The state of doctoral education in public administration: developments in the field's research preparation

This article reports the results of a 1995 survey of the fifty-six NASPAA-affiliated doctoral programs of public administration and public affairs. Following on two related streams of research, we assess the degree of intellectual coherence in the field of public administration, and document what doctoral programs are doing to encourage and prepare students to do research. The evidence indicates that public administration is a fragmented, interdisciplinary field but that many doctoral programs are undertaking considerable effort to train students for research careers. In particular, they are following NASPAA guidance provided in policy on doctoral education and heeding advice provided in the literature. A lingering question is whether these innovations are making a difference in the quantity and quality of research produced by doctoral graduates

What's in a name? Comparing DPA and Ph.D. programs

This article explores two questions: What are the main similarities and differences between the current sets of DPA and Ph.D. programs? And how, if at all, do these types compare on one important measure of program quality--the research productivity of program participants and graduates? After comparing DPA and Ph.D. programs and the research productivity of their graduates, the authors conclude that there is very little difference in DPA and Ph.D. programs. Degree title is more informative about the type of students recruited than outputs, such as journal publications. While DPA programs tend to be aimed more at practitioner training, that does not translate into lower levels of scholarly productivity for those graduates. The most noteworthy finding is the overall low research productivity of public administration graduates. Finally, the article raises several critical questions about the scholarly output of public afíairs program graduates

Determinants of graduate research productivity in doctoral programs of Public Administration

Given that research is the first step in improved practice, how can public administration doctoral programs train more productive research scholars? This article reports details on the first systematic attempt to answer this question empirically. Specifically, the authors collect data from 47 NASPAA-affiliated doctoral programs and test conventional wisdom distilled from the literature. Three factors prove to be important in doctoral programs that train productive research scholars: (1) engaging students in structured research experiences that culminate in student research productivity, (2) providing students with adequate financial support, and (3) employing productive faculty members. These three factors explain approximately 70 percent of the variation in graduate research productivity across doctoral programs, and they represent action steps for programs interested in improving the research productivity of their graduates. The implications for improving the quantity and quality of scholarship in public administration are discussed