No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 May 2020
Going to alumni cocktail parties is a great idea. Not only are the drinks cheap, but you find out more about your teaching than the "Student Evaluation of Instruction" forms will ever tell you. When students are still talking enthusiastically about a class two to five years later, you know you did something right. When they explicitly mention it as the experience from which they learned most in their degree program, you may be inspired even to write it up for NEWS.
What was this experience? It was a class project in which the students were divided into teams and required to investigate major policies that the University had under consideration or had recently enacted.
1 National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration “Matrix of Professional Competencies of Graduates of Public Affairs/Public Administration Programs and of Public Managers,” in Guidelines and Standards for Baccalaureate Degree Programs in Public Affairs/Administration (NASPAA: Washington, D.C., 1976, pp. 7-13.)
2 ICP #4 (Syracuse, N.Y.: Inter University Case Program, 1952).
3 CPAC #12 (Syracuse, N.Y.: Inter; University Case Program, 1977).
4 Kunen, James S., The Strawberry Statement (New York: Avon, 1970Google Scholar).
5 jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184, 197 (1964).
6 ICP #100, Box 229 (Syracuse, N.Y.: Inter University Case Program, 1966).
7 Croton-on-Hudson, P.O. Box 337, N.Y. 10520: Policy Studies Associates, 1976.
8 Brady, Neil, “Conceptual Skills and the Public Administrator: Good Judgment and the Logic of Principles” American Review of Public Administration 16 (Spring, 1982), pp. 3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Professor Brady's format is the following: “1) You discern the important issues; 2) You state the principle which is relevant to the resolution of the issue; 3) You state the relevant facts. This means, for one thing, that you must be able to select the facts which are important for the issue as opposed to those which are unimportant; 4) You use the facts to make reasonable assumptions about the case at hand which pulls it under the umbrella of the principle to be applied; and 5) You draw your conclusion. The status of your conclusion will depend on how decisive, qualified, or hypothetical [your facts, principles, and assumptions were],” (p. 8).