Ranking Public Policy and Administration Graduate Programs,1995-2016

Abstract

In 1995, U.S. News and World Report (U.S. News) released its first ranking of public affairs master’s degree programs. The rankings have been conducted every 3 years since and have grown in importance to public policy and public administration programs. This study considers the history and background of ranking public policy and administration graduate programs, the rationale used by U.S. News, and the methodology used by U.S. News. This is followed by a longitudinal analysis of these rankings from 1995 to 2016. Findings are presented in a conceptual framework of academic rankings using concepts of equilibrium, specialization, diffusion of innovations, and institutional isomorphism. The implications of this framework and the findings of our analysis are spelled out for public affairs deans, directors, and faculty seeking to improve their ranking as well as those seeking to hold on to their present rankings.

Keywords

rankings U.S. News isomorphism equilibrium diffusion of innovation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Diamond

Graham

H. D.

(1997). The rise of American research universities: Elites and challengers in the postwar era. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Diamond

Graham

H. D.

(2000, July/August). How should we rate research universities? Change, pp. 21-33.

Dichev

(2001). News or noise? Estimating the noise in the U.S. News university rankings. Research in Higher Education, 42, 237-266.

DiMaggio

P. J.

Powell

W. W.

(1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.

Ellwood

J. W.

(2008). Challenges to public policy and public management education. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 27, 172-187.

Espeland

W. N.

Sauder

(2007). Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. American Journal of Sociology, 113, 1-40.

Finder

(2001 August 1). At University of Kentucky, a push to aim higher. The New York Times, p. A19.

Fombrun

C. J.

(1996). Reputation: Realizing value from the corporate image. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Fowles

Frederickson

H. G.

Koppell

J. G. S.

(in press). University rankings and the ivory cage: Evidence and a conceptual framework. Public Administration Review.

10.

Frederickson

H. G.

(2001a, January/February). Getting ranked. Change, pp. 49-55.

11.

Frederickson

H. G.

(2001b). Reflections on ranking master’s degrees in public affairs: The search for reputational capital. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 7, 65-71.

12.

Gormley

W. T.

Weimer

D. Q.

(1999). Organizational report cards. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

13.

McDonough

P. M.

Antonio

A. L.

Walpole

Perez

L. X.

(1998). College rankings: Democratized college knowledge for whom? Research in Higher Education, 39, 513-537.

14.

Morgeson

F. P.

Nahrgang

J. D.

(2008). Same as it ever was: Recognizing stability in the “Business Week” rankings. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7, 26-41.

15.

National Research Council. (1995). Research-doctoral programs in the United States. Washington, DC: Author.

16.

Perry

J. L.

(1995). Ranking public administration programs. Journal of Public Administration Education, 1, 132-135.

17.

Rogers

E. M.

(1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York, NY: The Free Press.

18.

Teasley

C. E.

III. (1995). The bad (U.S.) News ranking of MPA programs. Journal of Public Administration Education, 1, 136-141.

19.

Tracy

Waldfogel

(1997). The best business schools: A market-based approach. Journal of Business, 70, 1-31.

20.

Trieshmann

J. S.

Dennis

A. R.

Northcroft

C. B.

Niemi

A. W.

(2000). Serving multiple constituencies in the business school: MBA programs versus research performance. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 1130-1141.

21.

Van de Walle

Roxanne van Delft

(2015). Publishing in public administration: Issues with defining, comparing and ranking the output of universities. International Public Management Journal, 18, 87-107.

22.

Ventriss

(1995). The rating system: Determining what constitutes a quality program. Journal of Public Administration Education, 1, 142-153.

23.

Weber

(1968). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. New York, NY: Bedminster.

24.

Williams

A. M.

Slagle

D. R.

Wilson

(2014). Ranking universities for scholarship in public administration research 2006-2010. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 20, 393-412.