Introduction to the issue

Welcome to the first issue of 2020! In this issue, we are introducing a new feature to the journal: a series of editorials focused on connecting the streams of research that emerge out-of-public administration, public affairs, and public policy with the classroom. One of the challenges in the academy is finding a way to connect the research that we conduct with how we teach and train our students. Frequently, as scholars we discount this transition, arguing that the increased understanding brought by research will naturally transfer to the classroom. The aim of the editorials is to help in this knowledge transfer and aid in the application of our research.

In this issue, we welcome the first editorial in the series from Maher, Ebdon, and Bartle (2020). In their editorial, they discuss the state of our understanding about the fiscal health of public organizations. This understanding is then connected back to the MPA curriculum in the form of a financial condition analysis. What makes this approach particularly compelling is that it includes several assignments that can be used in the classroom to provide that understanding of the financial condition of an organization.

We are also excited to be able to publish five new pieces of research. In the first article, Kuenzi, Stewart, and Walk (2020) discuss the field of nonprofit education. Using a survey of graduate students from nonprofit-related degrees, they explore the question of who pursues a degree in the area and why. Their research shows that the primary reason for pursuing a degree related to nonprofit management is its focus on the third sector, followed by the location of the graduate program.

Next, Rauhaus and Schuchs Carr (2020) investigate the gender differences among public administration faculty. Using a survey of faculty in public service, they find a significant difference in the perceptions of professional experience between male and female faculty. Based on these differences, they discuss four challenges that are present and common among women faculty in public affairs programs. Knepper, Scutelnicu, and Tekula (2020) also study gender differences within the discipline; however, they do so in the context of research productivity. While both genders are productive, Knepper et al. (2020) found that women were significantly less productive than men during their tenure-track and post-tenure careers. The authors seek to address this productivity gap by developing three recommendations to further develop the research productivity of women in public administration.

Using 126 years of dissertation data, Yun, Hamidullah, and McDougle (2020) analyzed the gender differences in doctoral research among public administration scholars. The analysis showed that the number of women completing a dissertation in public administration has increased over the years. There have also been significant differences in the subject matters of the dissertations. While men have historically classified their dissertations as political science, management, and economics related, women have classified theirs as political science, school administration, and management.

In our final research article on the issue, D’Agostino, Levine, and Sabharwal (2020) explore the role that MPA programs play in preparing students for how gender influences the negotiation process. While their research shows that the role of gender in negotiation is not being discussed in the MPA classroom, negotiated order and second-generation bias suggest that the negotiation process gives privilege to more masculine practices. This enforces the need to increase our attention to the issue in the classroom in order to overcome the bias that our students work under.

We are also excited to provide two book reviews in this issue. Wiley (2020) reviewed Hilton and O’Leary’s (2018) recent book, Leading in Place: Leadership through Different Eyes. In her review, Wiley connects the role and value that the text plays in courses on leadership, organizational dynamics, and management. Min and Brower (2020) reviewed Johansen’s (2019) recent book, Social Equity in the Asia-Pacific Region: Conceptualizations and Realities. In their review, Min and Brower note the value of thinking about social equity in an international context and discuss the incorporation of the text into public administration courses that focus on international or comparative administration. They also discuss; however, the value of the book for introduction to public administration courses by providing a framework for understanding the concept of publicness across cultural divides.