Moving to Corporate Governance of the Curriculum for the Professional MPA/MPP

Transcription

1 Improving administration and governance in nonprofit organizations Mail: 9219 Mintwood Street, Silver Spring, MD Phone: Fax: Web: White Paper Moving to Corporate Governance of the Curriculum for the Professional MPA/MPP Introduction This white paper presents an alternative approach to governing the MPA/MPP curriculum in U.S. professional schools of public affairs (including public policy and public administration). A primary goal of corporate governance is to strengthen the brand identity of a school in the minds of prospective students and other constituencies. Corporate governance offers a systematic means for continuous improvements in course content and ensures that the quality of the degree program varies as little as possible when inevitable faculty turnover occurs. Corporate governance also may greatly reduce the work load related to instructional preparation for newly hired faculty (especially junior faculty). The white paper first characterizes how the MPA/MPP curriculum currently is governed in most U.S. schools of public affairs. The paper then explains corporate governance as an alternative, and explores the benefits of corporate governance. Finally, the paper considers the challenges that must be surmounted to transition to corporate governance. Individual Governance of the MPA/MPP Curriculum U.S. professional schools of public affairs (including public policy and public administration) emerged out of the social and behavioral sciences starting around 80 years ago. Some of the schools grew out of political science, while others were founded by faculty with a background in applied economics. Today, most of the faculty members of the schools are recruited out of the social sciences, with political science, economics, and sociology being the three most prevalent sources. These faculty members bring with them a tradition of individual governance of the curriculum that prevails throughout the social sciences and other research disciplines. The elements of individual governance of the curriculum are as follows: IG-1. The content of each course assigned to a specific instructor largely is under the control of that instructor. Certainly the dean/director and other faculty can seek to persuade the instructor to adopt specific curriculum elements, but the final decisions about course content are made by the instructor and reflect the instructor s individual preferences and beliefs about the purpose of the course within the degree program.

2 October 2011, Page 2 of 5 IG-2. IG-3. IG-4. The course syllabus generally is deemed to be the intellectual property of the course instructor and not the school, and the instructor has the right to take the syllabus to another university in the event of obtaining employment at that other university. The content of a course might change considerably as a result of faculty turnover, and different cohorts of MPA/MPP students may discern that they experienced very different curricula even as the titles of their courses remained constant. Curriculum innovation/reform within the school more often involves developing new courses or approving new combinations of courses in specializations, tracks, concentrations or stand-alone degree programs, than it does delving into the contents of existing courses. Under a regime of individual governance, it is difficult to make the claim that a school has control over the MPA/MPP curriculum in a manner consistent with fulfilling the role of a professional school. Offering professional education requires meeting expectations that the quality of the educational experience will be reasonably consistent over time, with curriculum content continuously monitored and adjusted to meet the evolving needs of the profession. Under individual governance, the school does not have the means to guarantee that these standards will be met. Under a regime of individual governance, a school may have difficulty establishing its brand identity through its MPA/MPP curriculum. Course instructors may not offer curriculum content consistent with the goals of the brand identity, instructors may take syllabi with them when they move to other universities, and there is no guarantee of the coordination among courses necessary to build a brand identity. This implicit comparison to private sector operations may raise some concerns, but there is a valid reason why successful corporations develop and zealously guard their brand identity that identity is one of their most important assets when competing in the marketplace. Ongoing recruitment of new faculty from within the social science disciplines requires such faculty members to prepare to teach in a curriculum environment for which their doctoral program experience may have not offered much training or resources. Individual governance of the MPA/MPP curriculum may place a heavier teaching burden on new faculty (especially junior faculty) compared with faculty positions in the home disciplines. While schools of public affairs may offer higher salaries than do many social science departments, the additional financial incentives cannot fully compensate for the extra time new faculty must devote to preparing to teach in the MPA/MPP context. Taking into account the rigors of the current tenure and promotion process, it may be difficult for new faculty ever to justify the extra time required for such course preparation. This in turn may influence the investments faculty members are willing to make in course preparation, with negative consequences for curriculum quality and brand identity.

3 October 2011, Page 3 of 5 Components of Corporate Governance of the Curriculum Corporate governance of the MPA/MPP curriculum shifts the locus of such governance from the individual instructor to a school s faculty as a corporate decision making body. Under corporate governance, the faculty makes consensual decisions about the teaching objectives of most of the courses in the degree program down to the level of individual course syllabi. The elements of corporate governance of the curriculum are as follows: CG-1. CG-2. CG-3. CG-4. The content of each course is under the control of the faculty and the faculty collectively determines course objectives and all relate details. The school then provides instructors with syllabi, lecture notes and exhibits, examination question vaults, and other resources to deliver each course in a manner consistent with the mandate from the faculty and the overall brand identity of the MPA/MPP program. The course syllabus generally is deemed to be the intellectual property of the school and not the instructor, and the instructor does not have the right to take the syllabus to another university in the event of obtaining employment at that other university. Certainly, a school could grant permission for such use, perhaps in return for acknowledgement as to the source. The content of a course should not change as a result of faculty turnover, and different cohorts of MPA/MPP students should discern that they experienced very similar curricula. Curriculum innovation/reform regularly involves reviewing the contents of existing courses to verify that the courses meet the evolving needs of the profession. Such reviews might be assigned to teams within the faculty best suited to evaluating curriculum imperatives and making recommendations to the entire faculty about adjustments to specific courses. The reviews might occur in a regular cycle, such as every three to five years, to keep course contents updated without over burdening the faculty with the associated work. These elements of corporate governance are found in the operations of other types of professional schools such as business, law and medicine. In fact, corporate governance of the curriculum may be a hallmark of professional education. Benefits of Corporate Governance In comparison with individual governance, corporate governance of the MPA/MPP curriculum offers some important benefits to the school and to the faculty. The school has available the means to guarantee that individual courses will be improved continuously to ensure they serve the needs of the profession. The school can build and sustain a unique brand identity by arranging for coordination and consistency among course, and preserving those features as faculty turnover occurs.

4 October 2011, Page 4 of 5 Prospective students and other constituencies may be assured that the objectives of the MPA/MPP curriculum represent the consensus of the faculty as a corporate whole. Newly hired faculty often would deliver sanctioned course content using a large amount of pre-existing resources supplied by the school. The additional stress on faculty hired from the social science disciplines would be greatly mitigated, and the willingness of faculty members to invest in curriculum improvements would be increased through the collaborative team-based reviews. These are very valuable benefits, and 501c3 Tuneup believes that they greatly outweigh any negative consequences of moving to corporate governance of the MPA/MPP curriculum. Challenges in Moving to Corporate Governance Moving the governance of an MPA/MPP program from the individual to the corporate regime involves surmounting several challenges. Individual faculty members may be reluctant to relinquish what they perceive to be their intellectual property rights. The faculty may not relish the prospect of participating in a regular cycle of curriculum reviews that require taking time away from research interests. Building and maintaining the academic resources required under corporate governance can be a major investment for the school s administration (especially at the beginning). A key step in addressing these concerns is to build a new consensus within the faculty about their corporate obligations within the context of the school offering professional education in the form of the MPA/MPP. If anything, these obligations are increasing in the current climate for higher education that includes greater financial burdens on students, increased scrutiny of the schools roles on their home campuses, and more intensive efforts by other types of professional schools to compete for the same students. A well-designed process of engaging the faculty in the related issues is necessary to produce the consensus necessary for adopting corporate governance of the MPA/MPP curriculum. Once that consensus is achieved, the specific objections to corporate governance are much more easily addressed and the potential negative consequences may be mitigated. Conclusion The table on the following page compares individual with corporate governance of the MPA/MPP curriculum to highlight the differences among the two regimes and to generate additional discussion about the benefits of the corporate model. 501c3 Tuneup is available to participate in such discussions, and to assist schools interested in moving to corporate governance. Operating a professional MPA/MPP program increasingly will require attention to the governance of the program and how that governance helps to ensure responsive to the changing profession, quality control over time, and the establishment of a recognized brand. 501c3 Tuneup looks forward to working with interested schools on these issues.

5 October 2011, Page 5 of 5 Final say over course content Legal ownership of the course syllabus Potential impact of faculty turnover on course content and objectives Course preparation required of newly hired faculty Curriculum innovation regularly involves scrutiny of individual course contents and revisions to such? School has the authority to ensure all courses comply with its brand identity? Individual Governance Course instructor. Course instructor. Very great courses with the same name could be entirely different in content. Significant faculty drawn from the disciplines may have to make large time investments to adjust teaching to the MPA/MPP context. No. No. Corporate Governance The faculty as a whole. The school. Minimal instructors would implement the content sanctioned by the faculty. Intended to be minimal instructors would use sanctioned syllabi, lectures, assignments and examination materials. Yes. Yes. Comparison of Individual with Corporate Governance of the MPA/MPP Curriculum About 501c3 Tuneup, Inc. 501c3 Tuneup, Inc. is a consulting firm located in the Washington, DC metropolitan area that advises nonprofit organizations, including higher education, on governance and administrative issues. The founder and president is Erik A. Devereux, Ph.D., the former executive director of APPAM - Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management. While at APPAM, Erik worked closely for 11 years with the association s Committee of Institutional Representatives to plan a series of conferences on the MPA/MPP curriculum including the special meetings held in Park City, Utah in the summer of Erik also developed APPAM s annual report on MPA/MPP admissions and collaborated with officials at NASPAA and ASPA to build the comprehensive career website PublicServiceCareers.org. Before joining APPAM, Erik was on the faculty of the Heinz College at Carnegie Mellon University for eight years, where he taught in the MPP core (winning two teaching awards) and served as the director of the MPP program. Among the recent higher education clients of 501c3 Tuneup are Indiana University s School of Public and Environmental Affairs, a consortium of 18 public and international affairs graduate schools participating in a benchmarking study of administrative costs and structures, and the Public Policy and International Affairs (PPIA) Program (the leading diversity initiative in the MPA/MPP field). Much more information about 501c3 Tuneup is available online at