journal of public affairs education - NASPAA *The Global Standard ...

Operation PSA: The Action Learning of Curiosity and Creativityselection and experimentation, (6) PSA formation, and (7) action-learningdocumentation. Each step is explained through the team’s shared experiences inthe production of the two PSAs, including one made during the 2008 TPAC.The first PSA was purposely crafted to reflect an undergraduate perspective onthe meaning and role of public administration. Completed prior to theconference, the team hoped it would resonate with audience members and buildexcitement about the pedagogical appeal of PSAs. The second one was filmedand edited over a 24-hour period during the conference. It relied upon theexpressed trust and respect between conference participants to entice newcomersto the 2009 TPAC, and required a willingness from attendees to accept thelearner role themselves. Describing the process for these PSAs is intended toengage the reader through the progression of building boundary-spanning PSAs.Step 1: General Problem IdentificationDetermining what issue or concern is the focal point for any research effort isextremely important. An initial resource for feedback might come from thetrusted opinions of peers, practitioners, or former students. If venturing intonew or unknown territory, interacting with institutional Centers for Teachingand Learning might help one discern developmental trends or issues that spark aresearcher’s interest or curiosity. Operation PSA, on the other hand, grew fromthe notion of returning to a back-to-basics style of learning, similar to Dewey’s(1916) association between communication and education. It provided a logicalfoundation from which to address the development of students’ and educators’leadership talents and action-learning experiences.Step 2: Team RecruitmentResearch or application projects are only as good as their members. Theimportance of this fact becomes even more clear when documents reveal that“people join groups to pursue individual needs,” rather than to resolve group goals(Ruben & Stewart, 1998, p. 279). For the team leader, finding a commonality orfoundation upon which others could agree was imperative. Drawing again uponthe works of Dewey (1916) and Revans (1980), Operation PSA arose from (a) thecommitment to resolve a real problem or issue (i.e., the incorporation ofinnovative action-learning tools within public and nonprofit administrativeclassrooms) and (b) a willingness to explore the bounds of innovation in order togenerate change as learner agents (Worley, 2000). Keeping the number ofmembers down to a workable unit was another factor of concern, because, withfour members in the group, there could be as many as “twenty-five potentialcommunication relationships” (Ruben & Stewart, 1998, p. 281). Therefore, theinclusion of any more than four additional members was outweighed by the costsincurred for attaining consensus, keeping members informed, counteractingpressures toward conformity, and affecting leadership (Ruben & Stewart, 1998).Journal of Public Affairs Education 367