The crisis of policy education in turbulent times: Are schools of public affairs in danger of becoming irrelevant?

Abstract

The work of crafting sustainable solutions to complex policy problems requires decision makers and implementers to secure buy-in from a diverse set of stakeholders. Those stakeholders operate in policy ecosystems that span public, for-profit, nonprofit, and entrepreneurial sectors. This increasingly complex landscape requires schools of public affairs, policy, and administration to reconsider how to provide graduates with more advanced and integrated skill sets than ever before. Since 2013, several groups of public and educational leaders have met to discuss this challenge, culminating in a collective redesign effort driven to imagine a new public service education curriculum. This essay highlights core issues identified in collective discussions, and then proposes four principles to drive the curricular redesign process: (1) build sustained partnerships between public and educational sectors, (2) focus on competency-based learning, (3) instill a lifelong learning mind-set in students, and (4) integrate new modalities for learning.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Albaek

(1995). Between knowledge and power: Utilization of social science in public policy making. Policy Sciences, 28(1), 79–100. doi:10.1007/BF01000821

Cabrera

(2015). Systems thinking made simple: New hope for solving wicked problems. Ithaca, NY: Odyssean.

Caplan

(1979). The two communities theory and knowledge utilization. American Behavioral Scientist, 22(3), 459–470. doi:10.1177/000276427902200308

Deans' Summit . (2017, October 11). First annual dean’s summit: Synopsis. Washington, DC: LBJ Washington Center.

Dweck

Walton

Cohen

2014. Academic tenacity: Mindsets and skills that promote long-term learning. Washington, DC: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED576649.pdf

Ellwood

(2008). Challenges to public policy and public management education. Journal of Policy Analysis & Management, 27(1), 172–188. doi:10.1002/pam.20313

Evans

(2015). Presidential address: Reflections of an accidental analyst. Journal of Policy Analysis & Management, 34(2), 256–266. doi:10.1002/pam.21815

Evans

Morrison

(2013, September). Catalyzing discovery for social impact: Exploring the power of the research-academic-policy nexus to stimulate policy innovation . Report to the National Science Foundation, Austin, Texas.

Evans

Morrison

(2015, February). Curriculum blueprint to enhance social scientists’ capacities to create and sustain social change . Final workshop report to the National Science Foundation, Austin, Texas.

10.

Fritzen

(2008). Public policy education goes global: A multi-dimensional challenge. Journal of Policy Analysis & Management, 27(1), 205–214. doi:10.1002/pam.20315

11.

Gaynor

Carrizales

(2018). Teaching democracy: A review of public administration introductory courses. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 24(1), 66–79. doi:10.1080/15236803.2018.1429822

12.

Getha-Taylor

(2012). Cross-sector understanding and trust. Public Performance & Management Review, 36(2), 216–229. doi:10.2753/PMR1530-9576360203

13.

Kettl

(2016). Escaping jurassic government: How to recover America’s lost commitment to competence. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.

14.

O’Leary

Choi

Gerard

(2012). The skill set of the successful collaborator. Public Administration Review, 72(s1), S70–S83. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02667.x

15.

Posner

(2009). The pracademic: An agenda for re-engaging practitioners and academics. Public Budgeting & Finance, 29(1), 12–26. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5850.2009.00921.x

16.

Prewitt

Schwandt

Straf

(Eds.). (2012). Using science as evidence in public policy. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.

17.

Schultz

(2017a). Alternative facts and public affairs. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 23(3), 775–778. doi:10.1080/15236803.2017.12002285

18.

Schultz

(2017b). Public administration in the age of Trump. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 23(1), 557–562. doi:10.1080/15236803.2017.12002268

19.

Sommerfeld

(2015). The rise of the data scientists. GT: Government Technology. Retrieved from http://www.govtech.com/local/The-Rise-of-the-Data-Scientists.html

20.

Starke

Heckler

Mackey

(2018). Administrative racism: Public administration education and race. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 24(4), 469–489. doi:10.1080/15236803.2018.1426428

21.

U.S. Office of Personnel Management . (2018). Federal workforce priorities report (FWPR). Retrieved from https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/human-capital-management/federal-workforce-priorities-report/2018-federal-workforce-priorities-report.pdf

22.

Volcker Alliance . 2017. Tenure and promotion at schools of public affairs (Working paper of the Volcker Alliance). Retrieved from https://www.volckeralliance.publications/tenure-and-promotion-schools-public-affairs

23.

Volcker Alliance . (2018). Preparing tomorrow’s public service: What the next generation needs. New York, NY: Author.

24.

Weible

Sabatier

(2009). Coalitions, science, and belief change: Comparing adversarial and collaborative policy subsystems. Policy Studies Journal, 37(2), 195–212. doi:10.1111/psj.2009.37.issue-2

25.

Wildavsky

(1976). Principles for a graduate school of public policy. Journal of Urban Analysis, 3(1), 127–152.

26.

Wildavsky

(1979). Speaking truth to power: The Art and craft of policy analysis. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.