Roanokecollege Office: West Hall 121

RoanokeCollege Office: West Hall 121

C. William Hill, Jr.Hours: daily, 2:00 – 3:00

Fall 2003375-2423 (office), 389-0449 (home, before 9pm)

SYLLABUS: PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION (POLI. 301)

OBJECTIVES

This course is a survey of the relationship between politics and administration, ethics and administration, and the theory and practice of public administration in the United States. It concentrates on: historical development of bureaucracy, organizational theory, and public management functions. Conscientious students will gain the following:

1. Appreciation of the field of public administration,

2. Knowledge of the development of U.S. administrative institutions, particularly at the national level,

3. Familiarity with the findings that have been offered to explain the presence, successes, and failings of modern bureaucracy,

4. Sensitivity to ethical concerns in modern bureaucratic practices,

5. Acquaintance with what has come to be called the “view public management,”

6. Reinforcement of critical thinking, learning, and preprofessional skills, and

7. Ability to apply theory to practice through homework, case studies, and class discussions.

READINGS REQUIRED FOR PURCHASE

Robert T. Golembiewski, etal. 1997. Cases in Public Management, 5th ed.

Jay Shafritz and E.W. Russell, 2003, Public Administration, 3rd ed.

New York Times, weekday subscription.

Lee Cuba. 2002. A Short Guide to Writing about Social Science.4th ed.

Additional readings (on library reserve or handouts).

COURSE REQUIREMNTS

The key to successful completion of this course is the prompt and full completion of all readings and other assignments. The class format combines lecture-discussion with various other techniques. Attendance is essential but voluntary. Rudeness will not be tolerated (chronic tardiness, distracting the class, leaving the class, etc.) and may affect one’s class contribution. Research papers (suitable in form and content to the instructor) will be assigned to make up tests, but only if the test was missed because of an independently verified medical or family emergency, and I am notified in advance.

Correct English will be a criterion for evaluation on all written work. Standard usage is expected on tests, but you may circle any possible error for complete credit. Major errors on papers will cost 1% each.

Anyone with a diagnosed learning disability who wants to take tests in the LearningCenter must inform me of that well in advance of each test. The test will begin at the same time as the class test.

ACADEMIC INTEGRITY

Until the happy day when the College readopts a student Honor Code (see my paper on Blackboard),I am an enthusiastic supporter of the academic integrity policy of the faculty. We all share in the responsibility of maintaining Roanoke College as a place were ideas can be freely expressed and properly credited. We all benefit from these practices. I implore you to do your part by doing your own work and encouraging your friends to do the same.

The general rule in my classes is that anything (drafts included) offered for my evaluation by a student is assumed to be exclusively the product of that person. Participation by any other person in its preparation constitutes an integrity violation.

In-class assignments/tests must be written on paper I provide using no other paper, books, or notes.

There are only 3 exceptions: (a) specific assigned group projects in which members of a group will share the grade, (b) materials provided or authorized by me for in-class assignments/tests, and (c) discussion of class material with anyone. You are encouraged to talk about course material with others, but when it comes to writing anything, it must be original.

Any idea or fact not original with you or very commonly known must be documented according to Lee Cuba’s manual. Despite what Cuba says in Chapter 7, I require page numbers for all references.

See my paper, “Whatever Happened to Honor?” on Blackboard for examples of documentation formats.

If you are ever in doubt about any academic integrity practice, please contact me in advance.

It may be worth noting that when I bring a charge of academic integrity, I ask the board to assign nothing lower than an XF as a penalty.

EVALUATION COMPONENTS

Grades will be based on the average of: tests 1and 2 (20% each), 1 paper (20%), test 3 (30%) and class contribution (10%), which includes oral participation, quizzes, and homework.

Grammar and spelling are grading criteria for all written work: In-class errors are – ½%; out-of-class errors are – 1%. (See Blackboard for major errors.)

The tests may include both subjective and objective formats.

Test 3 will be comprehensive.

Late term papers sacrifice 10% daily, counting weekends, and beginning at roll call on the due date. They will not be accepted after 4 days.

Plus/minus values for this course are as follows: The first and last three percentage points in a ten-point interval will be used to assign plus and minus grades, respectively. Thus, B+ = 89-87%, B- = 82-80%, etc.

I do not post grades, and instructors are prohibited by federal law from discussing grades with anyone over the telephone or by email. Students are encouraged to ask in person about their progress in the course.

CASE STUDY ASSIGNMENT

One case study of 3000-3750words, plus title page, table of contents, and works cited documentation. See separate discussion for more details.

HOMEWORK

You will prepare and submit homework assignments promptly. These assignments are due at the beginning of class on the days indicated. Late assignments will not be accepted. If you are going to be absent, send the assignment to class with a friend or make sure that is in my hands before class the day it is due.

SCHEDULE

Key Dates: F, 10/3 Test 1

F, 11/7 Test 2

M, 11/24Paper due (roll call)

M, 12/8Final Test (8:30 a.m.)

SCHEDULE

S&R = Shafritz and Russell

# = refers to case study no. in Golembiewski et al.

# in bold type = written assignment due in class the day indicated (assignments should be word processed, stapled, and no more than two pages in length)

Date Content Assignment

1 / W, 8/27 / Introduction to the field / • S&R: ch. 1; pp. 1-36.
2 /
F, 8/29 / Definitions /

W. Wilson, “The Study of Administration,” Course Documents, Blackboard

3 / M, 9/1 / Relationships: Private /

S&R: ch. 2, pp. 37-78.
M. Blumenthal, “Candid Reflections,” Course Documents,Blackboard

4 / W, 9/3 / Relationships: Political /

#2 ACLU v. Tyler Co., p. 24.
#20 Going to the Dogs, p. 106.
#16 Agency Capture?, p. 89.

5 / F, 9/5 / Relationships: Cultural /

#24 Doing Hard Time, p. 125.

6 / M, 9/8 / Accountability /

S&R: ch. 14, pp. 509-541.

7 / W, 9/10 / Accountability, contd. /

#8 Zealous Employee, p. 53.

8 / F, 9/12 / Ethics /

ASPA Code of Ethics, handout.
A. Comstock, “Maintaining Government Integrity,” 2001, handout.
#36 MEMS.
#12 Anna Lieberman, p. 65. Write memo recommending solution in light of ASPA code of ethics.

9 / M, 9/15 / History of U.S. administrative practices /

S&R: ch. 3, pp. 79-125.

10 / W, 9/17 / Guardian Leadership /

S&R: ch. 4, pp. 126-164.

11 / F, 9/19 / Popular Leadership
12 / M, 9/22 / Reformer Leadership /

(Review Wilson article.)

13 / W, 9/24 / Expert Leadership
14 / F, 9/26 / Organization theory: Closed
and open systems /

S&R: ch. 5, pp. 165-209.

15 / M, 9/29 / Classical theories
16 / W, 10/1 / Classical, contd.
17 / F, 10/3 / Test 1 / All above
18 / M, 10/6 / Transitional theories /

S&R: ch. 6, pp. 210-253.

19 / W, 10/8 / Humanistic theory /

#21 Hail to the New Chief, p. 109.
#37 Of Bounded Cooperation, p. 179.

20 / F, 10/10 / Organizational design /

#18 Dilemma in Juvenile Court, p. 96-write memo to the files for ques. 1.

21 / M, 10/20 / Design, contd.
22 / W, 10/22 / Reinventing government /

S&R: pp. 254-274.

23 / F, 10/24 / Total Quality Management /

S&R: pp. 275-283.

24 / M, 10/27 / TQM techniques /

#23 License for Quality, p. 119write memo with chart for ques. 5.

25 / W, 10/29 / Executive leadership /

S&R: ch. 9, pp. 324-345.
#19 Effective Leadership, p. 104.
J. Fallows “Post-President for Line,” Atlantic Monthly, March 2003, p. 59, Course Documents, Blackboard.
Brookheiser, “Mind of Bush” Atlantic Monthly, April 2003, p. 55, Course Documents, Blackboard.

26 / F, 10/31 / Decision-making /

#38 Challenger, p. 184.

27 / M, 11/3 / Planning /

S&R: ch. 13, pp. 324-340, 474-508.

28 / W, 11/5 / Evaluation /

#26 Mixed Effects, p. 129write memo as Blumenthal solving issues.

29 / F, 11/7 / Test 2 / All since Test 1
30 / M, 11/10 / Staffing /

S&R: ch. 10. pp. 346-385.
C. Swain,TheNew White Nationalism in America, ch. 6, reserve.

31 / W, 11/12 / Staffing, contd. /

#28 AA in HamiltonCo., p. 144.
#31 Police Captain Dilemma, p. 158.

32 / F, 11/14 / Staffing, contd. /

#5 Intransigence & Inertia, p. 35
#6 Middle Management, p. 41

33 / M, 11/17 / Staffing, contd. /

#40 Office Romance, p.193.
#43, Corrections Officer, p. 207.
#48, Supervisor's Analysis, p. 229.

34 / W, 11/19 / Staffing, contd.
35 / F, 11/21 / Staffing contd.
36 / M, 11/24 / Budgeting
Paper due /

S&R: ch. 12, pp. 426-473.

37 / M, 12/1 / Budgeting, contd. /

#22 Shifting Costs, p. 112.
#45 Easing Toward Change , p. 215.
#3 Budget Costs, p. 30prepare memo for Beecher's signature with recommendations and figures.

38 / W, 12/3 / Budgeting, contd.
39 / F, 12/5 / Discussion
40 / M, 12/8 / Test 3 (8:30 am) / All above

CASE STUDY ASSIGNMENT

Choose an organizational theory or theorist from among those we have studied. Your mission is to: (a) provide a persuasive explanation of that theory, (b) attempt to apply it to eight cases in Golembiewski, and (c) evaluate how successfully the theory worked in practice. Research beyond the assigned course materials is required for “a” above. Full documentation is required for the paper, using the format found in chapter seven of Cuba but with page numbers. Each successful paper will be organized around a central thesis related to your choice of theory.

Choose a theory-theorist from Shafritz-Russell, chapters five-seven.

Choose sevencases from the following. All papers must conclude with “17 Deliah’s In-basket.” As you write about a case, make sure you indicate which you have chosen, by name. Organize the sequence of your discussion of the eight cases so it contributes to your thesis. Do not mechanically repeat the circumstances of each case.

Cases available for study (choose seven plus 17 Deliah’s In-basket, p. 90)

5 Intransigence and Inertia, p. 35

9 AIDS Patients, p. 58

14 The Outsider

21 Hail to the New Chief, p. 109

25 Environmental Quality, p. 25

29 HIV and Employee Rights, p. 150

30 Performance Evaluation, p. 153

33 A Subordinate’s Homophobia, p. 163

35 Annual Daffodil Festival, p. 172

38 The Challenger Shuttle Disaster, p. 184

41 Carl the Ripper

47 Stop Having Birthdays, p. 224

46 Keep a Two-by-Four Behind Your Desk (p. 220)

Submit one paper copy of your report (paper clips, please, no staples or binders) in a pocketed folder with a labeled computer disk with the Word version of the paper. Do not email your paper.

The papers are due at roll call on the date indicated on the syllabus. Late papers sacrifice 10% credit each day they are late. This includes weekends and begins at roll call. They will not be accepted at all after the fourth day.

Please let me know how I can help you as you work through this project. I am eager to review topics, outlines, and even preliminary drafts if submitted on a timely basis. I suggest that you begin the theory part of your paper shortly after the first test and work on cases as they correspond to class material. Successful papers will require three drafts, so do not wait until the last minute to do this assignment. In case of any alleged last-minute cyber-problem, I require you to produce a draft of the paper in order to receive any consideration.

In choosing the cases, it almost does not matter which seven are selected. You are not being evaluated on how successfully your theory worked, but on your analysis of to what extent it worked and why. Your job is to recognize and explain its strengths and weaknesses, not to make sure that it was always successful.