Some schools have merged their PA and PP programs or don't distinguish that much from the two traditions (i.e., were always offering a combination of both fields).
How is the public policy and public administration market?
-
When we (low paying LAC with no other grad program in the dept, 3-3) did a search for one of core MPA lines (4 MPA courses a year +2 undergrad) about 3-4 years ago, the pool was shallow and weak, especially if you want/need someone to teach quant. (And the bar here is low--we don't need an R wizard or cutting edge methodologist, just someone who can get some moderately intelligent mid-career bureaucrats through a basic multiple regression.)
About 50 applicants, maybe slightly over half of whom were remotely qualified. We didn't move super-fast, and a month later when we reached out to our long short list of 8, 3 had other jobs and 2 others had interviews with offers pending. We ended up hiring someone with a solid publication record, no MPA experience. We feared she might not be a good fit for MPA students teaching-wise, and we have been proven correct in that fear.
-
Over time, PA has worked hard to distinguish itself from the larger discipline--developing PA doctoral programs, creating new (and very low impact) journals devoted to narrow topics like nonprofit or HR in the public sector, etc. Very clever approach, as it allows them to compare their (on average, low-quality) work to peers with similar work. They really do know how to play the bureaucratic game.
-
The PA market was fair this year. There were good jobs at really good schools this year, but it seemed like these were fewer than in past years. There appeared to be hardly any jobs at regional/directional schools this year, and these places typically outnumber those jobs at ranked or flagship schools.
-
OK Jordon, FU.
When we (low paying LAC with no other grad program in the dept, 3-3) did a search for one of core MPA lines (4 MPA courses a year +2 undergrad) about 3-4 years ago, the pool was shallow and weak, especially if you want/need someone to teach quant. (And the bar here is low--we don't need an R wizard or cutting edge methodologist, just someone who can get some moderately intelligent mid-career bureaucrats through a basic multiple regression.)
About 50 applicants, maybe slightly over half of whom were remotely qualified. We didn't move super-fast, and a month later when we reached out to our long short list of 8, 3 had other jobs and 2 others had interviews with offers pending. We ended up hiring someone with a solid publication record, no MPA experience. We feared she might not be a good fit for MPA students teaching-wise, and we have been proven correct in that fear. -
The larger discipline being what? Seems like polsci people have not realized PA is not, and hasn't been, part of PolSci. It is an interdisciplinary field in which more and more people from economics and engineering are fleeing to do PhDs. More quant and experimental methods than in several Polsci programs. In fact, weaker PA programs tend to be those in polsci departments. Low impact journals? Seems like you have not checked recently ISI or Scopus, they have their own subfield with very good impact factor journals.
Over time, PA has worked hard to distinguish itself from the larger discipline--developing PA doctoral programs, creating new (and very low impact) journals devoted to narrow topics like nonprofit or HR in the public sector, etc. Very clever approach, as it allows them to compare their (on average, low-quality) work to peers with similar work. They really do know how to play the bureaucratic game.
-
Obviously you are not literate. If you did a PhD must have learned not to make generalizations from your anecdotal experience. Look at records of recent graduates from top 15-20 Public affairs schools. Even if you separate PP from PA, PA people are usually more sophisticated in methods and more connected to practical problems than several graduates from PolSci programs. Just take a look of the stuff recently published in top PA journals.
Don't know about the size but directly experienced the "quality." Tops PA schools' candidates were unbelievable. If you are literate you can be a star.
-
Crazy talk.
Obviously you are not literate. If you did a PhD must have learned not to make generalizations from your anecdotal experience. Look at records of recent graduates from top 15-20 Public affairs schools. Even if you separate PP from PA, PA people are usually more sophisticated in methods and more connected to practical problems than several graduates from PolSci programs. Just take a look of the stuff recently published in top PA journals.
Don't know about the size but directly experienced the "quality." Tops PA schools' candidates were unbelievable. If you are literate you can be a star. -
I’m on a search committee for PA this fall and we’ve gotten a s**tload of applications from political scientists. Some of them who do work that is PA adjacenct have a shot (not a great one). But we’ve actually had some comparativists apply! They’ll have no shot. PA people will have a much better shot than PA adjacent political scientists.
-
This. Even at a regional. PS does not = PA. Campaigns and elections is not the same as budgeting.
I’m on a search committee for PA this fall and we’ve gotten a s**tload of applications from political scientists. Some of them who do work that is PA adjacenct have a shot (not a great one). But we’ve actually had some comparativists apply! They’ll have no shot. PA people will have a much better shot than PA adjacent political scientists.
-
PP is better, sort of like applied econ (at the top schools). Pretty high paying.
The larger discipline being what? Seems like polsci people have not realized PA is not, and hasn't been, part of PolSci. It is an interdisciplinary field in which more and more people from economics and engineering are fleeing to do PhDs. More quant and experimental methods than in several Polsci programs. In fact, weaker PA programs tend to be those in polsci departments. Low impact journals? Seems like you have not checked recently ISI or Scopus, they have their own subfield with very good impact factor journals.
Over time, PA has worked hard to distinguish itself from the larger discipline--developing PA doctoral programs, creating new (and very low impact) journals devoted to narrow topics like nonprofit or HR in the public sector, etc. Very clever approach, as it allows them to compare their (on average, low-quality) work to peers with similar work. They really do know how to play the bureaucratic game.