Patricia M. Shields

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Patricia M. Shields
PatMShields.jpg
Born 1951
Main interests
Research methods, civil-military relations, gender studies, public administration, pragmatism, privatization, peace studies
Notable ideas
Applying pragmatism to public administration

Patricia M. Shields (born 1951) is a Professor of Political Science and Public Administration [1] at Texas State University. In 2001 she began her tenure as Editor-in-Chief of the international and interdisciplinary journal Armed Forces & Society [2][3]. She is also a Contributing Editor to Parameters: The US Army War College Quarterly[4]. Patricia M. Shields is notable for her publications focusing on research methods,[5] [6] civil military relations,[7][8] [9]gender issues, [10] pragmatism in public administration, [11] peace studies, [12] and the contributions of Jane Addams to public administration and peace theory.[13] [14]She received a BA in Economics from the University of Maryland - College Park, an MA in Economics and a PhD in Public Administration from The Ohio State University.[15]

For more information see ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0960-4869

Scholarship[edit]

Patricia M. Shields is perhaps most widely known as a scholar for promoting the classical pragmatism of C. S. Peirce, William James, and John Dewey as an "organizing principle" for the discipline of public administration. Her publication, "The Community of inquiry: Classical Pragmatism and Public Administration" (2003), began an ongoing, interdisciplinary, academic debate in the journal Administration & Society.[16] She applies the feminist pragmatism of Jane Addams to Public Administration.[17]

Shields is also notable in the public administration community for utilizing pragmatism to advance research methodology in the field.[18] For example, Shields is responsible in part for popularizing Dewey's notion of the working hypothesis as a method of preliminary, qualitative, exploratory research, in addition to the concept of the practical ideal type for program evaluation.[19][20][21][22]

Recognition[edit]

She received recognition by the American Society for Public Administration, the Section for Women in Public Administration with the Rita Mae Kelly Award for her contribution to gender studies in public administration, [23] National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration with the Leslie A. Whittington Award for excellence in teaching research methods, [24] the Inter-University Seminar for Armed and Society with the Morris Janowitz Career Achievement Award [25] and the journal Public Administration Review with the Laverne Burchfield Award. [26] Texas State University has recognized her with the Presidential Seminar Award, The Presidential Award for Excellence in Teaching[27] and the Everett Swinney Faculty Senate Excellence in Teaching Award.[28]

References[edit]

  1. ^ http://www.polisci.txstate.edu/people/faculty/shields.html and http://faculty.txstate.edu/profile/1922230
  2. ^ http://www.sagepub.com/journals/Journal201730/boards Website accessed July 9, 2014.
  3. ^ http://www.iusafs.org/about/journal.asp
  4. ^ https://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/parameters/MastMission.cfm
  5. ^ https://newforums.com/title-list/featured-authors/pat-shields/ New Forums Press. Retrieved September 21, 2018.
  6. ^ Soeters, J., Shields, P. and S Rietjens (Eds.) 2014. Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in Military Studies, Routledge () and Shields, P. and Rangarjan, N., 2013. A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management. New Forums Press. and Shields, P. (1998). Pragmatism as a Philosophy of Science: A Tool for Public Administration. In Research in Public Administration, Vol. 4. London, England: JAI Press.and Shields, P., & Tajalli, H. (2006). Intermediate Theory: The Missing Link in Successful Student Scholarship. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 12, 313–334 and Shields, P., & Whetsell, T. (2017). Public Administration Methodology: A Pragmatic Perspective. In J. Raadschelders & R. Stillman (Eds.), Foundations of Public Administration (pp. 75–92). New York: Melvin & Leigh
  7. ^ Shields, P. M. (2015). Civil Military Relations. In D. A. Bearfield & M. J. Dubnick (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy (3rd. ed.). New York: Taylor & Francis and Shields, P. (2003). The Bureaucracy in Military Sociology. In J. Callaghan & F. Kernic (Eds.), Armed Forces and International Security: Global Trends and Recent Issues (pp. 181–184). Piscataway, NJ: Transaction and Kohen, A., & Shields, P. (1980). Reaping the Spoils of Defeat: Labor Market Benefits of Vietnam-era Veterans. In C. Figley & S. Leventman (Eds.), Strangers at Home: Vietnam Veterans Since the War (pp. 181–209). New York, NY: Prager and Shields, P. (1993). A New Paradigm for Military Policy: Socioeconomics. Armed Forces & Society, 19(4), 511–531 and Shields, P. (1980). Enlistment During the Vietnam Era and the “Representation” Issue of the All-Volunteer Force. Armed Forces & Society, 7(1), 133–151
  8. ^ Shields, P. M. (2011, March). An American Perspective on 21st Century Expeditionary Mindset and Core Values: A Review of the Literature. In Core values and the expeditionary mindset: Armed forces in metamorphosis (pp. 15-35). Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG.
  9. ^ Shields, P. M. (1981). The burden of the draft: The Vietnam years. Journal of Political and Military Sociology, 9(2), 215.
  10. ^ Stalnaker, S. and Shields, P.(1994). Perspectives of Violence by Attorneys, Police and Women’s Shelter Directors: Divisive Differences and Significant Similarities. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 10, 29–37 and Shields, P., & Rangarajan, N. (2011). Public Service Professionals: The Legacy of Florence Nightingale, Mary Livermore and Jane Addams. In D. Menzel & H. White (Eds.), The State of Public Administration: Issues, Challenges and Opportunity (pp. 36–53). New York: M.E. Sharpe and Shields, P. (1988). Sex Roles in the Military. In C. Moskos & F. Wood (Eds.), The Military - More Than a Job (pp. 99–114). McLean: VA: Pergamon-Brassey and Shields, P., Curry, L., & Nichols, J. (1990). Women Pilots and Combat: Attitudes of Male and Female Pilots. Minerva: Quarterly Journal of Women and the Military, 8, 21–35
  11. ^ Shields, P., Whetsell, T., & Hanks, E. (2013). Pragmatism and Public Administration: Looking Back, Looking Forward. In N. Rumens & M. Kelemen (Eds.), American Pragmatism and Organization Studies: Researching Management Practices (pp. 115–130). Burlington VT: Gower and Shields, P., & Whetsell, T. (2017). Public Administration Methodology: A Pragmatic Perspective. In J. Raadschelders & R. Stillman (Eds.), Foundations of Public Administration (pp. 75–92). New York: Melvin & Leigh and Whetsell, T. A., & Shields, P. M. (2011). Reconciling the Varieties of Pragmatism in Public Administration. Administration & Society, 43(4), 474–483 and Shields, P. (2008). Rediscovering the Taproot: Is Classical Pragmatism the Route to Renew Public Administration€. Public Administration Review, 68, 205–221 and Shields, P. (2005). Classical Pragmatism Does Not Need an Upgrade: Lessons for Public Administration. Administration & Society, 37(4), 504–518 and Shields, P. (2004). Classical Pragmatism: Engaging Practitioner Experience. Administration & Society, 36, 351–361 and Shields, P. M. (2003). The Community of Inquiry: Classical Pragmatism and Public Administration. Administration & Society, 35(5), 510–538 and Shields, P. M. (1996). Pragmatism: Exploring Public Administration Policy Imprint. Administration & Society, 28(3), 390–411
  12. ^ Shields, P., & Soeters, J. (2013). Pragmatism, Peacekeeping and the Constabulary Force. In S. Ralston (Ed.), A Bold new World: Essays on Philosophical Pragmatism and International Relations (pp. 87–110). New York: Lexington Books and Shields, P. (2017). Limits of Negative Peace, Faces of Positive Peace. Parameters, US Army War College Quarterly, 47(3), 1–12 and Shields, P., & Rissler, G. (2016). Positive Peace: Exploring the Roots and Potential for Public Administration. Global Virtue Ethics Review, 7(3), 1–15
  13. ^ Shields, P., & Soeters, J. (2017). Peaceweaving: Jane Addams, positive peace, and Public Administration. American Review of Public Administration, 47(3), 323–339. https://doi.org/DOI 10.1177/0275074015589629 and Shields, P. (2017). Jane Addams: Progressive Pioneer of Peace, Philosophy Sociology, Social Work and Public Administration. New York: Springer and Shields, P. (2006). Democracy and the Social Ethics of Jane Addams: A Vision for Public Administration. Administrative Theory and Praxis, 28, 418–443 and Shields, P. (2010). Jane Addams Theory of Democracy and Social Ethics: Incorporating a Feminist Perspective. In M. D’Agostiono & H. Levine (Eds.), Women in Public Administration: Theory and Practice (pp. 15–34). Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett
  14. ^ Jane Addams's Social Ethics 2018 International Colloquium on Ethical Leadership. This youtube video is sponsored by the journal Public Integrity
  15. ^ http://www.polisci.txstate.edu/people/faculty/shields.html - website accessed 5/18/11
  16. ^ Patricia M. Shields, (2003). "The Community of Inquiry: Classical Pragmatism and Public Administration." Administration & Society 35 (November): 510-538. The debate began with Miller, Hugh. (2004). Why old pragmatism needs an upgrade Administration & Society Vol. 36 (May): 243-249. Miller asserted that the neopragmatism of Richard Rorty was an upgrade to classical pragmatism. Miller took issue with the Community of inquiry concept defined through 1) problematic situation, 2) scientific attitude, and 3) participatory democracy. The primary dispute occurred over scientific attitude. Shields responded: (2004) Classical Pragmatism: Engaging Practitioner Experience Administration & Society 36 (July):351-362. Other public administration scholars contributed: Snider, Keith. (2005). Rorytan Pragmatism: 'where's the beef' for public administration Administration & SocietyVol. 37 (May):243-247; Evans, Karen. (2005). Upgrade or a different animal altogether? Why old pragmatism better informs public management and new pragmatism misses the point Administration & Society Vol. 37(May) 248-255; Stocis, Gregory. (2005). A view from the trenches: Comments on Miller's Why Old Pragmatism Needs an Upgrade Administration & Society Vol. 36 (July):362-369; Hildebrand, David. (2005) "Pragmatism, Neopragmatism, and Public Administration." Administration & Society 37(July): 345-359; Hickman, Larry. (2004). On Hugh Miller on 'Why old pragmatism needs an Upgrade' Administration & Society Vol. 36: 496-499; Webb, James. (2004). Comment on Hugh T. Miller's Why old Pragmatism needs an upgrade.' Administration & Society Vol. 36: 479-495; Hoch, Charles. (2006) "What Can Rorty Teach an Old Pragmatist Doing Public Administration or Planning? "Administration & Society" 38(3) 389-398. Hugh Miller responded to these critics: (2005) Residues of foundationalism in classical pragmatism Administration & Society Vol. 37(May):360-374, which was countered by Shields (2005) summarizing the responses and reiterating classical pragmatism's applicability to public administration: "Classical Pragmatism Does Not Need and Upgrade: Lessons for Public Administration". Administration & Society 37 (September), 504-518. In 2010, Karen Evans re-energized the discussion: "Into the Woods: A Cautionary Tale for Governance." Administration & Society 42(November): 859-883. Keith Snider (2011) responded to Evans' call for pragmatism with skepticism in "On the problem of adopting pragmatism in public administration." 37: 243-247. Philip Salem and Patricia Shields responded (2011)."Out of the Woods: Facilitating pragmatic inquiry and dialogue." 43:124-132, the debate was concluded (for now) by Travis Whetsell and Patricia Shields (2011). "Reconciling the Varieties of Pragmatism in Public Administration." Administration & Society 43:474- 483. Oliver Kasdan re-articulated the neopragmatist upgrade claim - (2011) A neopragmatist approach to administrative authority: Using rorty's liberalism for social progress. Administrative Theory & Praxis. Vol. 33.No. 4.- which was countered by Whetsell, Travis. (2012). Theory Pluralism in Public Administration: Epistemology, Legitimacy, and Method. American Review of Public Administration. Forthcoming.
  17. ^ Guy, Mary. (2018) book review of Shields, P. (2017). Jane Addams: Progressive Pioneer of Peace, Philosophy Sociology, Social Work and Public Administration. New York: Springer in Public Administration Review Vol 78, No. 3 pp. 491-492.
  18. ^ http://chipbruce.wordpress.com/2010/06/21/navigating-the-corridor-of-inquiry/ - website accessed 5/24/11
  19. ^ Shields, Patricia M. 1998. "Pragmatism as a Philosophy of Science: A Tool for Public Administration." Research in Public Administration Vol. 4 pp.195-225.
  20. ^ Shields, Patricia and Hassan Tajalli. 2006. "Intermediate Theory: The Missing Link in Successful Student Scholarship." Journal of Public Affairs Education Vol. 12. No. 3.
  21. ^ Shields, Patricia and Nandhini Rangarajan. 2013. A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual frameworks and Project Management. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press
  22. ^ http://newforums.com/title-list/featured-authors/pat-shields/ Website accessed July 12, 2014
  23. ^ http://aspaswpa.weebly.com/awards.html
  24. ^ http://www.naspaa.org/principals/awards/past.asp#Leslie - website accessed 5/31/11
  25. ^ http://www.iusafs.org/JanowitzAward.asp
  26. ^ https://www.aspanet.org/ASPA/Make-Connections/Awards/Lavern-Burchfield-Award.aspx
  27. ^ http://www.polisci.txstate.edu/people/faculty/shields.html
  28. ^ http://www.txstate.edu/facultysenate/resources/piper-award/swinney.html