JOURNAL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS EDUCATION - National ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

MPA vs. MPP: A Distinction Without a Difference? MPA vs. MPP: A Distinction Without a Difference? Yongbeom Hur Appalachian State University Merl Hackbart University of Kentucky ABSTRACT Despite several scholarly inquiries, the question of whether there are critical differences between Masters of Public Administration (MPA) and Masters of Public Policy (MPP) programs continues in the minds of prospective students, potential employers, and university officials. Building on previous inquiries into this issue, we compare the core course content of selected MPA and MPP programs, and expand the study by investigating whether there is a correlation between the academic backgrounds of program faculty and the emphases in core curricula. We also surveyed departments or schools that have both MPA and MPP programs in order to determine the reasons for offering both programs and related issues — it was assumed that schools and departments offering both programs would have vetted program goals and content issues. Our study suggests that MPA and MPP program curricula differ. However, such differences seem more likely to be associated with faculty discipline differences than with a focus on providing graduates the core competencies required for job and career options/opportunities in these fields. RESEARCH BACKGROUND AND STUDY PURPOSES Outwardly, public affairs education programs have had one of two orientations — traditional public administration or public policy. Although the curriculum differences of the two programs — Master of Public Administration (MPA) and Master of Public Policy (MPP) — may be less pronounced than they were two decades ago, it is assumed that these differences, among other factors, are what distinguish policy-focused programs from administrationoriented programs (Lowery & Whitaker, 1994, pp. 25-26). According to Elmore (1986), “analysis and economic theory are still the hallmark of public policy programs” (p. 70). To the founders of public policy schools, public JPAE 15(4): 397–424 Journal of Public Affairs Education 397
MPA vs. MPP: A Distinction Without a Difference? administration “wore the blinders of a single discipline (political science) and lacked in interdisciplinary vision,” and “the content and personnel of public administration were thought to be low in quality and academic prestige” (Stokes, 1986, p. 45). In fact, some researchers note that most public policy programs have been developed at elite universities (De Soto, Opheim, & Tajalli, 1999; Ventriss, 1991). Regarding this division of public affairs education, Lowery and Whitaker (1994) raised a question, saying “If there are no differences, or only very minor differences in emphasis, then we must ask whether separate programs and professional associations 1 are warranted or whether differences should be restored” (p. 26). Among four categories 2 that Lowery and Whitaker suggested as possible difference areas to explore, De Soto et al. (1999) investigated (a) if the psychological dispositions of students entering public administration and public policy programs were different, and (b) if the socializing effects of each program’s respective curriculum were different. They did this by surveying members of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management (APPAM) and the <strong>National</strong> Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA). Based on results that showed no difference in the psychological dispositions of students and the socializing effects of curricula between APPAM and NASPAA members, De Soto et al. (1999, pp. 88-89) suggested that the integration of the two orientations for public affairs education may become more complete as public administration programs adopt elements of policy evaluation and analysis, and public policy programs offer training in management and organizational behavior. The question of curriculum differences between public administration and policy analysis programs has been explored, and the general findings support Lowery and Whitaker’s (1994) argument that “the stark differences between public administration and public policy programs seem to have eroded with time” (p. 25). For example, in comparing the curriculum requirements of 35 randomly selected NASPAA members and 16 randomly selected APPAM members, research by Averch and Dluhy (1992) indicated that curriculum differences between NASPAA and APPAM members were not substantial. Roeder and Whitaker (1993) analyzed curriculum components 3 of NASPAAaccredited MPA programs, and identified two distinct curriculum emphases — institutional-management orientations and analytical orientations. 4 Although Roeder and Whitaker (1993, p. 535) did not compare the curricula of NASPAA and APPAM members, they concluded that both analytical and public management approaches already were blended in NASPAA-accredited MPA programs, and therefore they expected no major differences between the curricula of NASPAA and APPAM members. The principal purpose of this study is to investigate, from core-curriculum content and other viewpoints, whether the distinction between MPA and MPP 398 Journal of Public Affairs Education
Page 1 and 2: Journal of Public Affairs Education
Page 3 and 4: Journal of Public Affairs Education
Page 5: Hard as it is to believe, with this
Page 9 and 10: MPA vs. MPP: A Distinction Without
Page 35 and 36: What Impacts the Learning in Servic
Page 55 and 56: The Value of Capstone Projects to P
Page 57 and 58:
The Value of Capstone Projects to P
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Indirect Giving to Nonprofit Organi
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Cognitive Styles Matching: Expandin
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
The Return of Public Relations to t
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Putting Yourself in Their Shoes: Th
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Review of: Doctoral Education in Pu
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Information for Contributors The Jo
show all

JOURNAL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS EDUCATION - National ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?