Abstract
Research and teaching are core business of academic institutions. The research context is thought to be fruitful for teaching and learning, and students may contribute to research. But how exactly does the interplay between research and teaching take place and how, in what respects and under which conditions, does this contribute to the quality of research and teaching? The article makes an inventory of functions of research in teaching in public administration curricula. It elaborates on conditions and mechanisms for effective realization of these functions, based on the contributions to this special issue, literature and our own insights and experiences. We evaluate and reflect on different functions and modes of linking research and teaching and to explore relevant conditions for their use.
Introduction
Academic education takes place in a research oriented environment. Teaching staff is typically engaged in scientific research and thus contributes to scientific knowledge and the development of theories and/or methods. Students are taught research- or theory-based knowledge and learn to do research themselves. We suppose all this is self-evident. However, it is not immediately clear how exactly the interplay between research, teaching, and learning takes place. Moreover, there is a need to reflect on how the way in which research is incorporated in teaching influences its impact.
In this volume, different functions of research in teaching PA are identified, such as: connecting theory to (different) real life contexts (Meek and Godwin, Quinn, Oldfield); developing an academic attitude (Knassmüller, Quinn), intensifying learning processes (Quinn, Meek and Godwin) becoming critical and reflexive (Luke and Barber, Nielsen) and becoming able to develop effective interventions and strategies (Meek and Godwin). Although most of these contributions are discussing the research–teaching nexus (Quinn) in post-experience academic programs, the functions mentioned are as relevant for pre-experience programs. For these students, there may also be an additional function: getting to know real life contexts in a critical and reflexive way.
This concluding contribution seeks to evaluate and reflect on different functions and modes of linking research and teaching and to explore relevant conditions for their use. To do so, we start with a reflection on the nature and aims of academic teaching. Next, we make an inventory of possible functions of incorporation of research in academic teaching. This answers the question
The nature of academic teaching
Brew (2003: 10) distinguishes two different concepts of academic teaching. On the one hand, the classical approach in which the teacher is the focal point and “knowledge transfer” is the dominant characteristic. This is linked to a conception of knowledge that she describes as “research is the creation or discovery of a body of knowledge which is perceived as detached and separated off from the people who develop it” (Brew, 2003: 9). On the other hand, a “community of practice” approach that is focused on the student and on (joint) construction of knowledge and interpretations. This is based on a conception of knowledge as being “more subjective; as a product of interpretation and negotiation” (Brew, 2003: 9).
We think that a further differentiation is useful, since the nature of the relationship between student and teacher need not be fully correlated to the conception of knowledge. For example, Problem-Based Learning (PBL) (Moust et al., 2007) is very much student focused and not at all at “knowledge transfer” but the approach may well be combined with the notion of objective and research independent knowledge. On the other hand, it is well conceivable to combine straightforward teacher-focused lecturing with the notion that knowledge is subjective or socially constructed. Thus, we arrive at four views on teaching as depicted in Table 1.
Teaching views.
Each of these modes is characterized by different (implicit) theories about what is to be learned and how learning processes take place. In all modes, connections between research and teaching are instrumental in enhancing/facilitating learning. But how these connections are made, with which functions, and what are relevant conditions to shape these effectively needs to be explored further. Healey (2005) suggests that the research–teaching nexus differs between disciplines, partly related to their nature, but also related to dominant culture in the field and views on (the nature of) knowledge and teaching. Still, we think that within each discipline and educational/didactical philosophy, research may have different functions in relation to teaching. In the next section, therefore, we start by discussing different possible functions of research in academic teaching programs. Next, we go on by exploring how these function may be shaped form the perspective of different educational approaches.
Functions of research in academic teaching
Why incorporate research in teaching Public Administration? We distinguish a number of functions.
This function of research incorporated in PA teaching implies and is supported by a redefinition of the role of teaching staff in the education process. Less emphasis can be put on knowledge transfer, since students themselves have become responsible for acquiring (and generating) knowledge. The roles of teaching staff as coach, consultant, reviewer, etc. may become more dominant compared to the role of expert.
Research and didactic perspectives
Research in relation to knowledge transfer
In an educational context that is defined as the transfer of objective knowledge by a knowledgeable teacher to students, research is presupposed as the base of the knowledge transferred. This is called “research-led” by Healey (2005: 69). In this view, scientific knowledge is supposed to grow continuously by ongoing research. Since future scientific researchers are supposed to come from the cohorts of academic students, the latter should also learn to do research. Teaching of research methods and training to apply these, therefore, is a key subject in academic curricula.
Students that are not going to be scientific researchers will still be working in jobs where they have to apply scientific knowledge and insights. They should be able to assess relevant characteristics of specific situation. This also requires knowledge of and training with research methods.
Finally, academics in all kind of roles, certainly within the domain of PA, will frequently be dealing with research of others, which they have to commission, evaluate, apply or translate to application. Having knowledge of and experience with research methods and with the research process will qualify them to do so.
For all these reasons, methodology courses and practicing research are in this approach essential elements in academic curricula, alongside substantive knowledge transfer.
Research in relation to transfer of social constructivist perspectives
This approach starts from the premise that there is no objective reality or at least that it is not directly accessible. All (scientific) “knowledge” is socially constructed. By consequence, substantive knowledge transfer is no longer key and attention for the way knowledge is constructed is far more central. Research is presented as a social process in which interpretation, negotiation and sense-making takes place.
In social sciences, such as PA, this view has the further implication that not only knowledge is socially constructed, but the phenomena this knowledge refers to as well. Human actor are presumed to act on the basis of sense-making that takes place in interaction (Weick, 1995). Explaining social processes (decision-making, policy processes, (inter-)organizational dynamics) requires insight in (collective) mindsets, interaction and the social construction of meaning.
What is to be taught in this approach is primarily this constructivist perspective and methods and skills to map mindsets, relations and interactions, and to reconstruct sense-making and understand actual behavior in an interpretative way. Research and research methods are, therefore, in this approach the central focus and core business of (social) science and academic teaching. Substantive knowledge is situation specific. Students need instruction and training to investigate these situation specific social processes.
Research in relation to activating learning
Here, the central idea is that active learning is more effective than passively consuming knowledge by listening to lectures or reading books in preparation for exams. Students should be engaged actively with the subject matter. In PBL, students are presented with cases/problems. They have to define what the problem is, identify what kind of information is required to analyse and explain it, and go and find that information, e.g. by finding and reading relevant literature of consulting experts (Moust et al., 2007). They have to work to elicit relevant knowledge, which is supposed and shown to lead to more thorough, lasting and operational knowledge. Although engaging in actual research is not always prominent in PBL, we think it fits very well. Doing research involves thinking about what information is relevant to a problem/question, how it can be found and how data retrieved should be interpreted. So it is PBL. In contrast to the first approach to teaching, doing research is not only a skill to be learned for future work, but also an effective way of learning during the education.
Research in relation to communities of practice
Knowledge, according to this approach, is socially constructed. And other social phenomena are socially constructed too. Students should, like in the second approach, learn to map and analyse these construction processes. But, like in the third approach, they should take the responsibility for organizing and managing their own learning process. Teaching staff can give input and advice, but students should approach these critically and make their own assessments of its validity and applicability. Debate, more than instruction, and active production rather than passive consumption of knowledge are the vehicles of learning. The roles of teacher and student become less different than in the other approaches. Both are engaged in knowledge production and debate. They cooperate (or struggle) in a community of practice. Academic education is a joint effort to investigate and make sense of the world in a critical dialogue. This corresponds to the final function of research in teaching mentioned in the Functions of research in academic teaching section: becoming a responsible and self-directive academic professional.
However, the other functions are relevant as well and should be shaped dialogically.
Incorporating research in teaching PA
From the short preceding discussion, it can be concluded that research is an essential ingredient of academic teaching, although the community of practice approach would be inclined to claim that academic teaching is a collaborative research trajectory. In fact, all functions identified in the Functions of research in academic teaching section are to find a place in academic curricula, although their shape and weight will differ between didactical approaches and perhaps between disciplines.
Public Administration is a social science focusing on the analysis of societal problems, steering and management processes and on contributing to solutions and strategies for these problems and processes. Societal problems often are characterized by different perspectives and interests of actors and actor groups involved. This character of the discipline gives rise to specific challenges for the research-teaching nexus.
PA as a social science
Although social science may be practiced from a positivistic perspective, the social constructivist paradigm is far more convincing than in the natural sciences. We presuppose that atoms don not think, while we take for granted that humans do. The implication is that both variables and relations between them may not (always) be fixed in the social domain. Take “solidarity” as a variable. It is quite plausible that solidarity influence individual and group behavior. But how important is solidarity in comparison with self-interest. And who is solidary with whom and which behavior is connected with it? And what is defined as self-interest? Is it contradictory with solidarity or is it the same? What if actor X is solidary with Y and Z, and Y and Z have a conflict? Does this give rise to redefinition of solidarity or of related behavior? And so on.
For PA, there is an additional reason for a social constructivist approach. PA is not primarily concerned with the explanation of fixed patterns (that have unintentionally emanated) but with explaining efforts (by whom?) to change patterns considered undesirable (by whom and why?) and contributing to more effective strategies to do so. Sense making does not only help to explain these patterns, but also to develop solutions and strategies. Even in the case of so-called power strategies, the question is who will be guided by such strategies, in which way and to what extent? Here too, sense-making, social construction of meaning, norms and values, and behavior is key.
Many actors, complex dynamics
PA is typically engaged with situations and issues in which many actors with different perspectives, interests, resources, interdependencies and other relations are involved. All these actors have, conscious or not, strategies, values and mindsets. The interaction between them may change these strategies, values, mindsets and/or interdependencies. A complex multi-layered, multi-actor network dynamics with often unpredictable outcomes (both objective and in the sense of meaning for different actor groups) results. PA tries to analyse such dynamics and to develop interventions that might ‘work’. Academic PA professionals should be able to research such time- and situation-specific processes, to monitor and analyse the impact of interventions and strategies in specific contexts and to develop situation specific advice and new interventions.
Conclusion
Our conclusion is that academic PA curricula should to a very large extent be defined as a research process. Students and teachers constitute in their collaboration a community of practice (Wenger, 2000; cf. Brew, 2003: 11 ff). This suggests ways to link research and teaching:
Students should learn to do research (the first function of including research in teaching mentioned earlier), not only by taking dedicated courses, but also by the nature of the interaction with the teaching staff and fellow students and by the nature of assignments in the substantive courses. Substantive courses are defined as research trajectories. Lectures may present and summarize previous findings and theory development as a starting point. The relevance and applicability should be explored in working groups or (research) assignments. Moreover, students (and teachers) are looking for adequate translations to specific situations and identify additional or alternative research questions. (See Fenger and Homburg, 2011, for the so called studio approach for this kind of activities). Students are involved in research projects (with fellow students, but also together with teaching staff) to produce new (often situation-specific) knowledge. In doing so they contribute to knowledge and insight. It also helps them to define themselves as “researcher”. A substantial part of the research activities should be devoted to actual PA problems and be linked, again in a community of practice atmosphere, to proposed strategies and interventions. Contacts and interaction with relevant actors in the field (not only administrative actors) is essential to learn to map different perspectives and analyse their interaction.
All this may help students to become critical and self-directive academics and to act in responsible ways in professional practice or future research.
Footnotes
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.