The goal of public service education is to prepare students to serve in the public interest. Educational outcome measurement is an important method in determining whether public service programs actually are achieving their intended objectives. This paper provides a “Model of Learning Outcomes for Public Service Education.” This model builds on what we already know about outcome assessment, and elaborates on how public service education adds value to individuals, organizations, and governance. Key to this Model of Learning Outcomes for Public Service Education is what we term “enabling characteristics,” or factors that mediate the relationship between short-term, intermediate, and longer-term outcomes in public service education. This process enables practitioners to assess their public service education programs and determine to what extent they add value to students, organizations, and governance. Ultimately, this Model of Learning Outcomes for Public Service Education can be used to improve public service education programs.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlexanderF. K. (2000). The changing face of accountability: Monitoring and assessing institutional performance in higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 71(4), 411–430.
2.
AristiguetaM.GomesK. M. B. (2006). Assessing performance in NASPAA graduate programs. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 12(1), 1–18.
3.
BeaumontE. (2005). The challenge of assessing civic engagement: What we know and what we still need to learn about civic education in college. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 11(4), 287–303.
4.
BoyleP.WhitakerG. (2001).Education for the new public service: Implications of the transformation of governance. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 7(4), 267–279.
5.
BrinkerhoffR. O. (Ed.). (1989). Evaluating training programs in business and industry. New Directions for Program Evaluation. (No 44). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
6.
BrinkerhoffR. O.ApkingA. M. (2001). High impact learning. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
7.
BrownR. E.ReedC. S. (2002). An integral approach to evaluating outcome evaluation training. American Journal of Evaluation, 23(1), 1–17.
8.
CarterS. D. (2002). Matching training methods and factors of cognitive ability: A means to improve training outcomes. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 13(1), 71–87.
9.
CastleberryT. E. (2006). Student learning outcome assessment within the Texas State University MPA Program. Texas State University: Applied Research Projects. Retrieved Nov. 19, 2007, from http://ecommons.txstate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1184&context=arp
10.
ChampagneN. (2006). Using the NCHEC areas of responsibility to assess service learning outcomes in undergraduate health education students. American Journal of Health Education, 37(3), 137–146.
11.
ClearyR. E. (1990). What do public administration masters programs look like? Do they do what is needed?Public Administration Review, 50, 663–669.
12.
DownsA. (1962, Spring). The public interest: Its meaning in a democracy. Social Research, 1–36.
13.
DurantR. F. (2002). Toward becoming a learning organization: Outcomes assessment, NASPAA accreditation, and mission-based capstone courses. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 8(3), 193–208.
14.
FenwickT. J. (2002). Problem-based learning, group process and the mid-career professional: Implications for graduate education. Higher Education Research and Development, 21(1), 5–21.
15.
FitzpatrickJ. L.Miller-StevensK. (2009). A case study of measuring outcomes in an MPA program. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 15(1), 17–31.
16.
FordK. J.QuiñonesM. A.SegoD. J.SorraJ. S. (1992). Factors affecting the opportunity to perform trained tasks on the job. Personnel Psychology, 45(3), 511–527.
17.
GecasV. (1989). The social psychology of self-efficacy. Annual Review of Sociology, 15, 291–316.
18.
GoodsellC. T. (1990). Public administration and the public interest. In WamsleyG. L.et al. (Eds.), Refounding public administration (pp. 96–113). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
19.
HamblinA. C. (1974). Evaluation and control of training. London: McGraw Hill.
20.
HerbertT.ReynoldsK. (1998). MPA learning outcomes: Does the cohort format make a difference?Journal of Public Affairs Education, 4(4), 253–262.
21.
HoltonE. E. (1996). The flawed four-level evaluation model. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 8(2), 95–113.
22.
JenningsE. T. (1989). Accountability, program quality, outcome assessment, and graduate education for public affairs and administration. Public Administration Review, 49(5), 438–446.
23.
KeeJ.NewcomerK. E. (2008). Transforming public and nonprofit organizations. Vienna, VA: Management Concepts.
24.
KirkpatrickD. L. (1959). Techniques for evaluating training programs. Journal of ASTD, 13(11), 3–9.
25.
KirkpatrickD. L. (1976). Evaluating training programs. New York: McGraw-Hill.
26.
KirkpatrickD. L. (1998). Evaluating training programs (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
27.
KnowlesM. (1990). The adult learner: A neglected species (4th ed.). Houston: Gulf.
28.
LeeS. H.PershingJ. A. (2002). Dimensions and design criteria for developing training reaction evaluations. Human Resource Development International, 5(2), 175–197.
29.
LeeY. (2006). Examining the effect of small group discussions and question prompts on vicarious learning outcomes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(1), 66–80.
30.
LucasW. A.CooperS. Y. (2004). Enhancing self-efficacy to enable entrepreneurship: The case of CMI’s connections. MIT Sloan Working Paper 4489-04. Retrieved May 3 , 2009 , from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=568383
McLaughlinJ. A.JordanG. B. (2004). Using logic models. In WholeyJ. S.HatryH. P.NewcomerK. E. (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation (2nd ed.), (pp. 96–113). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
33.
MichlitschJ.SidleM. W. (2002). Assessing student learning outcomes: A comparative study of techniques used in business schools. Journal of Education for Business, 77(3), 125–130.
34.
MitchellJ. (1991). Education and skills for public authority management. Public Administration Review, 51(5), 429–437.
35.
National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA). (2008, January). General information and standards for professional master’s degree programs. Retrieved May 3, 2009, from http://www.naspaa.org/accreditation/seeking/reference/standards.asp
36.
NASPAA. (2009, April 4). Draft NASPAA Standards Review. Retrieved May 22, 2009, from http://www.naspaa.org/accreditation/standard2009/docs/NASPAA_Standards_4.15.2009.pdf
37.
NewcomerK. E. (2008). Assessing performance in nonprofit service agencies. In JulnesP. L.BerryF. S.AristiguetaM.YangK. (Eds.), International handbook of practice-based performance management, public performance and management review (pp. 25–44). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
38.
NishishibaM.NelsonH. T.ShinnC. W. (2005). Explicating factors that foster civic engagement among students. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 11(4), 269–285.
39.
Office of the Information Commissioner-Ireland. (2002). Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002: Annual Report 2002. Retrieved November 21, 2007, from http://www.oic.gov.ie/en/Publications/AnnualReports/2002/AnnualReport2002TextVersion/Name,2852,en.htm
40.
PeatB. (2006). Integrating writing and research skills: Development and testing of a rubric to measure student outcomes. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 12(3), 295–311.
41.
PhillipsJ. J. (1997). Handbook of training evaluation and measurement methods (3rd ed.). Houston: Gulf.
42.
RobertsG. E. (2001). Using stakeholder surveys in MPA program performance measurement. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 7(1), 19–30.
43.
SalasE.Cannon-BowersJ. A. (2001). The science of training: A decade of progress. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 471–499.
44.
SchubertG. A. (1960). The public interest. New York: Free Press.
45.
SchwoererC. E.MayD. R.HollensbeE. C.MenclJ. (2005). General and specific self-efficacy in the context of a training intervention to enhance performance expectancy. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16(1), 111–130.
46.
ShadishW. R.CookT. D.CampbellD. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
47.
SmithH. A. (2007). Public administration scholars as a source of knowledge for federal practitioners: Barriers to communication in the federal environment. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The George Washington University, Washington, D.C.
48.
SoraufF. J. (1957). The public interest reconsidered. The Journal of Politics, 19(4), 616–639.
49.
StoneR. W.BaileyJ. J. (2007). Team conflict self-efficacy and outcome expectancy of business students. Journal of Education for Business, 82(5), 258–266.
50.
SullivanB. F.ThomasS. L. (2007). Documenting student learning outcomes through a research intensive senior capstone experience: Bringing the data together to demonstrate progress. North American Journal of Psychology, 9(2), 321–329.
51.
TamM. (2006). Assessing quality experience and learning outcomes: Part I: Instrument and analysis. Quality Assurance in Education, 14(1), 75–87.
52.
TamM. (2007). Assessing quality experience and learning outcomes: Part II: Findings and discussion. Quality Assurance in Education, 15(1), 61–76.
53.
TraceyJ. B.HinkinT. K.TannenbaumS.MathieuJ. E.BlackW. C. (2001). The influence of individual characteristics and the work environment on varying levels of training outcomes. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12(1), 25–31.
54.
TseH. (2007). Professional development through transformation: Linking two assessment models of teachers’ reflective thinking and practice. In TownsendT.BatesR. (Eds.), Handbook of teacher education (pp. 495–506). Netherlands: Springer.
55.
WamsleyG. L.BacherR. N.GoodsellC. T.KronenbergP. S.RohrJ. A.StiversC. M.et al. (1990). Refounding public administration. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
56.
WholeyJ. S. (1983). Evaluation and effective public management. New York: Little, Brown.
57.
WilliamsD. G. (2002). Seeking the holy grail: Assessing outcomes of MPA programs. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 8(1), 45–56.
58.
YamarikS. (2007). Does cooperative learning improve student learning outcomes?Journal of Economic Education, 38(3), 259–271.
59.
YeagerS. J.HildrethW. B.MillerG.RabinJ. (2007). What difference does having an MPA make?Journal of Public Affairs Education, 13(2), 147–167.
