{"title":"管理者和学生如何看待公共服务:理论与实践的分歧","authors":"John R Wood, Kenneth Kickham","doi":"10.1177/01447394211013068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines existing management concepts and practices that make up three contemporary approaches to public policy and public administration. We attempt to understand whether municipal public administrators and public administration graduate students validate these perspectives in “reality” versus “ideally.” Addressing the extent to which practicing public administrators and students identify with theoretical frameworks, which one(s) they deem most prominent, and how closely their preferred frameworks correspond to what they see in practice, we offer an exploratory analysis of results from 176 respondents through descriptive statistics, paired-sample t-tests, and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). We hypothesize significant differences with respect to 1) what is preferred and what is perceived in the workplace, 2) group membership (administrator, graduate student, or undergraduate student), and 3) gender (female or male). This research will help public administration educators bridge the gap between theory and practice and narrow the distance between the “is” and the “ought.”","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/01447394211013068","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How managers and students view public service: The theoretical vs. practical divide\",\"authors\":\"John R Wood, Kenneth Kickham\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01447394211013068\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper examines existing management concepts and practices that make up three contemporary approaches to public policy and public administration. We attempt to understand whether municipal public administrators and public administration graduate students validate these perspectives in “reality” versus “ideally.” Addressing the extent to which practicing public administrators and students identify with theoretical frameworks, which one(s) they deem most prominent, and how closely their preferred frameworks correspond to what they see in practice, we offer an exploratory analysis of results from 176 respondents through descriptive statistics, paired-sample t-tests, and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). We hypothesize significant differences with respect to 1) what is preferred and what is perceived in the workplace, 2) group membership (administrator, graduate student, or undergraduate student), and 3) gender (female or male). This research will help public administration educators bridge the gap between theory and practice and narrow the distance between the “is” and the “ought.”\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/01447394211013068\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01447394211013068\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01447394211013068","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
How managers and students view public service: The theoretical vs. practical divide
This paper examines existing management concepts and practices that make up three contemporary approaches to public policy and public administration. We attempt to understand whether municipal public administrators and public administration graduate students validate these perspectives in “reality” versus “ideally.” Addressing the extent to which practicing public administrators and students identify with theoretical frameworks, which one(s) they deem most prominent, and how closely their preferred frameworks correspond to what they see in practice, we offer an exploratory analysis of results from 176 respondents through descriptive statistics, paired-sample t-tests, and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). We hypothesize significant differences with respect to 1) what is preferred and what is perceived in the workplace, 2) group membership (administrator, graduate student, or undergraduate student), and 3) gender (female or male). This research will help public administration educators bridge the gap between theory and practice and narrow the distance between the “is” and the “ought.”
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.