In order to gain a greater understanding of the three ways of teaching qualitative and quantitative techniques, we examined course content. In this article, we propose management decision making as an alternative for the MPA graduate who may use these skills to make more informed decisions. We provide support for a quantitative decision-making course focused on building analytical skills, show that this is a path taken by several programs, and respond to several questions and issues central to teaching quantitative methods to MPA students within the NASPAA guidelines.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AgorWeston H.1985. “Managing Brain Skills to Increase Productivity.” Public Administration Review, 45(6): 864–868.
2.
AmmonsDavid N.1996. Municipal Benchmarks.Sage Publications: Washington, D C.: International City/County Management Association, 15–32.
3.
BanksJerryRossiniFrederick A.. 1987. “Management Science Failures in the Public Sector.” Public Productivity Review, 42(2): 15–23.
4.
DrorYehezkel. 1971. Design for Policy Sciences. (Chapter 3: Particular Weaknesses of Management Sciences.)New York: American Elsevier Publishing, Inc.
5.
CaudleSharon. 1999. “SMSPA News.” Section on Management Science and Policy Analysis, Washington, D.C.: American Society for Public Administration, Summer.
6.
CaulkinsJonathan P.1999. “The Revolution of Management Science Instruction: Implications for Teaching Public Affairs Students.” Journal of Public Affairs Education, 5(2): 107–117.
7.
ElmoreR.F.1986. “Graduate Education in Public Management: Working the Seams of Government” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 6: 69–83.
8.
FitzpatrickJody. 2000. “What Are Our Goals in Teaching Research Methods to Public Administrators?” Journal of Public Affairs Education, 6(3): 173–181.
9.
GreinerJohn M.1996. “Positioning Performance Measurement for the Twenty-First Century.” In HalachmiArieBouckaertGeert, Organizational Performance and Measurement in the Public SectorWestport, CT: Quorum Books, 11–50.
HaasPeter J.Fred SpringerJ.. 1998. “Policy Analysis in the Classroom and the Real World.” PA Times, 21(5): 1–2.
12.
HatryHarryLouis BlairDonald FiskKimmelWayne. 1987. Program Analysis for State and Local Government.Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute.
13.
HatryHarry P.1999. Performance Measurement.Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute.
14.
KeeJames E.1994. “Benefit Cost Analysis in Program Evaluation.” In WholeyJ.HatryH.NewcomerK., Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
PattonCarl V.SawickiDavid S.. 1993. Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning, Second Edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
17.
PoisterTheodore H.StreibGregory. 1989 “Management Tools in Municipal Government: Trends over the Past Decade.” Public Administration Review, 49(3): 240–248.
18.
RoederPhillip W.WhitakerGordon. 1993. “Education for the Public Service: Policy Analysis and Administration in the MPA Core Curriculum.” Administration and Society, 24(4): 512–540.
SylviaRonald D.SylviaKathleen M.GunnElizabeth M.. 1997. Program Planning and Evaluation for the Public Manager, Second Edition. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
21.
SwissJames E.1991. Public Management Systems.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 128–166.
22.
WaughJr.WilliamL.Ronald JohnHyBrudneyJeffrey L.. 1991. An Assessment of Research Skill-Building in MPA Curricula, In BergersonPeter J., Teaching Public Policy: Theory, Research and Practice.Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 49–56.
23.
WeimerDavid L.ViningAidan R.. 1992. Policy Analysis: Concepts and Practice.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
