students. • Initially, several political science department faculty were skeptical of a concentration in nonprofit organizations. Some faculty viewed the nonprofit sector as a potential diversion of fiscal and human resources away from the study of government. Nonprofit administration was seen as having a delegitimizing effect on the public sector mission. These views sometimes played out in painful decisions—from the MPA program perspective—made by most of the department faculty and/or department leadership to allocate vacant faculty lines in traditional public administrative subfields rather than a second line in the nonprofit administration subfield. The initiative required patience and persistence over a number of years before the MPA program succeeded in hiring another tenure-track nonprofit scholar; but it was a goal accomplished only through securing college and university approval to use program- generated, nonlegislated funds to pay salary and benefits for the tenure-tracked faculty line. It represents the first known time at Utah that a tenure-track hire was approved using entirely non-base funds. • Service Learning. Most nonprofit course instructors have found service learning to be an effective approach to learning. Also, an MPA required core course (PADMN 6550), which deals with the nonprofit sector and organizations, is officially designated a service learning course.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 361 C. A. Simon, M. Yack, & J. S. Ott

PADMN 6550 instructors are required to use service learning, but the approach or model is not specified. Table 1 outlines recent service learning placements and internships. • Service learning has not been readily accepted in the Political Science Department. Some political science department faculty members have viewed it as a “gimmick” or “fad” that detracts from “real learning.” Most of the faculty members who teach in the MPA program now view service learning as an important form of learning. Fortunately, this university has an extremely active and supportive Community Engagement Center that has helped the MPA program implement service learning wisely and effectively. • The University of Utah “Nonprofit Academy for Excellence.” The U of U’s Division of Continuing Education offers a noncredit certificate program for leaders and managers of nonprofit organizations. Several members of the MPA faculty regularly teach in the Nonprofit Academy and, through connections established in the classroom, build ongoing relationships that open opportunities for community- based research as well as for internships and service learning. The director of the Nonprofit Academy is a graduate of the U of U MPA program, an extremely useful connection for internships, service learning, and permanent jobs. This aspect of community partnerships had a difficult history. Between 1995 and about 2005, the MPA program tried (and twice failed) to implement a center for noncredit education for nonprofit leaders. There were many barriers, the most important one being that the university’s Division of Continuing Education—the only reasonable “home” for a major program of noncredit education—is on a self-supporting financial model. It must make enough money to support its programs, including administrative overhead. We failed twice at finding a balance between program revenues and costs. We succeeded only after we had created enough trust through partnerships with other community organizations that also serve nonprofits that we were able to carve out noncompeting, self-sustaining market niches. The Utah Nonprofits Association has been the key partner. • The Utah Nonprofits Association (UNA). UNA is a statewide “umbrella membership association” for 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations. UNA offers an array of services and benefits to its member organizations, including training, insurance packages, and access to human resource consultants at greatly reduced prices. Until UNA outgrew the space available, it was housed with the MPA program and contracted for support services. Although the U of U did not fund the executive director position, it partially subsidized

362 Journal of Public Affairs Education MPA Program Partnerships With Nonprofit Organizations

Table 1. Recent University of Utah MPA Program Internship and Service Learning Placements

Internship Placements Service/Learning Placements Artspace (Renovates warehouses, builds low-cost Splore (Outdoor adventures for residences and studios, and provides selected children and youth with disabilities) social services for artists) Utah Symphony & Opera Bountiful Community Food Co-op Utah Food Bank Disability Law Center Make-A-Wish Foundation of Utah American Cancer Society Girl Scouts of Utah Boys and Girls Club of Utah First Step House (Substance abuse) Utah Legal Services Utah Animal Adoption Center Make-A-Wish Foundation of Utah Utah Nonprofits Association Pancreatic Cancer Action Network LDS Church, Office of Public Affairs Utah Health Policy Project Utah Commission on Volunteers Utah Microenterprise Loan Fund University of Utah, Office of Guadalupe School (Adult education, primarily Central Development for immigrants and refugees) Utah Nonprofits Association International Rescue Committee First Step House (Substance abuse) Rocky Mountain Care/Hospice and Community Faith in Action The Road Home (Homeless Shelter) Utah Community Action Program Davis Arts Center Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation American Red Cross of Utah Utah Coalition of La Raza Wasatch Mountain Amateur Hockey Association Girl Scouts of Utah Montessori Community Foundation Choice Humanitarian (International service trips, similar to Peace Corps but shorter) Humane Society of Utah March of Dimes of Utah

Journal of Public Affairs Education 363 C. A. Simon, M. Yack, & J. S. Ott

the cost of office space, clerical and technical assistance, and office supplies. We predicted that having UNA housed in the MPA offices would cause informal and formal opportunities for interactions that would yield useful results, and we were correct. Initially, the MPA program received some political science department faculty criticism for “wasting space,” but once a number of MPA students gained access to UNA projects and internships with UNA member nonprofits, the criticism abated. • Several U of U faculty members have served leadership roles on the UNA board of trustees for the last two decades. This connection has provided access to a wide variety of nonprofit connections and created numerous opportunities for students. The greatest barriers to effective partnerships with UNA have been the time required of faculty and staff and a vague but pervasive distrust of higher education’s motives. Our two failed attempts to create noncredit education programs worked against us. The answer has been staff and faculty persistence, constancy, reliability, and trust (“social capital”) built over decades. We now have a joint scholarship with UNA to show the strides made. • Distinguished Practitioner/Lecturer in Residence. In 2011, the MPA Program faculty and staff created a soft-funded trial position for a “Distinguished Practitioner/Lecturer in Residence.” The program successfully recruited for a non-tenure-tracked, three-quarter time position and then hired the director of the Community Foundation of Utah, a dynamic leader in nonprofit development, governance, advocacy, and social entrepreneurship. She taught three MPA courses last year: Nonprofit Advocacy and Public Policy, Management of Nonprofit Organizations, and Entrepreneurship in the Social Sector. The individual worked with select students as they wrote their major research papers on topics in her areas of strength. Perhaps most important, she helped the MPA program establish more visibility and deeper ties with nonprofit organizations and foundations across the state and across the subsectors, and she has inspired and energized MPA students with experiential learning in and out of the classroom. • We had funding for only one year for this position, and it was an experiment. Although the individual’s contribution benefited us tremendously—especially the students in her courses and those who worked on research papers with her—we could have made better use of her abilities and connections. We did not anticipate how much time and effort it would require to fully use her skills and networks, nor the challenges of scheduling with a full-time practitioner. We could have—should have—immediately made plans to have her as an active member of our community partnership team. We will have another distinguished practitioner/lecturer in residence in the near future, but not without better planning.

364 Journal of Public Affairs Education MPA Program Partnerships With Nonprofit Organizations

• “Nonprofit Chatters.” The University of Utah MPA Program created and cosponsors an ongoing series of networking events, “Nonprofit Chatters,” with the Utah Nonprofits Association and the Community Foundation of Utah. The chatters provide nonprofit organization leaders in Utah with information about and professional connections to faculty and staff at Utah’s universities, who teach and conduct research on aspects of the nonprofit sector and nonprofit organization management. The chatters are informal in nature, with the goal of bringing together multiple stakeholders who are providing training, research, and evaluation services for nonprofits. Topics have included partnerships between higher education and nonprofits (e.g., service learning, internships, and conferences), a standards of ethics review for Utah Nonprofits Association, and duplication of services. Costs for these chatters have been minimal (i.e., meals, parking, and office supplies) and are covered by the MPA Program, Utah Nonprofits Association, and the Community Foundation of Utah. Invitations to these chatters have included a variety of nonprofit leaders in hopes of continuing to expand partner networks and hearing various voices. • There have been few barriers to the “nonprofit chatters” initiated in summer 2010—long after strong partnership relationships had been established among the MPA Program, the Nonprofit Academy for Excellence, UNA, and a number of executive directors of leading nonprofit organizations. Sensitivity has been needed when deciding whom to invite, particularly in deciding among nonprofit organization leaders, representatives from a few other in-state universities, and independent consultants. Otherwise, the barriers have been simply operational. Time is needed to plan and organize chatters.

Some Implications of the MPA Program’s Long-Term Investment in Community Partnerships Although it may appear to be simple good fortune that the University of Utah MPA faculty has ready access to nonprofit leaders and organizations, to a large extent these associations and networks exist because MPA program leaders have been instrumental in creating and maintaining nonprofit networks. MPA program leaders have continued to invest in relationship building with the nonprofit community, devoting significant professional and personal time to their effort. The MPA program has been assiduous in its effort to earn trust and gain access to nonprofit organization leaders on behalf of its students (see Table 1 for a sampling of nonprofit organizations that have provided placements for MPA interns and students doing service learning as a method of student and program engagement with nonprofits). The implications of these internship and service-learning placements for civic engagement are evident and self-explanatory (Weerts & Sandmann,

Journal of Public Affairs Education 365 C. A. Simon, M. Yack, & J. S. Ott

2010). Nonprofit organizations are “manifestations of community” (Smith & Lipsky, 1993). A number of the internships and service-learning placements have developed into permanent positions, providing strong evidence of the professional development implications, including for example: Artspace; Utah Symphony & Opera; Utah Food Bank; Make-A-Wish Foundation; First Step House (substance abuse); Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints Public Affairs Office. Although internships can provide students with longer and deeper experiences with nonprofit organizations, service learning has provided many more University of Utah MPA students with exposure to nonprofit organizations and almost certainly has influenced more students to work for or volunteer with nonprofit organizations. As with most MPA programs in the United States, Utah MPA students are mostly in-service, the vast majority are married with children, and few require or are able to take advantage of internships. Service learning does include a time commitment out of class, but it is more doable than internship requirements and allows students to engage with a class and a community partner simultaneously. Many MPA students resist service learning, mostly because it requires additional time away from home and work, and because of scheduling conflicts with community partners and fellow group members. Therefore, MPA program instructors have learned that it is wise to offer a variety of service-learning projects and perhaps also alternative assignments such as research papers. The service-learning projects retain rigor but are set up in different scenarios where students may do comparative research that could be conducted at any time of the day or night instead of interviews, which usually need to be conducted during business hours. This type of flexibility reduces student resistance to service learning. The MPA program has learned considerably from its experience with service learning. For example, the MPA program has learned to use two different service- learning models: organized group projects and individualized immersion. • Organized Group Projects are the most common model of service learning at this university. The instructor4 works with a nonprofit’s staff to identify projects that will benefit the nonprofit organization and provide appropriate learning opportunities for the students. Projects range from applied policy research analyses to representation and reporting on bills during a legislative session to an organizational analysis that proposes structural or operational changes. Most typically, interim reports are presented by student participants to the instructor and class, while formal reports are presented to the nonprofit organi zational leadership at the end of the semester. Organized group projects provide students with opportunities for community and civic engagement, and professional practice in groups of fellow students who may have varying opinions about nonprofit work and missions.

366 Journal of Public Affairs Education MPA Program Partnerships With Nonprofit Organizations

• Individualized Immersion is less structured than organized group projects, yet frequently a richer approach to civic engagement, liberal education, and professional education. Students find, select, volunteer with, and then declare their individual placements to the instructor.(4) The instructor helps find placements only for the few students who have difficulty finding appropriate individualized immersion opportunities. Students submit weekly journal entries that directly relate events or observations they have experienced or talked about with supervisors or peers at their placement to concepts and theories specifically from that week’s assigned reading. The journal entries and the analysis required to write the entries provide rich material for classroom discussions. Discussions are not limited to theory, but also related to praxis, “Action, Practice, as…practical application of a theory.”(5) Praxis can be a powerful approach to both liberal and professional education.

Lessons Learned Through Partnerships Between the MPA Program and Nonprofit Organizations in the Community The following are a few of the most important lessons learned through the long-standing concentration in nonprofit organizations:5(4) • Remain committed to community partnerships—and to individual partners—because they are essential elements in implementing the MPA program mission. Do not falter or otherwise let the partnerships become “extra duties” for faculty or staff. Partnerships with nonprofit organizations are integral to the program. They are not expendable frills or relationships to be enacted only when you need them. The partnerships require regular attention to relationship building. It is important that MPA program leadership be supportive of staff and faculty when they commit time and energy to relationship maintenance. Patience is required as payoffs are not always immediately observable. • Allocate enough staff and faculty time and resources to maintain the partnerships in lean times as well as when budgets are healthy. We cannot afford to forget that when university budgets are tight, most nonprofit organizations are also experiencing revenue shortfalls, and demands for their services often are increasing while capacity is often decreasing. We cannot abandon them when they need us the most! • Many public administration faculty members—and even more political science faculty—are not interested in nonprofit research or education and are even less interested in engagement between the MPA program

Journal of Public Affairs Education 367 C. A. Simon, M. Yack, & J. S. Ott

and nonprofit organizations in the community (Bergquist, 2008; Center for Urban and Environmental Solutions, 2007; Hunter et al., 2009). Some faculty colleagues may view nonprofit organizations as a distraction from focusing on the public in public administration. A few senior political science faculty members, in particular, may view teaching, research, and especially service involving nonprofit organizations as “not political science” and may try to undermine commitments to partnerships as “not academic or fluffy” as well as “not public administration” or “not political science” (Center for Urban and Environmental Solutions, 2007). Although faculty members with these types of views have decreased in the last decade, they have not disappeared and cannot be ignored (Bergquist, 2008). • Convincing faculty members to integrate nonprofit sector organization issues and strategies into public administration (and political science) courses takes time, patience, and usually fortuitous circumstances. Reminding colleagues that approximately half of all MPA graduates are now employed in nonprofit organizations does not reduce faculty resistance to modify their curricular content to reflect student consumer demand. Do not expect faculty in other disciplines to be any more willing to include nonprofit education in their curriculum. • MPA programs should not lose sight of the understanding that the nonprofit sector is an integral component in the governance process in democratic societies as well as in the delivery mechanism for many public services. Increasingly, the nonprofit sector is part of who we are as a society and how we govern ourselves. If we allow our program to focus solely on the management of nonprofit organizations, we will have missed the essence of the sector’s importance, and curricular marginalization will likely persist. We also learned some important lessons at the micro level: • Not all course service-learning arrangements can be designed and implemented in the same way. In some circumstances and with particular students, individualized immersion may be at least as effective as more tightly designed and supervised group/project models. Your university’s service-learning center or office may try to convince you otherwise. • Offer students a variety of projects to choose from, or an alternative to service learning. Students should choose projects that do not encumber their work and personal schedules and that they can fully commit to completing. Faculty should convey the message that service learning will provide a valuable learning opportunity, but a full commitment by students to these projects is necessary so community

368 Journal of Public Affairs Education MPA Program Partnerships With Nonprofit Organizations

organizations are not left scrambling to complete unfinished projects. Students should choose alternative assignments such as research papers only if their personal and work schedule prohibits spending time weekly on community projects or if the student is preparing for doctoral education, where a research paper will be more valuable to their educational future. Maintaining a variety of assignment options is likely to reduce faculty and student resistance. • Creating an effective and sustainable nonprofit training and technical assistance program through, for example, an office of continuing education is a more complex undertaking than it may appear. We learned that far more planning, strategizing, and collaborating are needed than we had anticipated. We have “paid the price” in the community for early failures. • Alumni working in nonprofit organizations face heavy demands on their time. Although these alumni may wish to partner with the MPA program through service learning and internships, the fit and timing must still be right. Also, previous experience as a service-learning student or intern does not necessarily translate into alumni being strong community partners. On the positive side, many alumni who work in nonprofit organizations have become long-standing, great community partners and also have helped the MPA program to network with other community organizations.

Conclusion The University of Utah partnerships with nonprofit organizations incorporate many of the key elements discussed in the community engagement and service- learning literatures. Effective cross-campus and community leadership has led to complex networks and strong program relationships between community and university partners. The MPA program and students have benefited greatly from the relationships developed with organizations in the nonprofit and public sectors. Anecdotal evidence and strong community support offer some evidence of the benefits to the program’s community and on-campus partners. There is a need to formalize institutional and departmental understandings about the value of service learning and community engaged research and education for faculty recognition in the promotion, tenure, and merit reward processes (Ott, 2010). Community-engaged learning is coproduction—learning and working together in a complex and ever-changing environment. Community-engaged learning is about building strong, pro-social values and reinforcing the role of the educated individual in his or her community and society. Beyond problem solving, however, engaged learning methodologies are likely to contribute significantly to the establishment of resilient and sustainable societies.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 369 C. A. Simon, M. Yack, & J. S. Ott

Footnotes 1 As evidenced by inclusion of nonprofit organizations throughout theNASPAA Accreditation Standards for Master’s Degree Programs, adopted October 16, 2009.

2 This paper focuses on master’s-level education in public administration and affairs. Service learning is a “cousin” of service-oriented programs at the federal, state, and local levels, such as AmeriCorps and the Utah Commission on Volunteers.

3 Much of the literature on service learning presents narrative case studies on successful community engagement endeavors. Examples of successful service learning and community engagement employ “service with” rather than “service to” methodologies. The former approach encourages service- learning participants to become fully engaged in the community they serve as active co-participating advocates, planners, decision makers, and implementers. “Service to” is seen as a largely antiquated model resembling the paternalistic methodologies of service in which those providing service are perceived as empowered while those being served are perceived as non-efficacious.

Effective and long-lasting approaches to service learning and community-engaged learning require a university-level commitment (see Bringle & Hatcher, 1996; Boyer, 1994). In their “Comprehensive Action Plan for Service Learning,” Bringle and Hatcher (1996, p. 223) outline a multidimensional model that focuses on planning, awareness, resources, monitoring and evaluation, and institution alization across four dimensions: institution, faculty, students, and community (Bringle & Hatcher, 1996, p. 223). Within the university setting, recognition for the value of student engagement and learning must be institutionalized in recognition/reward systems for faculty and students, including the retention, promotion, and tenure policies and practices (see also Jacoby, 1996).

4 We are fortunate to have an unusually active Community Engagement Center at the University of Utah (the “Bennion Center”) that helps arrange and fund service-learning “coordinators” for courses. If an instructor knows of an undergraduate or graduate student who would serve well, the instructor may request that individual and the request is almost always honored. If the instructor does not have a particular student in mind, the Bennion Center will find and assign a student. When a course has a service-learning coordinator, the instructor supervises rather than performs these functions.

5 These are a few of the lessons we have learned while partnering with nonprofit organizations for about 20 years. Awareness of these lessons learned may benefit other programs, but we do not claim that these lessons are universal.

References Aberle-Grasse, M. (2000). The Washington Study-Service of Eastern Mennonite University: Reflection on 23 years of service learning. American Behavioral Scientist, 43, 848–857.

Barber, B. (1988). Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Bellah, R. N., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W. M., Swidler, A., & Tipton, S. (1992). The good society. New York, NY: Knopf.

Bennis, W. (1967). Organizations of the future. Reprinted in Jay M. Shafritz & Albert C. Hyde, Eds. 1992. Classics of Public Administration (3rd ed., pp. 284–296). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

370 Journal of Public Affairs Education MPA Program Partnerships With Nonprofit Organizations

Bergquist, W. H., & Pawlak, K. (2008). Engaging the six cultures of the academy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.

Boris, E. T., & Steuerle, E., (Eds.). (2006). Nonprofits and government: Collaboration & conflict (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.

Boyer, E. (1994, March). Creating the new American college. Chronicle of Higher Education, A48.

Bringle & Hatcher. (1996). Implementing service learning in higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 67(2): 221-239.

Campus Compact. (2001). Assessing service-learning and civic engagement: Principles and techniques. Providence, RI: Campus Compact.

Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. (2008). Classification Description: Community Engagement Elective Classification. Retrieved from http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/

Center for Urban and Environmental Solutions. (2007). Engaging academia in community research: Overcoming obstacles and providing incentives. Ft. Lauderdale, FL: Florida Atlantic University, Center for Urban and Environmental Solutions.

Cipolle, S. B. (2010). Service learning and social justice: Engaging students in social change. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Clemens, E. S. (2006). The constitution of citizens: Political theories of nonprofit organizations. In Walter W. Powell & Richard Steinberg (Eds.), The Nonprofit sector: A research handbook (2nd ed., pp. 207–220). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Douglas, J. (1987). Political theories of nonprofit organizations. In Walter W. Powell (Ed.),The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (1st ed., pp. 43–54). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Edwards, M. (2009). Civil society (2nd ed.). Cambridge, England: Polity Press.

Flynn, N. (2012). Public sector management (6th ed.). London, England: Sage.

Foley, M., & Edwards, B. (1997). Editors’ introduction: Escape from politics? Social theory and the social capital debate. American Behavioral Scientist, 40(5), 550–561.

Frederickson, H. G. (1980). New public administration. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.

Gronski, R., & Pigg, K. (2000). University and community collaboration: Experiential learning in human services. American Behavioral Scientist, 43, 781–792.

Grusky, S. (2000). International service learning: A critical guide from an impassioned advocate. American Behavioral Scientist, 43, 858–867.

Hrebenar, R. J., & Morgan, B. B. (2009). Lobbying in America. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO Retrieved from http://www.abc-clio.com.

Hunter, R., Munro, S., Dunn, L., & Olson, K. (2009). Bridging university and community: The power of collaborative partnerships for social change. In Kathryn Mohrman, Jian Shi, Sharon E. Feinblatt, & King W. Chow (Eds.), Public universities and regional development (pp. 289—310). Chengdu, China: Sichuan University Press.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 371 C. A. Simon, M. Yack, & J. S. Ott

Inglehart, A. P., & Becerra, R. M. (2011). Social services and the ethnic community: History and analysis (2nd ed.). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.

Jacoby, B. (Ed.). 1996. Service learning in higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

King, C. (Ed.). (2011). Government is us 2.0. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.

Koliba, C. J. (2000). Moral language and networks of engagement: Service learning and civic education. American Behavioral Scientist, 43, 825–838.

LeRoux, K. (2009). Nonprofits as civic intermediaries: The role of community-based organizations in promoting political participation. Urban Affairs Review, 42(3), 410–422.

———. (2011). Examining implementation of the National Voter Registration Act by nonprofit organizations: An institutional explanation. Policy Studies Journal, 39(4), 565–589.

Lisman, C. D. (1998). Toward a civil society: Civic literacy and service learning. Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.

MacFarlane, B. (2007). The academic citizen: The virtue of service in university life. New York, NY: Routledge.

Mendel, S. C. (2010). Are private government, the nonprofit sector, and civil society the same thing? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29, 717–733.

Michener, J. L., Yaggy, S., Lyn, M., Warburton, S., Champagne, M., Black, M. A., et al. (2008). Improving the health of the community: Duke’s experience with community engagement. Academic Medicine, 83(4), 408–413.

Mirabella, R. M. (2007). University-based educational programs in nonprofit management and philan thropic studies: A 10-year review and projections of future trends. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36, 11S–27S.

National Center for Charitable Statistics (NCCS). (2012, May). NCCS Quick Facts. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Retrieved from http://nccs.urban.org/statistics/quickfacts.cfm

Ott, J. S. (2010, October). Community activities in faculty expectations and rewards. Unpublished paper presented at the annual conference of the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration, Las Vegas, NV.

Ott, J. S., & Dicke, L. (Eds.). (2012). The nature of the nonprofit sector (2nd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press/Perseus.

Parsons, C. (1996). Serving to learn, learning to serve. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Putnam, R. D. (2001). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Touchstone Books.

Rawls, J. (1996). Political liberalism. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Read, B. I., & Pekkanen, R. (Eds.). (2009). Local organizations and urban governance in East and Southeast Asia. London, England and New York, NY: Routledge.

Rohr, J. A. (1986). To run a constitution: The legitimacy of the administrative state. Lawrence, KY: University Press of Kansas.

372 Journal of Public Affairs Education MPA Program Partnerships With Nonprofit Organizations

Roschelle, A. R., Turpin, J., & Elias, R. (2000). Who learns from service learning? American Behavioral Scientist, 43, 839–847.

Rosenbloom, D. H. (1983). Public administrative theory and the separation of powers. Public Administration Review, 43(3), 219–227.

Salamon, L. M., & Sokolowski, S. W. (Eds.). (2004). Global civil society: Dimensions of the nonprofit sector (Vol. 2). Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.

Schneider, J. A. (2009). Organizational social capital and nonprofits.Nonprofit & Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38(4), 643–662.

Smith, D. H. (1973). The impact of the volunteer sector on society. Reprinted in J. S. Ott & L. A. Dicke (Eds.), The nature of the nonprofit sector (2012, pp. 71–79). Boulder, CO: Westview Press/Perseus.

Smith, S. R., & Grønbjerg, K. (2006). Scope and theory of government–nonprofit relations. In W. W. Powell & R. Steinberg (Eds.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (2nd ed., pp. 221–242). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Smith, S. R., & Lipsky, M. (1993). Nonprofits for hire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Speck, B. W., & Hoppe, S. L. (Eds.). (2004). Service learning: History, theory, and issues. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Stivers, C. (1993). Gender images in public administration: Legitimacy and the administrative state. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

———. (2000). Bureau men, settlement women: Constructing public administration in the Progressive Era. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.

———. (2001). Democracy, bureaucracy and the study of administration. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Tocqueville, A. de (2002). Democracy in America (Trans. H. Manfield & D. Winthrop). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Toffler, A. (1967).Future shock. New York, NY: Bantam.

United States Government Accountability Office (U.S. GAO). (2007).Nonprofit sector: Increasing numbers and key role in delivering federal services. Washington, DC: Author.

Waldo, D. (1980). Enterprise of public administration. Novato, CA: Chandler and Sharp.

Wallace, J. (2000). A popular education model for college in community. American Behavioral Scientist, 43, 756–766.

Weerts, D. J., & Sandmann, L. R. (2010). Community engagement and boundary-spanning roles at research universities. Journal of Higher Education, 81(6), 1380–1387.

Wright, M. da G. M. (2000). A critical–holistic paradigm for an interdependent world. American Behavioral Scientist, 43, 808–824.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 373 C. A. Simon, M. Yack, & J. S. Ott

Christopher A. Simon is professor of Political Science at The University of Utah. He conducts research in alternative energy policy; civic community and volunteerism; education policy; criminal justice policy; Homeland Security policy; land use policy; and military sociology. He is coauthor (with Brent Steel and Nicholas Lovrich) of State and Local Government: Sustainability in the 21st Century (Oxford, 2011); Alternative Energy: Political, Economic, and Social Feasibility (Rowman & Littlefield, 2007); Public Policy: Preferences and Outcomes (Longman, 2007, 2010); and To Run a School: Administrative Organization and Learning (Praeger, 2001; Mandarin edition, 2005). He has published articles in Administration & Society, American Review of Public Administration, Armed Forces & Society, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Comparative Technology Transfer & Society, Educational Research Quarterly, Land Use Policy Journal, Policy Studies Journal, Public Administration Review, and Social Science Quarterly.

Melissa Yack is the program manager for the Master of Public Administration and a PhD candidate in Education Leadership and Policy at the University of Utah. She formerly worked for Girl Scouts of Utah.

J. Steven Ott is professor of Public Administration/Political science at The University of Utah. He teaches and writes about organization theory, behavior, and change in the public and nonprofit sectors. Ott was an executive with a Denver, Colorado–based management consulting firm for 26 years before joining the faculties at the universities of Maine and Utah. His clients were mostly government and nonprofit organizations with particular emphasis on planning and evaluation of public programs that deliver services through nonprofit organizations, including, for example, public health, development disabilities, mental health, and juvenile corrections.

374 Journal of Public Affairs Education Review of The Art & Craft of Case Writing, Third Edition

by William Naumes and Margaret Naumes

Review by Cynthia Jackson-Elmoore Michigan State University

The third edition of The Art & Craft of Case Writing aims to keep cases relevant in a fast-paced digital age. Veterans of case writing bring their extensive experience to bear in the volume. Their intent is to help case writers “develop effective cases, particularly for teaching purposes” (p. ix). Although the net is cast broadly, this book is likely to resonate with individuals new to case writing or those looking to refine their case writing skills. It is a resource for instructors who are interested in developing cases or finding alternative ways to present cases they already use. Unless the class is geared toward development of cases, The Art & Craft of Case Writing would not be appropriate for classroom use. Instead, it is a text that might be used for faculty development, particularly for early stage faculty or individuals shifting their teaching focus and/or pedagogy. The book can be conceived in three parts. The first part sets the context, the second presents specifics on case writing and the third provides examples supporting the body of the text. Specifically, Chapters 1 through 4 provide an overview and philosophical discussion on the nature and benefits of case studies. Chapter 1 focuses on definitions and types of cases, along with reasons for writing a case study. Chapter 2 stresses being clear about the objectives the case writer is trying to achieve; it also revisits the discussion on types of cases. Chapter 3 describes various resources from which to gather data for a case. It notes the importance of obtaining permission from key stakeholders to release the details outlined in the case as well as the steps necessary to gain buy-in for developing a case. Chapter 4 addresses research cases as distinct from teaching cases and discusses the relative advantages and disadvantages of case studies within the research realm. It also highlights some of the differences between research and teaching cases and discusses how to design research cases from the start. Chapters 5 through 8 address the important issue of developing the instructor’s manual for a case, including a discussion of what goes in the instructor’s manual and the value of writing the teaching note before crafting the case. These four chapters are provided in what seems to be a disjointed fashion, likely in an attempt to take the reader sequentially through the steps of case writing. Their placement within the

JPAE 19(2), 375–376 Journal of Public Affairs Education 375 W. Naumes & M. Naumes book is intended to help the reader understand the intertwined nature of writing the case and writing the instructor’s manual. Chapter 9 addresses issues related to developing an array of support material for cases that can be used by both instructors and students. Finally, Chapter 10 highlights opportunities to use alternative media for cases, particularly in a digital age. The four appendices help the reader visualize and understand the relationship between the case itself and the instructors’ manual. There are numerous examples based on the writers’ personal experience. Readers are left to question what the literature has to say about the experiences and skill sets presented in the text. The discussion of research cases may make some readers leery of attempting case studies. Specifically, language in Chapter 4 suggests that case study methodology may be difficult to get approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). The authors state that “the typical interview for case research includes a semistructured question set, whereby the researcher is able to follow interesting responses by the individuals being interviewed. This research process creates an insurmountable problem for the IRB process” (p. 78). Many researchers employ semi-structured interview protocols and successfully navigate IRB processes at their respective institutions. Given the usefulness of cases in teaching and research, as well as the ability to use research cases as teaching tools, it is important to bear in mind that case research protocols can and do gain IRB approval. It is useful to note that six of the chapters provide opportunities to practice skills and techniques. Exhibits and checklists to assist with case development and supplemental material are plentiful. Even so, case writers or teacher-scholars with extensive experience with cases may find it useful simply to read the summary and conclusion sections of the first four chapters. Similarly, Chapters 6 and 7 provide the most insight on case writing for those experienced with case studies. Overall, if readers approach the text as a how-to book and use those chapters and sections that pertain to their immediate needs, this book may be of value for novices and seasoned case writers.

Footnote 1. Publishing information: 314 pp. (pbk) M.E. Sharpe (2012) Armonk, NY ISBN: 978-0-7656-2776-6 (cloth) ISBN: 978-07656-2777-3 (pbk)

Cynthia Jackson-Elmoore is dean of the Honors College and professor of Political Science and Social Work at Michigan State University, where she also maintains an affiliation with the Global Urban Studies Program. She previously taught courses in urban politics, public policy processes and analysis, and social welfare policy and services. Her research interests include nonprofits and urban politics, healthy communities, and state and local policy.

376 Journal of Public Affairs Education Review of Cultural Competency for Public Administrators

Edited by Kristen Norman-Major and Susan T. Gooden

Review by Christopher Koliba University of Vermont

The world is changing: This cliché does not ring hollow for anyone teaching, researching, or practicing in the public administration field. Technological advances, changing norms and attitudes, and evolving demographic realities are persistent features of any competent public administrator’s approach to her or his craft. To this end, those responsible for educating and providing research to the public administration field need not only to accommodate this shifting landscape, but embrace it. The recent publication of Cultural Competency for Public Administrators, a volume edited by Kristen Norman-Major and Susan Gooden, provides public administration educators, researchers, practitioners, and students with a compelling roadmap for negotiating the new terrain and even thriving within it and, more important, because of it. There is good reason to seek to harness the power of cultural diversity. Justice Sandra Day O’Conner’s justification for upholding the University of Michigan Law School’s diversity admissions policy in the 2003 case, Grutter v. Bollinger et al., was based upon the premise that diversity in the classroom improves the learning environment for all. This notion has been backed up by research showing that heterogeneous groupings of work groups are better problem solvers than homo- geneous groups. Scott Page, a computational social scientist, has underscored this. His research has found that groups of people who share common mental models, similar backgrounds, and perspectives are less successful at solving complex problems than diverse groups are (Page, 2007). Differences between people allow for the triangulation of perspectives and insight, creating an intersubjective framework for problem solving (Koliba & Lathrop, 2007). The cognitive dissonance that may arise when heterogeneous groups are tasked to problem solve can lead to creative solutions that cannot otherwise be realized. With these observations in mind, we turn to Norman-Major and Gooden’s assertion at the beginning of the volume that “cultural competency is a characteristic of good government.” They go on to make a strong case for considering cultural

JPAE 19(2), 377–379 Journal of Public Affairs Education 377 C. Koliba competency along the lines of race, ethnicity, gender, age, ability, religion, educational level, income and class, and sexual orientation. The message conveyed here is that we must not only tolerate, accommodate, and incorporate diversity into our modern workplaces, but we should embrace and fully harness this diversity to achieve good governance goals that have been a part of the public administration cannon for over 100 years. The message of shifting from simply “managing” diversity to “harnessing” it echoes throughout this book and is a message that is right for the times. Recognizing that glass ceilings and pay inequities still persist in the modern workplace, we must not only invite diversity into the workplace, but allow this diversity to transform the workplace (Thomas, 1990). This is a long-standing theme in the public administration literature on social equity (Frederickson, 1971) and representative bureaucracy (Krislov, 1974). Cultural Competency for Public Administrators provides the reader with insights into identifying and harnessing cultural competencies to achieve these goals by reflecting on the concrete skills, attitudes, and dispositions needed to accomplish them. A chapter written by Mitchell Rice and Audrey Mathews in particular (Chapter 2) and the entire Part III of the book on “Educating for Cultural Competence” provide an extremely useful set of attributes and educational strategies to foster culturally competent public administrators. The remaining chapters of the book focus on critical issues and perspectives relative to the legal environment, cultural diplomacy, human resource management practices, international service, and a discussion of specific competencies relative to gender differences, Hispanics, Native peoples, sexual orientation diversities, and people with disabilities. Chapters on cultural competencies in health care and disaster management, and the challenges associated with cultural competency, round out the offerings to form one of the most comprehensive treatments of cultural competencies in print. The latter set of observations by Samuel Brown underscore the paradoxical nature of thinking about, living with, and harnessing diversity. Cultural differences by their very nature generate cognitive dissonance. This dissonance can be viewed as a “challenge” to be overcome, or it can be viewed as an opportunity to produce better results. As MPA and MPP programs look to align learning competencies with NASPAA accreditation standards, the attributes and strategies presented in this book serve as an invaluable resource. This book is a must-read for any program looking to pursue or maintain accreditation. More important, however, this book should be read by current and future public administrators. It should be incorporated into courses on organizational behavior and human resource management. The competencies outlined in this book should be used to guide student learning for the 21st century. The world is changing. In fact, change has always been a feature of public administrative practice. It is now incontrovertible that effective negotiation of this complex terrain of social change requires cultural competency.

378 Journal of Public Affairs Education Book Review

Footnote 1. Publishing information: 374 pp. (pbk) M.E. Sharpe (2012) Armonk, NY ISBN: 978-0765626769(cloth) ISBN: 978-0-7656-2677-6(pbk)

References Frederickson, G. (1971). Toward a new public administration. In Frank E. Marini (Ed.), Toward a new public administration: The Minnowbrook perspective. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing.

Koliba, C., & Lathrop, J. (2007). Inquiry as intervention: Employing action research to support an organization’s capacity to learn. Administration & Society, 39(1), 51–76.

Krislov, S. (1974). Representative bureaucracy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Page, S. E. (2007). The difference: How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Thomas, R. R. (1990, March–April). From affirmative action to affirming diversity.Harvard Business Review, 107–117.

Christopher Koliba is an associate professor in the Community Development and Applied Economics Department at the University of Vermont (UVM) and the Director of the Master of Public Administration (MPA) Program. He possesses a PhD and an MPA from Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. His research interests include governance networks and complex adaptive systems, organizational learning and development, action research methods, civic education, and educational policy.

Journal of Public Affairs Education 379 380 Journal of Public Affairs Education National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA) >`>Ê,ÕL>]Ê*ÀiÃìÌ >VÊÌÌ]Ê6ViÊ*ÀiÃìÌÊ À>ViÃÊ-°Ê iÀÀÞ]Êi`>ÌiÊ*>ÃÌÊ*ÀiÃìÌ Information for Contributors >ÕÀiÊ V>À>`]Ê ÝiVÕÌÛiÊ ÀiVÌÀ JPAE Oversight Committee: The Journal of Public Affairs Education (JPAE) is the fl agship journal of the National Association of >Ì iiÊ i>ÌÌÞ]Ê iÛÊ ÕLV]ÊEÊ >ÀiÃÊ iwÊi` Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA). JPAE is dedicated to advancing teaching and learning in public affairs broadly defi ned, which includes the fi elds of policy analysis, public administration, public management, public policy, nonprofi t administration, and their subfi elds. David Schultz]Ê `ÌÀÊÊ iv]Ê>iÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ Advancing teaching and learning includes not only the improvement of specifi c courses and teaching Kristen Norman-Major]Ê >>}}Ê `ÌÀ]Ê>iÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ Michael W. Popejoy]Ê Ê,iÛiÜÊ `ÌÀ methods but also the improvement of public affairs program design and management. The goal Iris Geva-May]ÊÃÃV>ÌiÊ `ÌÀÊvÀÊÌiÀ>Ì>Ê>`Ê «>À>ÌÛiÊ `ÕV>Ì]Ê-ÊÀ>ÃiÀÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ of JPAE is to publish articles that are useful to those participating in the public affairs education Michael O’Hare]ÊÃÃV>ÌiÊ `ÌÀÊvÀÊÌ iÊÃÃiÃÃiÌÊ>`Ê*À>VÌViÊvÊ/i>V }]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ >vÀ>]Ê iÀiiÞ enterprise, not only in the United States, but throughout the world. In service to this goal, articles Lisa Dejoras]Ê `ÌÀ>ÊÃÃÃÌ>Ì]Ê>iÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ should be clear, accessible to those in the public affairs fi elds and subfi elds, and generalizable. The new «ÞÊ `ÌÀ\Ê ÀÃÊ/ iÊÊÊÊÊ>ÞÕÌÊ>`Ê ÛiÀÊ iÃ}\Ê6>Ê ÃV iÀ editorial team is particularly interested in articles that (1) use rigorous methods to analyze the relative EDITOR’S COUNCIL effectiveness of different teaching methods, and (2) have international and/or comparativecomponents H. George Frederickson]ÊÕ`}Ê `ÌÀ]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ>Ã>Ã James L. Perry]Ê`>>Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞ]Ê }Ì or consider the effect of country setting. Articles submitted for publication in JPAE should not already Danny L. Balfour]ÊÀ>`Ê6>iÞÊ-Ì>ÌiÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ Mario A. Rivera]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ iÜÊ iÝV be published or in submission elsewhere. Articles that have been presented at conferences are welcome. Marc Holzer]Ê,ÕÌ}iÀÃÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ Heather E. Campbell]Ê >ÀiÌÊÀ>`Õ>ÌiÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ Edward T. Jennings]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊiÌÕVÞ Generally, manuscripts should conform to the JPAE style sheet available at www.naspaa.org/JPAE/ BOARD OF EDITORS stylesheet.pdf. Specifi cally, they should: Guy Adams]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ ÃÃÕÀ]Ê ÕL> John Kiefer]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ iÜÊ"Ài>Ã UÊ iÊÌÞ«i`ÊÊ>ÊÃÌ>`>À`Ê£Ó«ÌÊÃiÀvÊvÌÊÃÕV Ê>ÃÊ/iÃÊ iÜÊ,>®]Ê`ÕLiÊÃ«>Vi`]ÊÜÌ Ê Mohamad Alkadry, Florida International University William Earle Klay, Florida State University Peter J. Bergerson]ÊÀ`>ÊÕvÊ >ÃÌÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ Chris Koliba]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ6iÀÌ margins of no less than one inch on all sides. John Bohte]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ7ÃVÃ]Ê Ü>Õii Kristina Lambright]Ê } >ÌÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ] UÊ1ÃiÊ*ÃÌÞiÊÌiÝÌÊVÌ>ÌÃÊ>`ÊÀiviÀiViÃ°Ê ÀiÊvÀ>ÌÊÊ*ÊÃÌÞiÊV>ÊLiÊvÕ`Ê Espiridion Borrego]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ/iÝ>ÃÊ*>ÊiÀV> -Ì>ÌiÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ iÜÊ9À John M. Bryson]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ iÃÌ> Laura Langbein, American University at http://www.apastyle.org/. Beverly Bunch, University of Illinois, Springfi eld Scott Lazenby]Ê ÌÞÊvÊ->`Þ]Ê"Ài} UÊ ÌÊVÕìÊ>ÕÌ ÀÃ®Ê>iÃÊiÌ iÀÊÊÌÌiÊ«>}iÊÀÊÊL`ÞÊvÊÌ iÊ>ÕÃVÀ«ÌÊÊÀìÀÊÌÊ Lysa Burnier]Ê" Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞ Steven R. Maxwell]ÊÀ`>ÊÕvÊ >ÃÌÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ allow for anonymous peer review. N. Joseph Cayer, Arizona State University Barbara McCabe]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ/iÝ>Ã Heather Campbell]Ê >ÀiÌÊÀ>`Õ>ÌiÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ Michael Popejoy, Florida International University UÊ ÌÊiÝVii`ÊÎäÊ«>}iÃÊÊi}Ì ]ÊVÕ`}ÊÌiÃ]ÊÀiviÀiViÃ]Ê>`ÊÌ>LiÃ° Cal Clark, Auburn University Dorothy Olshfski]Ê,ÕÌ}iÀÃÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ]Ê iÜ>À Barbara Crosby]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ iÃÌ> Stephen P. Osborne, University of Edinburgh UÊVÕìÊi`ÌiÃÊÌ >ÌÊ>ÀiÊÌÊiLi`ì`ÊÌ ÀÕ} ÊÌ iÊÜÀ`Ê«ÀViÃÃÀ° Robert B. Cunningham]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ/iiÃÃii]ÊÝÛi David Reingold, Indiana University UÊ ÌÊÕÃiÊ>ÕÌ>Ìi`ÊLL}À>« ÞÊÌÃÊ `Ìi]Ê,ivÜÀÃ]ÊÀÊÌ iÊÌÊÊ7À`®° Dwight Denison]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊiÌÕVÞ Michelle Saint-Germain]Ê >vÀ>Ê-Ì>ÌiÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ] Anand Desai]Ê" Ê-Ì>ÌiÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ }Ê i>V Submissions should be made online at http://www.edmgr.com/jpae. At the site, you will be instructed to James W. Douglas]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ ÀÌ Ê >À>Ê>ÌÊ >ÀÌÌi Robert A. Schuhmann]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ7Þ} VÀi>ÌiÊ>Ê>VVÕÌÊvÊÞÕÊ >ÛiÊÌÊ>Ài>`ÞÊìÊÃÊÀÊÌÊ}ÊÊÕìÀÊÞÕÀÊiÝÃÌ}Ê>VVÕÌ° Robert Durant, American University Patricia M. Shields]Ê/iÝ>ÃÊ-Ì>ÌiÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ Jo Ann G. Ewalt]Ê >ÃÌiÀÊiÌÕVÞÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ Jessica Sowa]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ À>` -ÕLÌÌ}Ê>ÕÌ ÀÃÊÜÊLiÊ>Ãi`ÊvÀÊVÌ>VÌÊvÀ>Ì]Ê>iÃÊvÊ>ÞÊ>``Ì>Ê>ÕÌ ÀÃ]ÊÕ«ÊÌÊ Cynthia Fukami]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ iÛiÀ Kendra Stewart]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ >ÀiÃÌ Ì ÀiiÊÃÕLiVÌÊV>ÃÃwÊV>ÌÃÊÌÊÜ V ÊÌ iÊ>ÕÃVÀ«ÌÊÀi>ÌiÃ]Ê>`Ê>Ê>LÃÌÀ>VÌÊvÊ>««ÀÝ>ÌiÞÊ£xäÊ Susan Gooden]Ê6À}>Ê Üi>Ì Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞ James Svara, Arizona State University words. Additional instructions for registration in this system and submission of manuscripts can be Cynthia Jackson-Elmoore]Ê V }>Ê-Ì>ÌiÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞ Howard Whitton, Griffi th University Meagan Jordan]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊÀ>Ã>ÃÊ>ÌÊÌÌiÊ,V Blue Wooldridge]Ê6À}>Ê Üi>Ì Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞ found at http://www.edmgr.com/jpae or the JPAE website at www.naspaa.org/jpae. Authors should Edward Kellough, University of Georgia Giovanni Valotti]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌDÊ VV iÝ«iVÌÊÌÊÀiViÛiÊ>VÜi`}iÌÊvÊÀiVi«ÌÊvÊÌ iÊ>ÕÃVÀ«ÌÊ>`ÊV>ÊvÜÊÌÃÊ«À}ÀiÃÃÊÌ ÀÕ} ÊÌ iÊ Don Kettl]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ >ÀÞ>`]Ê i}iÊ*>À David Van Slyke, Syracuse University review process at the www.edmgr.com/jpae site. CORRESPONDENTS All articles are given an initial review by the editorial team. Articles must meet basic criteria including Khalid Al-Yahya]Ê ÕL>Ê-V ÊvÊÛiÀiÌ Charlene M. L. Roach]Ê1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊÌ iÊ7iÃÌÊìÃ]Ê writing quality, reasonable conformity with these guidelines, and interest to JPAE readers before they Edgar Ramirez Delacruz]Ê iÌiÀÊvÀÊ,iÃi>ÀV Ê>` -Ì°ÊÕ}ÕÃÌiÊ >«ÕÃ >ÀiÊÃÕLÌÌi`ÊvÀÊiÝÌiÀ>]Ê`ÕLiL`Ê«iiÀÊÀiÛiÜ°ÊvÊ>VVi«Ìi`ÊvÀÊ«ÕLV>Ì]Ê>ÕÃVÀ«ÌÃÊV>ÌÊ Ê /i>V }ÊÊ VVÃÊ ®]Ê iÝV be published until they conform to APA style and all of the authors have provided copyright transfer Journal of Public Affairs Education is published quarterly by the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration. >ÕÌ ÀÌÞ]ÊvÕÊVÌ>VÌÊvÀ>Ì]Ê>`ÊÃ ÀÌÊL}À>« iÃÊvÊ>LÕÌÊxÊiÃ®° >ÃÊvÀÊÃÃ}ÊÕLiÀÃÊÃ Õ`ÊLiÊ>ìÊÜÌ ÊÌ iÊÌ ÊvÜ}ÊÌ iÊÀi}Õ>ÀÊÌ ÊvÊ«ÕLV>Ì°Ê/ iÊ«ÕLÃ iÀÃÊiÝ«iVÌÊÌÊ Any questions about the manuscript submission, review, and publication process can be addressed to ÃÕ««ÞÊÃÃ}ÊÕLiÀÃÊvÀiiÊÞÊÜ iÊÃÃiÃÊ >ÛiÊLiiÊÃÕÃÌ>i`ÊÊÌÀ>ÃÌÊ>`ÊÜ iÊÌ iÊÀiÃiÀÛiÊÃÌVÊÜÊ«iÀÌ°ÊSubscription Rates: ÃÌÌÕÌ]Êf£ÓxÆÊ`Û`Õ>]ÊfxäÆÊ-ÌÕìÌ]Êf{äÆÊ 1°-°]Ê>``ÊfÓäÊÌÊ>««V>LiÊÀ>Ìi°Ê iVÌÀVÊJPAE articles can be accessed at www. the editorial team at [email protected]. >Ã«>>°À}É* iÃÃi}iÀ°ÊChange of Address: Please notify us and your local postmaster immediately of both old and new addresses. *i>ÃiÊ>ÜÊvÕÀÊÜiiÃÊvÀÊÌ iÊV >}i°ÊPostmaster: Send address changes to JPAE, National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Because of its mission, the Journal of Public Affairs Education allows educators to reproduce any `ÃÌÀ>Ì]Ê£äÓÊ6iÀÌÊÛi°Ê 7]Ê-ÕÌiÊ££ää]Ê7>Ã }Ì]Ê ° °]ÊÓäääxÎx£Ç°ÊEducators and Copy Centers:Ê «ÞÀ} ÌÊÓä£ä°Ê JPAE material for classroom use, and authors may reproduce their own articles without written National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration. All rights reserved. Educators may reproduce any material for V>ÃÃÀÊÕÃiÊÞÊ>`Ê>ÕÌ ÀÃÊ>ÞÊÀi«À`ÕViÊÌ iÀÊ>ÀÌViÃÊÜÌ ÕÌÊÜÀÌÌiÊ«iÀÃÃ°Ê7ÀÌÌiÊ«iÀÃÃÊÃÊÀiµÕÀi`ÊÌÊÀi«À`ÕViÊJPAE in permission. Written permission is required to reproduce any part of JPAE in all other instances. >ÊÌ iÀÊÃÌ>ViÃ°Ê*i>ÃiÊVÌ>VÌÊ>VµÕiiÊiÜÃ]Ê -*]Ê£äÓÊ6iÀÌÊÛi°Ê 7]Ê-ÕÌiÊ££ää]Ê7>Ã }Ì]Ê ° °]ÊÓäääxÎx£Ç]Ê« i\Ê ÓäÓÈÓnnÈx]Êv>Ý\ÊÓäÓÈÓÈ{Çn]Êi>\ÊiÜÃJ>Ã«>>°À}°Ê/ iÊ«>«iÀÊÕÃi`ÊÊÌ ÃÊ«ÕLV>ÌÊiiÌÃÊÌ iÊÕÊÀiµÕÀiiÌÃÊvÊ iÀV>Ê >Ì>Ê-Ì>`>À`ÊvÀÊvÀ>ÌÊ-ViViÃp*iÀ>iViÊvÊ*>«iÀÊvÀÊ*ÀÌi`ÊLÀ>ÀÞÊ >ÌiÀ>Ã]Ê -Ê<Î°{n£n{°ÊJPAE is >LÃÌÀ>VÌi`ÊÀÊìÝi`ÊÊ-/",]Ê - "]Ê}iÊ-V >À]Ê>`Ê `ÕV>ÌÊÕÊ/iÝÌÊìÝ°Ê-- Ê£xÓÎÈnäÎÊvÀiÀÞÊ£änÇqÇÇn®° JOURNAL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS EDUCATION VOLUME 19 NUMBER 2