Assimilation of Public Policy Concepts Through Role-Play: Distinguishing Rational Design and Political Negotiation

One important objective of introductory courses in public administration is to sensitize students to the difference between two concepts: substantive rationality and political rationality. Both types of rationality play an important role in policy processes. Yet, although the difference is straightf...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Simulation & gaming 2010-10, Vol.41 (5), p.743-766
Main Authors: Bots, Pieter W. G., Wagenaar, F. Pieter, Willemse, Rolf
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Assimilation
Bargaining
Comparative analysis
Control Groups
Debt management
Education
Experimental economics
Experiments
First year
Game theory
Games
Internalization
Introductory Courses
Learning
Negotiation
Negotiations
Policies
Policy Making
Public Administration
Public policy
Rationality
Role playing
Simulation
Students
Studies
Test Results
Textbooks
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:One important objective of introductory courses in public administration is to sensitize students to the difference between two concepts: substantive rationality and political rationality. Both types of rationality play an important role in policy processes. Yet, although the difference is straightforward in theory, and is addressed and well-illustrated in most standard textbooks on public administration, students seem to have difficulty internalizing it. This article reports on our findings from a role-playing game designed to make students experience the difference between policy making as a process of rational design and policy making as a process of political negotiation. We conducted an experiment involving a large group of students enrolled in a first year, one-semester course, and a control group of students who enrolled in the same course 1 year later. The former were tested four times (start of the course, immediately before and after playing the game, and 3 months later) and the latter two times (at the start of the course and at the exam) for their understanding of how policy making—as-rational-design and policy making—as-political-negotiation differ on seven characteristics. Comparison of test results obtained before and after the role-play indicates a positive learning effect for some characteristics, and a negative learning effect for others.
ISSN:1046-8781
1552-826X
DOI:10.1177/1046878109353468