Effective teaching and learning strategies through utilization of
learning outcomes and assessment strategies
The proposed Master of Arts degree in Public Administration (MPA) offers a
graduate degree program in the broad field of public administration for individuals
who are currently employed in the public, private, or nonprofit sectors and wish to
improve their administrative skills and knowledge.
The MPA cohort program also responds to recent political and administrative
challenges in Los Angeles County. With the changes in the Welfare Reform from
AFDC to the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families and greater reliance on
multi-agency activities, interagency cooperation has become increasingly
necessary. The MPA cohort program, by training the future generation of public
administrators and through incorporation of case studies and social welfare
issues with focus on Los Angeles County, can enable public sector
administrators in dealing with intra-and interagency political and policy issues.
Furthermore, public sector administrators and professionals must understand
how to develop effective public policy, design innovative programs based on that
policy to make the best use of limited public resources to meet increasingly
broad-ranging needs for services. The MPA cohort program is designed to
provide the skills needed for the managers and administrators in the Los Angeles
area. The MPA cohort program provides graduate students an understanding of
the institutional foundations and intellectual traditions of public administration and
policy and financial issues central to public service. Our students will interact in a
mutually reinforcing way, the academic study and professional practice of public
administration and policy.
This report provides the conceptual design of the MPA program for off-campus
sites and the assessment strategies utilized to measure student learning
outcomes and finally what changes we have implemented based on data
collected through our assessment activities.
Conceptual Design of the MPA Cohort program:
There are several key features in the conceptual design of the MPA cohort
program: 1) the use of multidisciplinary curriculum; 2) integration of case studies
combined with the cohort model format; and 3) added value of accessibility at offcampus site for mid-career professionals. Together, these features generate a
rich learning environment. To ensure that student teaching and learning were
effectively conducted, an assessment strategy was utilized based on
specific programmatic learning objectives and rubrics for assessment of
students papers.
Required Courses for the Off-campus cohorts:
The MPA cohort program is composed of 12 courses including the culminating
experience which consists of a comprehensive examination. The following
courses are offered at the off-campus sites and the assessment of teaching and
learning strategies were conducted through examination of students work from
the following courses.
Course
Title
Semester Units
MPA 610 – Seminar in Public Administration and Its Environment
MPA 620 – Research Methods for Public Administration
MPA 630 – Organization Theory & Human Behavior
MPA 643 – Human Resources Management
MPA 650 – Public Policy Process
MPA 640 – Public Policy Analysis
MPA 622A – Policy Implementation and Program Evaluation
MPA 642A – Ethics & Professionalism
MPA 644 – Public Budgeting and Financial Administration
MPA 632B – Strategic Management
MPA 660 – Integrative Seminar
MPA 697S- Comprehensive Examination
TOTAL UNITS
36
This section describes specific programmatic learning objectives.
The Educational Goals of the CSUN MPA Program:
The educational goals of the MPA program focus on the skills, abilities, and
habits of mind that a public and non-profit sectors professional would need to act
in a leadership role in public sector and non-profit administrative service.
Through the MPA program a program graduate should:
Learning Objectives #1:
Gain the ability to critically analyze, create or improve, and implement,
effective public policy in public sector programs and services.
Rubrics:
1. Show that you are able to conceptualize and specifically identify a
substantively important policy or organizational problem (level 1).
2. Identify specific policy alternatives and solutions (level 2).
3. Describe and prescribe an appropriate policy recommendation (level 3).
Learning Objectives #2:
Acquire the foundation knowledge needed to understand the distinctive
character and responsibilities of public sector administration in a
democratic society.
Rubrics:
1. Discuss accurately and in details the theories in public administration and
policy and their relevance to the real world policy and organizational
problems (level 1).
2. Use public administration concepts in meaningful and accurate ways to
analyze distinctive character and responsibilities of public sector
administrators (level 1).
3. Discuss the specific public administration value conflicts and dilemmas
that administrators encounter in decision making (level 2).
Learning Objectives #3:
Acquire the breadth and depth of knowledge about the challenges and model
practices of contemporary public sector administration needed to be effective
in that context.
Rubrics:
1. Make accurate and detailed social scientific observations about a series of
public sector problems and issues (level 1).
2. Using scientific or systematic analysis, describe leadership and
management approaches to solving these problems (level 2).
Learning Objectives #4:
Acquire an understanding of the special challenges and opportunities of
public sector administration in a diverse urban context.
Rubrics:
1. Through reliance on various social, policy and organizational variables,
discuss emerging policy issues in the region (level 2).
2. Linking these variables, provide a specific unitary approach in solving
social, political, policy and organizational problems in the region (level 3).
Learning Objectives #5:
Develop the skills and theoretical knowledge needed to redesign public sector
organizations, staff and delivery systems; as well as develop an
understanding of the importance of cooperative and collaboration across unit
lines and with external and community partners.
Rubrics:
1. Use various models and theories in organizational leadership to analyze
effective management of a public sector organization (level 1).
2. Show that you can identify specific public sector issues and problems
across units (level 1).
3. Show that you can link and interconnect these problems across different
units and problems/issues (level 1).
4. Show that you can develop specific solutions to these problems through
cooperative and collaborative strategies across various organizational
units and policy domains (level 2).
5. Apply organizational management principles and models to develop a plan
for managing small, midsize and large public and non-profit organizations
(level 2).
Learning Objectives #6:
Refine the ethical reasoning skills needed to address the complex value
challenges that face those in public sector administration.
Rubrics:
1. After clearly identifying an ethical issue in the public sector, demonstrate
the systematic reasoning necessary for making decisions (level 1).
2. Through reliance on ethical principles in public administration and
collaborative reasoning with peers, develop an ethical model of conduct
for particular public sector ethical dilemmas (level 2).
3. Express your own ethical reasoning and justification of policy decisions
and their impact on others (level 3).
Learning Objectives #7:
Develop foundation of financial management skills needed to critically
analyze, develop, implement, and openly and ethically manage budgets and
resources in the public sector.
Rubrics:
1. Use concepts, theories, and models of financial management for
understanding budget documents as social and policy choices (level 1).
2. Analyze different components of a budgetary document, and through
ethical policy decisions present an alternative financial document (level 2).
3. Working with diverse individuals, teams and organizational units develop a
budget document incorporating others concerns and priorities (level 3).
Learning Objectives #8:
Develop the foundation skills and abilities needed to address the essential
issues of human resources management to build a strong and effective team
in the public sector through: effective hiring, staff development, staff
evaluation, staff discipline and performance correction and dismissal.
Rubrics:
1. Make accurate and detailed observations that will allow you recognize and
outline patterns of human resources practice (level 1).
2. Develop effective procedures for hiring practices while maintaining ethical
standards and best practices in the public sector (level 2).
3. Describe current practices as to how can human resources management
resolve cultural conflicts within a public sector (level 3).
4. Analyze the interdependence of people in a public organizational context;
Identify potential issues and conflicts; propose specific solutions to these
situations (level 3).
Learning Objectives #9:
Develop advanced communication skills needed for leadership in the public
sector: strong oral communication skills in small groups and in larger public
contexts. Strong written communication and skills appropriate for writing
reports, explaining issues and policies, persuasively presenting initiatives,
corresponding with colleagues and clients, and media communications.
Rubrics:
1. As a professional, develop the ability to communicate observations and
beliefs concerning public policy to others (level 1).
2. As a professional, develop the critical skills to think clearly and critically to
fuse experience, reason, and training into considered judgments (level 1).
3. As a professional, assess and determine a problem and its causes, form
strategies that work on different situations to solve the problem, and act on
these strategies and evaluate their effectiveness (level 2).
4. As a professional, facilitate communication to encourage a variety of ideas
and opinions and write clearly and to the point as well as effectively
present ideas and arguments orally (level 3).
Learning Objectives #10:
Develop a commitment to and a facility for ongoing learning through a variety
of formal and informal modes. Develop the ability to assess the credibility of
various information sources.
Rubrics:
1. Show that you can relate previous experience and knowledge to a new
situation and problem (level 1).
2. Show that you can use a variety of arguments simultaneously to analyze a
specific issue (level 2).
3. Show that you can use and apply social science methods to verify the
credibility of information (level 3).
Analysis of Rubrics:
Level 1: Show observational skills, Draw reasonable inferences
Level 2: Perceive and make relationships, Analyze structure and organization
Level 3: Employ multidisciplinary framework in order to analyze, establish
linkages between theory and practice as well as between multiple policy
problems and issues
The matrix below illustrates how the content and instructional strategies of all the
courses in the MPA cover the 10 educational goals of the MPA program. While
different courses in the program emphasize different components of the
educational goals of the overall program, the program is designed to achieve its
educational goals by addressing those goals repeatedly within different contexts
and with increasing levels of sophistication as a student moves through the
cohort.
On the chart below an “X” indicates that the educational goal is given primary
emphasis in the course. A “^” indicates that the educational goal is addressed
in the course.
Course No.
MPA 610
MPA 620
MPA 630
MPA 643
MPA 640
MPA 644
MPA 650
MPA 660
MPA 612A
Course Title
Public Administration & Its
Environment
Research Methods for Public
Administration
Organization Theory & Behavior
Human Resource Management
Public Policy Analysis
Public Budgeting & Financial
Management
Public Policy Process
Integrative Seminar
Intergovernmental Relations
1
2
Program Outcomes
3 4 5 6 7 8
9
10
^
x
^ X X ^
X
X
X ^ ^ X
^
^ ^
^
X ^
X X
^
X ^
^ ^ x
X X
^
X X X
^ ^ ^
^ ^
X ^
^
^
MPA 612B
MPA 622A
MPA 622B
MPA 632A
MPA 632B
MPA 632C
MPA 632D
MPA 642A
MPA 642B
MPA 642C
MPA 642D
MPA 652A
MPA 697S
MPA 698S
Comparative Public Policy &
Management
Policy Implementation & Evaluation
Management of Information Resources
Organizational Leadership
Strategic Management
Communication in Public Organization
Management of Nonprofit
Organizations
Ethics and Professionalism
Public Sector Labor Relations
Public Entrepreneurial Management
Community & Economic Development
Administrative Law
Comprehensive Examination
Preparation
Graduate Project
X ^ X ^
X X ^ ^
^
X ^
X ^
^ ^
X X
^ ^ ^ ^
^ ^ X
^
^
^
^
^ ^
X
X ^
X X
X X X
^
^
x
^
X
^
^
X
^
X
X
^
^
^
X
^
Evaluation of Student Learning & Program Assessment:
Each course in the program has key assignments tied to the emphasized
learning objectives of that course. These assignments are designed to allow the
student to demonstrate the specific knowledge, critical skills, and professional
abilities each course is designed to foster.
Instructors provide feedback to the students after each assignment. Feedback
includes written comments, grades, and one-on-one consultation and guidance.
Because the cohort program schedule is defined from the outset of the program,
faculty time is not needed for traditional academic advising. Instead, the faculty
in the cohort program work with the director to develop on-line, and/or in person
consultation times (on site during scheduled times slots before and/or after the
class meeting) that focus on helping the student to become an active partner in
his or her own education – developing an understanding of areas of strength and
weakness, developing a plan to build on strengths and address weaknesses
through independent, supplemental, or tutorial instruction.
The cohort MPA is developing new rubrics to be used to analyze student
performance on written and oral communications assignments across all courses
in the curriculum so that students get the comprehensive and cohesive feedback
needed to refine and advance critical skills from course to course throughout the
program.
In the MPA cohort program, student success has additional significance because
students do not have easy options for repeating courses or shifting majors.
Therefore, extra care is taken by the faculty and the program director. The
faculty and the director work together to identify any weakness in student
learning as early as possible and to offer that student the individual guidance and
coaching needed to allow weaknesses to be addressed systematically so this do
not impede the student’s ability to move forward successfully with the cohort if at
all possible.
Oversight of the MPA program is provided by the program director and the MPA
Program Advisory Board (PAB) that comprises faculty representatives from each
of the academic departments that are represented in the MPA program. Each
PAB departmental representative is nominated by the department chair and
approved by the dean of The Tseng College. The PAB also includes the MPA
program director and two accomplished senior public sector professionals widely
respected among regional peer professionals who assist the director in
identifying these members. The PAB is charged with ongoing review and
improvement of the MPA program.
As indicated, each course in the MPA program has two to four key assignments
tied to the learning objectives emphasized in that course. These assignments
are designed as a collaborative effort with the faculty members teaching in the
program working collaboratively with the PAB and the MPA director. A random
sampling of 20 percent of student work from each of these key assignments will
be collected and reviewed by the MPA program director and by the PAB each
year. The purpose of this review is to determine how effective each course is in
fostering the intended student outcome at the intended level.
When key assignments are changed or updated, the PAB and the director use
the first class assessment to develop a set of standards and essential
performance indicators that become the evaluation guide for that key
assignment. The evaluation guide (rubric or matrix) thus developed is used both
by the director and the PAB to determine the program’s effectiveness in fostering
student learning. The instructor in each course can use the relevant guides to
evaluate and grade student learning.
If the PAB’s review of the key assignments reveal that students are not
demonstrating the knowledge, conceptual skills, and abilities expected, the PAB
is charged with identifying a faculty team to work with the MPA director to
redesign the course curriculum with emphasis on improving the course or some
of its components in light of the learning shortfalls revealed by a review of
student work on the key assignments. The overall MPA budget includes funds to
cover any necessary redesign of courses.
The Assessment Process:
The assessment process for the MPA cohort program will proceed along the
following timeline:
Student Assessment
Students are provided with a portfolio folder divided into the separate sections
based on their classes. Students will maintain a portfolio of all work in each
course in the cohort. Every class assignment will be assessed based on specific
criteria drawn from the learning objectives for that course and built into each
syllabus. Using these criteria, each faculty member will provide students with
specific comments on their strength and weakness on each assignment. For
example, a faculty member teaching MPA 610 will look in student’s projects for a
clearly focused and researchable public policy or public administration question
with a supporting literature and relevant data as well as effective writing skills.
Students will conceptualize a specific policy issue or organizational problem and
by using course concepts and typologies they will describe the problem. At the
end of the class students will be asked to present their work orally which will then
be assessed by the faculty based on the specific rubric for effective public
speaking. The faculty member, using these specific criteria, will assess whether
each student’s presentation clearly articulates the relationships between
ideas/concepts out of an academic framework and those from his/her own
thinking.
As a context for evaluating student learning, we rely on multidimensional
assessment based on each course’s learning objectives. In this process,
students have several opportunities to demonstrate specific abilities that they
possess vis-à-vis MPA’s programmatic engagement of students in multiple ways
such as writing, public speaking, problem solving and analysis.
At the end of each class, students will be provided with specific comments on
strengths and weaknesses of their written work as well as any oral presentations.
This information will be available in each student’s portfolio which will provide to
students feedback on their level of work and performance. The MPA director
along with the faculty will review student portfolios at the end of each course,
assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the work done by students.
This process impels students to continually improve their learning skills. Finally, a
sampling of student work in MPA 660 Integrative Seminar and in the Graduate
Thesis Project give the director and the PAB a good opportunity to review how
well the program has prepared students to draw together the more complete
educational experience of the overall MPA program and apply them to complex
and real world challenges drawn directly from professional practice. There is
also an opportunity to see how well the program has prepared students to be
independent learners able to sort from the complex world of practice powerful
questions and conduct the research and information gathering needed to
consider such a question fully and to shape policies, practices, or initiatives
attuned to the realities of contemporary professional practice and informed by the
best in scholarship. The PAB’s assessment of a sampling of the work from MPA
660 and a selection of the complete thesis projects provides insights into the
ability of the MPA program to provide a comprehensive and integrated
educational experience able to achieve all 11 program goals. If the PAB detects
shortfalls in student work at this level, a more systematic look at the overall
program curriculum would be required to correct the weaknesses.
Students
Students will proactively monitor their own progress in gaining the knowledge,
skills, and abilities needed to become effective managers in the public sector
based on the feedback provided by the faculty member in each course. Students
can track their own performance and improvement as they go through the
program by relying on specific comments from the faculty. Using this feedback
from the faculty and the MPA director, students can work on and closely monitor
their own improvement. Students, also, will have the opportunity to provide
feedback to the MPA director regarding learning objectives for each class.
Faculty Assessment
After consultation with the faculty and closely monitoring and assessing students
learning abilities based on their overall strengths and weaknesses, the director of
the MPA program will contact the faculty member teaching the following class. At
this point, the faculty member teaching the next course may be asked to change
his/her assignments in order to place greater emphasis requiring students to
make improvements on weaknesses seen in the first level assessment. The MPA
director can discuss with the faculty teaching later classes to place a greater
emphasis on student weaknesses through more assignments and other class
work. This will provide the opportunity to make necessary changes in order to
improve student learning specifically in areas that are perceived to require the
greatest need. This information also can be used for redesigning of course syllabi
and changing specific assignments for the purpose of improving student learning.
MPA Director and Faculty Development
The MPA director will use assessment data to encourage faculty to make
changes in their syllabi assignments and projects and to provide
recommendations to the Advisory Committee for curricular and programmatic
changes when necessary.
MPA Director and Advisory Committee
The MPA director and Advisory Committee will use assessment data to make
curricular and programmatic changes when necessary and appropriate to align
coursework and program content with learning objectives. The MPA director and
Advisory Committee will ensure that students are achieving a more sophisticated
level of understanding and skills as they progress in the cohort toward
graduation. The MPA director and Advisory Committee will create faculty training
and development events when necessary and appropriate to ensure that faculty
are properly assessing student performance based on MPA learning objectives.
(Every five years a panel of experts in public sector—both academics and
practitioners—will assess a randomly selected sample of student work from the
MPA cohort program in order to provide feedback for curricular changes).
Outside Assessment Committee of Academics and Practitioners
The Outside Assessment Committee of Academics and Practitioners will ensure
that the program is teaching the appropriate skills and knowledge needed in the
public sector milieu at the time. The Outside Assessment Committee of
Academics and Practitioners will comment on whether the MPA learning objects
are still current and appropriate.
The Outside Assessment Committee of Academics and Practitioners will provide
feedback on whether assignments are preparing MPA students to apply their
academic knowledge to the current public sector environment based on MPA
learning objectives.
Faculty
Assessment
of Students
Student
SelfAssessment
Faculty
Feedback to
MPA
Director
MPA
Director
Feedback to
Faculty
MPA Cohort – Assessment Summary Grid
Level 1 – Course Level Assessment
Step 1
• Upon enrollment, students are provided with a
portfolio folder divided into 11 sections, one for each
course in the MPA program.
Step 2
• Class assignments are assessed based on specific
rubric tied to the learning objectives.
Step 3
• Students are provided with specific comments on
their strengths and weaknesses on each assignment
based on the rubric.
Step 4
• Faculty provides feedback to students on their oral
and written work using the rubric.
Step 1
• Students use the feedback, based on the specific
course rubric provided, to reflect, improve and
change their work.
Step 1
• Faculty informs the MPA director on weaknesses and
strengths of students’ work on their assignments
based on the learning objectives and criteria on
assessment.
Step 1
• The director of program contacts faculty teaching the
next class to provide assessment information gleaned
from previous course.
Step 2
• Faculty adjusts syllabus to ensure issues reported in
faculty feedback from the previous class have been
addressed.
Step 3
• Faculty changes class assignments after consultation
with the director, placing focus on weaknesses from
the previous class.
Step 4
• Director, using assessment data based on the
feedback provided to students in their portfolio,
encourages faculty to make changes to their syllabi.
Level 2 – Program Level Assessment
MPA
Director
and
Advisory
Committee
Outside
Academic &
Practitioner
Assessment
Committee
MPA
Program
Review
Step 1
•
The MPA director and Advisory Committee use
portfolio assessment data to make curricular and
programmatic changes to ensure alignment of
program content with learning objectives.
Step 2
• The MPA Director and Advisory Committee create
faculty training and development events to enhance
learning effectiveness.
Step 1
• After reviewing students’ portfolio assessment data,
the committee determines whether MPA is teaching
appropriate skills and knowledge needed in public
sector milieu at the time.
Step 2
• The committee provides feedback on appropriateness
and effectiveness of assignments and syllabi.
Step 3
• The committee will guide curricular changes to
continue improve assessment and learning foci.
Level 3 – External Reviewers & Program Assessment
Step 1
• External reviewers, examining students’ portfolios
and faculty feedback, will provide perspective on the
strengths and weaknesses of students’ work.
Step 2
• External reviewers, after examination of course
syllabi and program self-study report, make
suggestions that will promote alignment of program
curricula with learning objectives.
Once every five years, the MPA undergoes a full formal program review that
includes external reviewers who are asked to look at student work on the key
assignments and provide feedback on strengths and possible areas for program
improvements. External reviewers also look at the program self-study report,
course syllabi, and other program documents to render a more well-rounded
assessment of the program to guide curriculum change.
In addition, periodically, The Tseng College funds a complete program redesign
that looks not only at needed changes in individual courses but questions more
comprehensively whether or not the program’s educational goals overall, its
focus, and its courses still provide the best possible preparation for public sector
leadership in the contemporary and changing context of practice. The Tseng
College along with the MPA director and the PAB will be undertaking such full
comprehensive curriculum reconsideration during the 2004/2005 academic year
based on feedback received from the five-year review. $55,000 has been set
aside in The Tseng College budget for the year to fund the broad faculty effort
needed for this level of program reconsideration. While individual faculty or
faculty teams might be asked to develop new course components or create new
key assignments, the effort will emphasize a program level perspectives that
ensures the courses work together to achieve overall program goals.
Realignment of programmatic components with Learning Objectives
Course
No.
MPA 610
MPA 620
MPA 630
MPA 643
MPA 650
MPA 640
MPA 644
Course Title
Public Administration & Its
Environment
Research Methods for Public
Administration
Organization Theory &
Behavior
Human Resource
Management
Public Policy Process
Public Policy Analysis
Public Budgeting & Financial
Management
Integrative Seminar
Comprehensive Exam
1
2
3
I
I
Curriculum Alignment Matrix
4
5
6 7
8
9
I/P
P/D
P/D
I
D P
MPA 660
D
MPA
697S
I= Introduced, P= Practiced, D= Demonstrated
11
I/P
I
I
I
10
I/P
I/P
P/D
P/D
I
I/P
P
P/D
D
Lessons Learned and Curricular Changes to the Program
Our continuous assessment of teaching and learning along with changes in the
programmatic learning objectives came about by collecting continuous data from
two core courses in the MPA program. The program advisory board working with
faculty and the director of the program decided to pick two courses, MPA 610 –
Public Administration and Its Environment and MPA 630 – Organization Theory
and Human Behavior, as the main courses that they will be assessed
continuously. The main reason for choosing MPA 610 course was that this
particular course is a mandatory field for the final comprehensive examination
area. So, students in the program are required to take a final comprehensive
examination in three specific fields and one of the fields is the general field of
public administration (MPA 610). Thus the papers and assignments of this
course have been systematically assessed for the past few years. Also, choosing
this course allows the advisory board, assessment committee and the director of
the program to identify the weaknesses and strengths in teaching and learning
material in the general field thus completing 360-degree evaluation.
MPA 610 learning objective and rubrics are Learning Objectives #2:
Acquire the foundation knowledge needed to understand the distinctive
character and responsibilities of public sector administration in a
democratic society.
Rubrics:
1. Discuss accurately and in details the theories in public administration and
policy and their relevance to the real world policy and organizational
problems (level 1).
2. Use public administration concepts in meaningful and accurate ways to
analyze distinctive character and responsibilities of public sector
administrators (level 1).
3. Discuss the specific public administration value conflicts and dilemmas
that administrators encounter in decision-making (level 2).
FINDINGS:
1. Citation of sources were done appropriately because the program requires
that every student to purchase a citation manual to follow APA, MLA or
Chicago manual of writing styles.
2. Students are required to conduct literature review of articles and books so
they can become familiar with the latest theories ideas and arguments in
the field of public administration. Conducting literature review is
assignments that require literary comparison of different positions is
essential for students’ preparation of the final comprehensive examination
and improvement of their knowledge of the field of public administration.
Students are also encouraged to conduct interviews or use secondary
data to see whether some of the theories and ideas expressed in the
literature can be applied and utilized in the world of public administration
practice. This practice allows students to develop and identify application
of theories to the real world of administrative practices.
3. Use of rubrics has allowed faculty to use formative assessment strategies
by adjusting the assignments in order to guarantee that learning is
happening in classrooms.
4. From a programmatic perspective use of summative methods has allowed
to measure the pass/fail rate on the comprehensive examination process.
As a program we have been able to make adjustments and share data
with faculty on how are students doing on their final comprehensive
examination, where are the weaknesses and what are challenges with
learning. Thus faculties have been able to adjust their readings and
lectures and class assignments to make sure that certain field related
theoretical ideas are being understood. For example, in the
comprehensive exam we ask students to discuss how public
administration can become better public servants considering that they
have to consider the idea of politics within the administrative process. The
readings suggest that Woodrow Wilson argued and make an effort to
show that administration and politics (legislative decisions or policy
making) can be separated. The final examination question is asking
students to identify the flaws in this modality of thinking and what
examples they can provide that show politics and administration can’t be
separated from each other. Initially we would see that students could not
identify some of the fundamental theoretical issues, but after holding
number of faculty meetings, we were able to convey the message to
faculty thus changing readings and assignments that reflect this and
enhances students learning in this area.
5. Faculty use mini-assignments based on the study guide provided to each
faculty so they ask students apply some of the theories to the actual final
exam questions. This way we can assess whether students and whether
they can apply some of this knowledge to specific type of questions that
might come up during the comprehensive exam comprehend basic ideas
and concepts.
6. Another finding was that students entering the program and taking their
first class have weaker writing skills. Many faculty have redesigned their
assignments that reflects heavier writing so we can address some of these
concerns.
7. Another major finding was that some of the programmatic learning
objectives and rubrics were not designed appropriately and we had to
make changes in the language and definition of these objectives so it
reflects through assessment of what we would like students to learn.
Below we have included changes that we have made to the programmatic
learning objectives and rubrics.
Based on the feedback that we have received a closely working with the faculty
advisory board, we had to make minor changes to the learning objectives and
rubrics for the MPA program. Also, during the review phase of the learning
objectives the faculty advisory board and assessment committee noticed
discrepencies in the learning objectives and since then they have recommended
changes which are being discussed below.
Revisions and Recommendations:
The current configuration of program outcomes, both “Primary” and
“Addressed” is good, with no changes recommended. However, I would
recommend revisions to some of the Learning Objectives and Rubrics.
Revisions are in bold italics
Learning Objective #1: (Primary)
Gain the ability to critically analyze, create or improve and implement effective
public policy in public sector programs and services.
Gain the ability to critically analyze, create or strategically develop and
implement effective policy in public sector programs and services.
Comments: As revised, this Learning Objective is given a broader scope
and can be used as a better Primary Objective for many MPA courses.
Rubrics:
1. Show that you are able to conceptualize and specifically identify a
substantively important policy or organizational problem (level 1).
2. Identify specific policy alternatives and solutions (level 2).
3. Describe and prescribe an appropriate policy recommendation (level 3).
Describe and prescribe an appropriate approach to public sector
policy implementation (level 3)
4. Upon determining organizational challenges and their causes,
determine effective strategies, goals and objectives to meet these
challenges, and evaluate their effectiveness (level 3).
Comments: With specific regard to “Analysis of Rubrics”, we feel that there
is not enough clear distinction among the three levels. With many of the
Rubrics, the various level actions are used almost interchangeably, i.e., to
develop, discuss, analyze, seems to be implied at every level. As written,
Rubric 3is not distinct and appears to be another level 1 or 2.
With specific regard to Rubric 3, above, perhaps level 3 should mean to
extend beyond simply discussing, describing a policy recommendation,
which are used for both levels 1 & 2, and should be geared more toward
approaches to actual policy implementation. Rubric 4 above has been
added to this objective as a rewrite from Objective #9.
Learning Objective #2 (Addressed)
Acquire the foundation knowledge needed to understand the distinctive character
and responsibilities of public sector administration in a democratic society.
Rubrics:
1. Discuss accurately and in details the theories in public administration and
policy and their relevance to the real world policy and organizational
problems (level 1).
Accurately discuss public administration theories and their
relevance to real-world policy and organizational problems (level 1).
2. Use public administration concepts in meaningful and accurate ways to
analyze distinctive character and responsibilities of public administrators
(level 1).
Use public administration concepts in meaningful, accurate ways to
analyze distinctive ethical character traits and responsibilities of
effective public administrators (level 1).
3. Discuss the specific public administration value conflicts and dilemmas
that administrators encounter in decision making (level 2).
Discuss the challenging nature of specific conflicts and dilemmas
confronting public administrators, and the best approaches to
managing these issues with ethical integrity (level 3).
Comments: No change to the Learning Objective. Revising the wording of
the Rubrics adds clarity, and greater emphasis on the importance of ethical
character. Rubric 3 is elevated to a “level 3,” as it now does more than
“discuss”, but hopefully encourages applicable “approaches” to actually
managing these ethical conflicts and dilemmas.
Learning Objective #5 (Primary)
Develop the skills and theoretical knowledge needed to redesign public sector
organizations, staff and delivery systems; as well as develop an understanding of
the importance of cooperative and collaboration across unit lines and with
external community partners.
Develop the skills and theoretical knowledge needed to redesign public
sector organizations, resources, and delivery systems. Understand the
importance of cooperation within the organization and collaboration with
community partners and external stakeholders.
Comments: “unit lines” is unclear, and students have asked what this
means. (we had to clarify this). The revision may clarify this. The revision
also broadens the objective to include “external stakeholders”, e.g.,
politicians, media, and contractors.
Rubrics: (Objective #5 cont’)
1. Use various models and theories in organizational leadership to analyze
effective management of a public sector organization (level 1).
2. Show that you can identify specific public sector issues and problems
across units (level 1).
Remove
3. Show that you can link and interconnect these problems across different
units and
problems/issues (level 1).
Remove
4. Show that you can develop specific solutions to these problems through
cooperative and collaborative strategies across various units and policy
domains (level 2).
Comprehensively show that you can develop solutions to these
problems through cooperative and collaborative strategies inside the
organization and with external stakeholders (level 2).
5. Apply organizational management principles and models to develop a plan
for managing small, midsize and large public and non-profit organizations
(level 2).
Identify and apply best practices, management principles, and
models, to strategically change and improve a public/non-profit
organization (level 3).
Comments: Rubrics 2, 3, & 4 basically all say the same thing. Recommend
removing Rubrics 2 & 3, and revise Rubric 4 to capture the intent of all
three rubrics and clarify references to “units”. Revise wording on Rubric 5.
No need to designate organizations as small, midsize and large. Elevate to
an application “ level 3”.
Learning Objective #6 (Addressed)
Refine the ethical reasoning skills needed to address the complex value
challenges that face those in public sector administration.
Rubrics:
1. After clearly identifying an ethical issue in the public sector, demonstrate
the systematic reasoning necessary for making decisions (level1).
2. Through reliance on ethical principles in public administration and
collaborative reasoning with peers, develop an ethical model of conduct
for particular public sector ethical dilemmas.
3. Express your own ethical reasoning and justification of policy decisions
and their impact on others (level 3).
Comments: No recommended changes
Learning Objective #9 (Addressed)
Develop advanced communication skills needed for leadership in the public
sector: strong oral communication skills in small and in larger public contexts.
Strong written communication and skills appropriate for writing reports, explaining
issues and policies, persuasively presenting initiatives, corresponding with
colleagues and clients and media communications.
Develop advanced communication skills needed for leadership in the
public sector. Demonstrate strong oral communication skills, as well as
strong written communication skills appropriate for writing reports,
explaining issues and policies, persuasively presenting initiatives,
corresponding with colleagues, clients, and media relations.
Comments: Recommend changes to improve syntax.
Rubrics:
1. As a professional, develop the critical skills to think clearly and critically to
fuse experience, reason, and training into considered judgments (level 1).
Develop the critical skills to think clearly and critically to integrate
theory, experience, reason, and training into making appropriate
communication judgments (level 1).
2. As a professional, develop the ability to communicate observations and
beliefs concerning public policy to others (level 1).
Develop the ability to communicate observations and beliefs
concerning public policy to others (level 1).
3. As a professional, assess and determine a problem and its causes, form
strategies that work on different situations to solve the problem, and act on
these strategies and evaluate their effectiveness (level 2)
Remove – The focus of this Learning Objective is oral and written
communication, and this Rubric clearly does not fit that Learning
Objective. However, this Rubric would be an excellent fit for
Learning Objective 1. Recommend that this rubric be revised and
moved to Learning Objective 1, as Rubric 4.
4. As a professional, facilitate communication to encourage a variety of ideas
and opinions and write clearly and to the point as well as effectively
present ideas and arguments orally (level 3)
Facilitate communication to encourage a variety of ideas and
opinions and write clearly and to the point as well as effectively
present ideas and arguments orally (level 3).
Learning Objective #9 cont’
Comments: Rubric format of this Objective seems awkward, as all begin
with “As a professional” (similar to Objective 10 where all begin with
“Show that you”). Recommend revising the wording to add more of a
feeling of overall continuity to the writing style of the document.
The bigger concern with this Learning Objective is that some of the
Rubrics don’t match the Objective. The primary focus of this Learning
Objective is to develop “strong oral” and “written communication skills.”
As currently written, Rubric 1 lacks a communication nexus, and has been
revised to establish this relationship. Rubric 3 focuses on assessing
problems and strategically developing solutions. We recommend that this
Rubric be removed, revised, and added to Learning Objective 1, where it is
a very good fit.
MPA 632B, Strategic Management
Current Program Outcomes – “Primary Emphasis” Learning Objectives 4 &
5 “Addressed in the Course” Learning Objectives 1, 2, & 9.
Revised Program Outcomes – “Primary Emphasis” Learning Objectives 1 &
5 “Addressed in the Course” Learning Objectives 2, 4 & 9.
Comments: I am recommending changes to the current Program
Outcomes of MPA 632B Strategic Management. Change Learning
Objective 4 from “Primary” to “Addressed in the Course.” Change
Learning Objective 1 from “Addressed in the Course” to “Primary
Emphasis.”
Changes have been made above to Learning Objectives 1, 5, 2, & 9, which
are Program Outcomes for MPA 632A, Organizational Leadership. All
changes have been made with both classes in mind (as well as other
courses in the curriculum). Learning Objective 4 is “Addressed” in
Strategic Management, and is acceptable as written.
MPA 642A, Ethics and Professionalism
Current Program Outcomes – “Primary Emphasis” Learning Objective 8
“Addressed in the Course” - Learning Objectives 2, & 5.
Revised Program Outcomes – “Primary Emphasis” Learning Objectives 2 &
6
“Addressed in the Course” - Learning Objective 5.
Comments: The current Primary Emphasis for this course is Objective 8. I
believe this was simply an oversight error, as Objective 8 is clearly
designed as a Learning Objective for Human Resources courses. I
recommend that the revised Primary Emphasis Learning Objectives for
MPA 642A, Ethics and Professionalism, be changed to Learning Objectives
2 & 6. Learning Objective 5 remains “Addressed in the Course”. Learning
Objectives 2, 5, and 6 have been revised above to reflect these changes.
Miscellaneous Changes
As a follow up to a comment made regarding Objective 10, I recommend that the
Rubrics be revised as follows:
Rubrics:
1. Show that you can relate previous experience and knowledge to a new
situation and problem (level 1).
2. Show that you can use a variety of arguments simultaneously to analyze a
specific issue (level 2).
Demonstrate the ability to use a variety of arguments simultaneously
to analyze a specific issue (level 2).
3. Show that you can use and apply social science methods to verify the
credibility of information (level 3)
Apply appropriate social science methods to verify the credibility of
information (level 3).