It sounds to me like at least part of the reason was that the degree title was not well known, though maybe some of the content changed too, I'm not sure. That's part of why I suggest the "MBPA" name here: the "MBA" has extremely high name recognition, so I feel like it's important to be similar.
Hi, interesting to know your perspective. Actually, I also have the same ideas as yours since MPP/MPA tends to provide the foundation in policy and social perspective but is not that deep in the specific field. Even though many universities have provided a lot of specialization, for instance combining MPP/MPA with business school/environmental science is somewhat that I was looking for when I prepared for my master's. As a person who works in the public sector, specifically in energy, a combination of those programs are a perfect combo for me.
Anyway, what's the difference between Public Administration/Public Affairs/Public Policy? Sometimes, i find it difficult to distinguish between public affairs and administration
That said, in practice, the distinction can be quite blurry!
And Public Affairs is, as far as I can tell, is whatever that particular university decided it is, but could be anywhere on the policy-administration spectrum or could even include some other stuff too. It's a pretty vague and flexible term, at least from what I've seen.
Great piece and compelling ideas! I couldn’t help but notice that in talking with the MBA students I met from HBS during my time at the Kennedy School of Government, we largely had the same curriculum - econ, stats, strategy, leadership, communications, etc., just with different case studies: they were trying to do things like sell more soap and boost profitability by finding ways to cut costs, while we were trying do things like increase the birthweight of newborns and enhance delivery of public services by finding ways to improve efficiency.
Indeed! Personally, I think that several key benefits of a combined core are that:
1. People would be exposed to case studies from a wider range of perspectives, sharpening their ability to think from multiple angles and better analyze what to do in different/new situations.
2. It's an opportunity to take people who didn't think they were government-interested and expose them to a lot of the meaningful work that goes on in government—and maybe even interest them in pursing careers in public service!
This sounds convincing at first glance; however, such arguments can be faulty. I think "generalist" and "specialist with background" are distinct. I could mock-write a post about how you should get a joint degree in Linguistics and Psychology (or, if you prefer, Cognitive Science) because of similarities, but existence of specialized degrees (which still offer basic courses in the other's endeavours) actually brings benefits given by… well, by the obvious "you can put more in people's heads in three courses of comparable length than in one". On the other hand, you probably wouldn't want, e.g., separate Phonology and Syntax degree - they need to know too much about the other's operations, even if most people specialize. So, without in-domain knowledge, it's really difficult to evaluate whether the similarities are sufficient or - well, I don't want to say "cherry-picked" but, let's say, balanced by hidden differences.
(Also, unlike in the academic case, there's obvious marketing problem - the division benefits MBA, allowing to take more for these programs and generally treat them differently because "you'll get lots of money from businesses".)
Also, Yale used to have (still has?) an MPPA - Master of Public and Private Administration
It looks like they got rid of it after a new dean came onboard in 1995: https://spinup-000d1a-wp-offload-media.s3.amazonaws.com/faculty/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2019/06/2005-05-06-AtB-Hardly-Academic.pdf
It sounds to me like at least part of the reason was that the degree title was not well known, though maybe some of the content changed too, I'm not sure. That's part of why I suggest the "MBPA" name here: the "MBA" has extremely high name recognition, so I feel like it's important to be similar.
Hi, interesting to know your perspective. Actually, I also have the same ideas as yours since MPP/MPA tends to provide the foundation in policy and social perspective but is not that deep in the specific field. Even though many universities have provided a lot of specialization, for instance combining MPP/MPA with business school/environmental science is somewhat that I was looking for when I prepared for my master's. As a person who works in the public sector, specifically in energy, a combination of those programs are a perfect combo for me.
Anyway, what's the difference between Public Administration/Public Affairs/Public Policy? Sometimes, i find it difficult to distinguish between public affairs and administration
Ha, that's a great question! In theory, this is the answer re: public policy vs. public administration: https://civicinsighter.com/p/are-public-policy-degrees-too-narrow
That said, in practice, the distinction can be quite blurry!
And Public Affairs is, as far as I can tell, is whatever that particular university decided it is, but could be anywhere on the policy-administration spectrum or could even include some other stuff too. It's a pretty vague and flexible term, at least from what I've seen.
Great piece and compelling ideas! I couldn’t help but notice that in talking with the MBA students I met from HBS during my time at the Kennedy School of Government, we largely had the same curriculum - econ, stats, strategy, leadership, communications, etc., just with different case studies: they were trying to do things like sell more soap and boost profitability by finding ways to cut costs, while we were trying do things like increase the birthweight of newborns and enhance delivery of public services by finding ways to improve efficiency.
Indeed! Personally, I think that several key benefits of a combined core are that:
1. People would be exposed to case studies from a wider range of perspectives, sharpening their ability to think from multiple angles and better analyze what to do in different/new situations.
2. It's an opportunity to take people who didn't think they were government-interested and expose them to a lot of the meaningful work that goes on in government—and maybe even interest them in pursing careers in public service!
This sounds convincing at first glance; however, such arguments can be faulty. I think "generalist" and "specialist with background" are distinct. I could mock-write a post about how you should get a joint degree in Linguistics and Psychology (or, if you prefer, Cognitive Science) because of similarities, but existence of specialized degrees (which still offer basic courses in the other's endeavours) actually brings benefits given by… well, by the obvious "you can put more in people's heads in three courses of comparable length than in one". On the other hand, you probably wouldn't want, e.g., separate Phonology and Syntax degree - they need to know too much about the other's operations, even if most people specialize. So, without in-domain knowledge, it's really difficult to evaluate whether the similarities are sufficient or - well, I don't want to say "cherry-picked" but, let's say, balanced by hidden differences.
(Also, unlike in the academic case, there's obvious marketing problem - the division benefits MBA, allowing to take more for these programs and generally treat them differently because "you'll get lots of money from businesses".)