Profiling Public Affairs Programs

Abstract

This research updates existing literature that describes the nature of public affairs programs. A profile of the top 50 public affairs programs, according to rankings from U.S. News & World Report, is identified. Programs are differentiated by type (master of public administration, master of public policy, master of public affairs, and other), and comparisons are made regarding total hours, hours in core, number of specializations, capital city location, accreditation, institutional home, required courses within core, numbers of core courses by category per the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration, and variety of specializations within programs. The article statistically explores the relative importance of program characteristics in the status of the top 50 institutions.

Master of Public Administration and Master of Public Policy degrees: Differences and similarities in the curricula and course contents

“…A group of researchers found that in their core curricula, public administration programs emphasized the topics of the management of people and public organizations (budget and finance, human resources, leadership, management, public administration, and organizational theory), whereas public policy programs emphasized economics and analytical methods (Elmore, 1986;Henry et al, 2009;Hur and Hackbart, 2009;Koven et al, 2008;Roeder and Whitaker, 1993). Some also found that the curricular differences between them were not substantial (Averch et al, 1992;Ellwood, 2008;Henry et al, 2009;Koven et al, 2008) and the differences between their curricula had eroded over time (Lowery, 1994).…”

“…Some institutions offer similar degrees with other names, such as Master of Public Affairs and Master of Public Policy and Administration. As the programs and their names evolved, a group of researchers investigated the differences and similarities between MPA and MPP programs, particularly in the last three decades (Averch et al, 1992;Elmore, 1986;Henry et al, 2009;Hur and Hackbart, 2009;Infield and Adams, 2011;Koven et al, 2008;Lowery, 1994;Roeder and Whitaker, 1993). A key question some of them asked was, are the contents of MPA and MPP programs substantially different from each other?…”

Scholars’ influence on their institutions: Reputation, prestige, and rankings

“…Public administration is not immune to performance assessments, report cards, benchmarking, and other ongoing measurements, comparisons, and assessments of programs based on multiple characteristics (Ammons, 2001; Behn, 2003; Coe, 2003; Halamachi, 2002; Koven, Goetzke and Brennan, 2008; Osborne and Gaebler, 1992; Osborne and Hutchinson, 2004; Wholey and Hatry, 1992). The first U.S. News and World Report rankings for public policy and administration graduate programs were in 1995.…”

Understanding the Field of Public Affairs through the Lens of Ranked Ph.D. Programs in the United States

“…Efforts have been made to understand a narrower version of public affairs, i.e., public administration, mostly through the lens of publications at major public administration journals (Lan & Anders, 2000;Miller & Jaja, 2005;Ni, Sugimoto, & Robbin, 2017). There are also a small number of studies trying to profile public affairs programs either through faculty/staff/student publications in major public administration journals (Douglas, 1996;Legge & Devore, 1987) or degrees offered (Koven, Goetzke, & Brennan, 2008). To our best knowledge, no research has examined the broader multidisciplinary field of public affairs that include not only public administration research, but also various other specific policy areas studied by scholars from public affairs programs.…”

“…The last section summarizes the research and discusses its limitations. Given its exploratory nature and similar to earlier field studies based on data mining (Koven et al, ; Ni et al, ), this article does not include a separate literature review. We have noted how this new study is distinct from earlier ones in the introduction.…”