Important: Read and Refer Often to the Information in This Syllabus!

Political Science 4930: Modern Administrative Thought

University of Central Oklahoma (Spring 2006 Syllabus): Independent Study

ABOUT THE INSTRUCTOR:

Dr. Brett S. Sharp, Associate Professor, served as a practicing public administrator in state and local government for over fourteen years. He received his Ph.D. and Master of Public Administration from the University of Oklahoma and a B.S. in Political Science/Public Affairs with a minor in Religious Studies from Oklahoma State University. For the past five years he served as an Associate Director for the Oklahoma Policy Research Center (now the UCO Policy Institute) and has also been a Field Researcher for the Rockefeller Institute of Government with the State University of New York at Albany. He is a past president of the Oklahoma Chapter of the American Society for Public Administration. Dr. Sharp is the recipient of several academic awards and has been the author of numerous policy studies and scholarly works.

            Contact Hours: Mon/Wed 3:15-4:15 PM and Wed 7:00-7:30 PM (and by appointment)

            Office:             Liberal Arts Bldg 102-J (in Political Science suite)             Email: bsharp@ucok.edu

            Telephone:       (405) 974-5526 (with voice mail)                                         Fax:    (405) 974-3823

            Web Site:         http://www.libarts.ucok.edu/political/faculty/sharp             Classroom: LAR 120

COURSE DESCRIPTION:

This course is designed to immerse students in the scholarly literature of public administration and public policy. The focus is on prevailing theories that explain the role of bureaucratic institutions within a dynamic democracy. The tensions that exist in the policy process between the street-level bureaucrats implementing programs and the elected politicians writing legislation is emphasized and explored. Specific objectives of this course include: (1) understanding and applying modern administrative theory to the practice of public administration; (2) demonstrating an appreciation for the role of leadership in enhancing public productivity and citizen responsiveness; (3) analyzing the role of public organizations and their relations with the private and nonprofit sectors of society; (4) designing appropriate organizational forms to enhance the public mission; and (5) enhancing decision-making skills and problem solving techniques relevant to public service.

TEACHING METHODS/LEARNING EXPERIENCES:

Because this class is taught as an independent study, the student is responsible through reading and writing assignments to learn relevant administrative concepts and applications. The student is responsible for arranging at least three meetings during the semester to discuss the readings and writing projects with the professor. Some flexibility is retained in the syllabus to accommodate appropriate learning opportunities. Students should also regularly provide the professor with email correspondence describing progress on these class assignments.

EVALUATION METHODS AND GRADING

            Instructor will determine course grades                 Grading components include:

            using the following scale:                                                     Discussions with Professor                        10%

                            90 -100        =         A                                             Reaction Papers                                          50%

                            80 - 89        =         B                                             Research Paper                                           40%

                            70 - 79        =         C

                            60 - 69        =         D

                              0 - 59        =         F 

Course Schedule - Spring 2006

READINGS

       ●    Allison, Graham T. (1979). Public and Private Management: Are They Fundamentally Alike in All Unimportant Respects?

       ●    Ammons, David N. (1996). Performance Measurement in Local Government.

       ●    Blau, Peter M. and Meyer, Marshall W. (1987). “Why Study Bureaucracy?”

        ●   Bolman, Lee G. and Deal, Terrence E. (1991). Reframing Organizations.

       ●    Cook, Garth. (1995). “Working for the Government is Cool.”

       ●    DiIulio, John J. & Kettl, Donald F. (1995). “Fine Print: The Contract with America, Devolution, and the Administrative Realities of American Federalism.”

       ●    Eisner, Robert. (1993). “Sense and Nonsense About Budget Deficits.”

       ●    Finney, Graham and Grossman, David A. (1998). Public Private Partnerships in the Twenty-First Century.

       ●     Gormley, William T. (1999). Accountability Battles in State Administration.

       ●    Gormley, William T. (1996). Privatization Revisited.

       ●    Ingraham, Patricia W. and Rosenbloom, David H. (1992). “The State of Merit in the Federal Government.”

       ●    Ingraham, Patricia W. (1996). Reinventing the American Federal Government: Reform Redux or Real Change?

       ●    Lehne, Richard. (1993). Understanding Government Regulations

       ●     Linden, Russell M. (1994). “The Evolution of Work in Public and Private Bureaucracies.”

       ●     Lowi, Theodore J. (1987/1993). “Two Roads to Serfdom, Liberalism, Conservatism, and Administrative Power.”

       ●    Luke, Jeffery S. and Caiden, Gerald A. (XXXX). Coping with Global Interdependence.

       ●    Lynn, Laurence E. (1987). Policy Analysis.

       ●    Osborn, David and Gaebler, Ted. (1992). Reinventing Government

       ●    Ospina, Sonia M. (1996). “Realizing the Power of Diversity.”

       ●    Perry, James L. and Kraemer, Kenneth L. (1993). The Implications of Changing Technology.

       ●    Rivlin, Alice M. (1992). “The Evolution of American Federalism.”

       ●    Rourke, Francies E. (1991). “American Bureaucracy in a Changing Political Setting.”

       ●    Sabatier, Paul A. (1999). Two Decades of Implementation Research: From Control to Guidance and Learning.

       ●    Schick, Allen. (1995). “Mapping the Federal Budget Process.”

       ●     Waldo, Dwight. (1980). Public Administration and Ethics.

       ●    Wilson, James Q. (1989). A Few Modest Suggestions That May Make a Small Difference.

       ●    Wilson, James Q. (1975). The Rise of the Bureaucratic State.

MEETINGS WITH INSTRUCTOR

Discussion of the assigned readings is an important part of succeeding in this course and is required of all students. Meeting with the instructor provides an opportunity for you to ask questions, clarify issues, and deepen your understanding of the concepts covered in the assigned readings. If you are unable to make a meeting as arranged, you are responsible for rescheduling at the instructor’s convenience and availability.

REQUIREMENTS FOR REACTION PAPERS

At various points during the semester, students are assigned to do a 3-4 page reaction paper of the reading assignments. These are due by the end of the week that the reaction paper is assigned. Each paper should cover all assigned readings not already addressed in previous reaction papers. The paper should include a brief synopsis of the major themes of the readings followed by your reaction and analysis. The paper should demonstrate an understanding of key concepts in the assigned readings, but should also strive to be creative, integrative, thought-provoking, and interesting. One option is to use a review essay format. Papers will be graded on synthesis of assigned readings, originality and style, format and grammar, linkage to concepts discussed in class, and quality of analysis. Be prepared to discuss your reactions during meetings or conversations with the instructor.

REQUIREMENTS FOR RESEARCH PAPER

Each student will write a 20-25 page, double-spaced paper for this course. You will choose as your topic some issue that directly relates to contemporary public administration. While you must cite sufficient references to make your paper convincing, this assignment requires a minimum of twenty references from refereed journals and/or professional periodicals. Students should follow the Chicago/Turabian style convention as outlined in the recommended textbook by Scott and Garrison, The Political Science Student Writer’s Manual. The first draft of the research paper (title page with topic, introduction, and preliminary list of references) is due at the beginning of class, Friday, November 14 and the final version is due Friday, March 24. Papers will be graded on topic selection, format, grammar, style, research documentation, research quality, content delivery, and analysis. Please refer to the discussion of plagiarism in the Academic Integrity Statement attached to the syllabus as well as pages 145-148 in The Political Science Student Writers Manual.

ACADEMIC HONESTY

Cheating = Failure (please refer to attached Political Science Department’s Academic Integrity Statement and the University’s Student Information Sheet and Syllabus Attachment). Cheating is unacceptable conduct and will result in an automatic grade of “F” for the course, and be reported to Academic Affairs. Students are required to do all of the work for this class on their own. Copying answers to exercises or examinations from anyone constitutes cheating. Allowing another student to copy one’s answers will be treated as cheating. A student may discuss exercises and case briefs with others before preparing his or her own answers, but the answers must be each student’s own work product. Consulting with the instructor about any assignment does not constitute cheating and is encouraged.

The Political Science Department of the University of Central Oklahoma is asking all students taking political science courses to read the following Academic Integrity Statement. Our purpose in doing so is to ensure that all our students are aware of what is improper academic behavior.

Academic Integrity Statement

As members of the academic community, students are expected to recognize and uphold standards of intellectual and academic integrity. The Political Science Department expects that its students will conduct themselves honestly. This means, above all, that students submit for credit work that is the product of their own efforts. Principles of academic integrity require that all dishonest work be rejected as a basis for academic credit, and that students refrain from any and all forms of dishonorable conduct in the course of their academic work. The examples and definitions given below are intended to clarify the standards by which academic honesty and integrity is judged. The list is merely illustrative of some of the more common infractions. It is not intended to be exhaustive. Any question a student has about what constitutes inappropriate behavior should be directed towards their instructor. The rule of thumb to follow is: If in doubt, ASK!

Definitions and Examples

Plagiarism - Plagiarism is presenting another person’s work as one’s own. Plagiarism includes not only the exact use of another’s words, word for word, but also the paraphrasing or summarizing of the works of another person without acknowledgment, including the submitting of another student’s work as one’s own. The student is responsible for understanding the legitimate use of sources, the appropriate ways of acknowledging academic, scholarly, or creative indebtedness, and the consequences of violating this responsibility. In case of doubt, give a citation of the author you are using. Failure to indicate the extent and nature of one's reliance on other sources is plagiarism. A plagiarized paper will result in a failing grade on the work in question, and perhaps, for the entire course.

Cheating on Examinations - Cheating on examinations involves giving or receiving unauthorized help before, during, or after an examination. Examples of unauthorized help include the use of notes, texts, or “crib sheets” during an examination (unless receiving instructor approval), or sharing information with another student either during or after an examination.

Falsification - It is a violation of academic honesty to misrepresent material or to fabricate information in an academic exercise or assignment (e.g. false or misleading citation of sources, the falsification of the results of experiments or of computer data).

Multiple Submissions - It is a violation of academic honesty to submit substantial portions of the same work for credit more than once without the explicit consent of the instructor to whom the material is being submitted the second time.