By James Thurmond

A good article for stimulating thinking on the status of today's MPA (master of public administration) programs was published in the March 2017 PM ("The Graduate Studies Quandary" by Scott Lazenby). I have not been active on ICMA's Advisory Board on Graduate Education, so I have missed the discussions. I would like to share a few comments and observations, though, about MPA programs.

I agree that there should be solid linkage between the MPA academic community and the practical community. I believe that this linkage currently exists with many MPA programs, because practitioners are an important component of the MPA education process.

I also agree that there should be stronger linkages between state professional associations than currently exist. Such linkages should be institutionalized through standing professional association committees dedicated to having working relationships between academia and practitioners.

I once served on an ad hoc higher education committee for a state professional association, and I felt that much was accomplished during its existence. Once its purpose was completed, however, the committee went away, and I felt that the linkage between MPA programs and the state association suffered.

Cognitive Skills Are Key

While there should be more to a MPA degree than teaching a student "how to think," I strongly believe that the most important skills and capabilities that we can teach future public managers are cognitive—how to think about solving problems, analyzing evidence and data, deciding a course of action, and more. In addition, we must then teach students how to apply their new cognitive skills to real-world problems through case studies, internships, current event discussions, class speakers, and capstone projects.

I am not sure that any MPA program could adequately address the six mission-specific elective competencies from the ICMA and NASPAA (Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration) working group. Just the one competency of "managing local government core services and functions" raises all types of questions.

What are core services? Water production and distribution, wastewater collection and treatment, police and fire, parks, streets, drainage, code enforcement, zoning, economic development? In my graduate school experiences in the early 1970s, I learned little about these "core services," but I did learn about them quickly on the job. I just do not see how a standard 36- to 40-hour MPA curriculum could cover all the core services.

Evidence Available?

Is there evidence or data that demonstrate the under-performance of MPA programs today or that MPA degrees aren't useful today?

While I do not have a MPA but received a MPAff degree in 1973, my anecdotal perspective based on 30 years of local government experiences and 10 years of teaching MPA courses is that today's MPA curriculum is a better blend of academics and practice than it was 40 or 50 years ago. Consequently, I believe that graduates today tend to be better prepared than I was in 1973.

James Thurmond, Ph.D., ICMA Life Member, is director, MPA Program, University of Houston, Houston, Texas (jhthurmo@Central.UH.EDU).