Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wp2c8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-07T03:53:36.528Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is There Really a Scholar-Practitioner Gap? An Institutional Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 January 2007

Ernest J. Wilson
Ernest J. Wilson
Affiliation:
University of Maryland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The relationship between scholars and practitioners is a continuing source of concern to both communities. Each side complains about the insularity of the other and routinely points to gaps that separate them. Alexander George and other scholars found weak interest and lackluster capacity on the part of academy-based social scientists to contribute knowledge deemed useful to the policy community (George 1993; Nincic and Lepgold 2000). For their part, leading policy practitioners have bitterly complained about what they see as the growing irrelevance of scholarly work to the design and conduct of statecraft (Newsom 1995–1996).

Type
THE PROFESSION
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 40 , Issue 1 , January 2007 , pp. 147 - 151
Copyright
© 2007 The American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anton, Philip S., Richard Silberglitt, and James Schneider. 2001. The Global Technology Revolution: Bio/Nano/Materials Trends and Their Synergies with Information Technology by 2015. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
Barnett, Michael. 2006. “In Need of Nuance: What the Academy Can Teach.” Harvard International Review (summer): 48–52.Google Scholar
Calhoun, Craig. 2004. “Word from the President: Toward a More Public Social Science.” Items & Issues 5 (spring/summer): 12–4.Google Scholar
Davenport, Thomas H., and Laurence Prusak. 1998. Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Drake, William J., and Ernest J. Wilson III Forthcoming. The Governance of Global Electronic Networks. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fenno Jr., Richard F. 1986. “Observation, Context, and Sequence in the Study of Politics.” American Political Science Review 80 (March): 3–15.Google Scholar
George, Alexander L. 1993. Bridging the Gap: Theory and Practice in Foreign Policy. Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press.Google Scholar
Holden, Matthew. 2000. “The Competence of Political Science: ‘Progress in Political Research’ Revisited: Presidential Address, American Political Science Association, 1999.” American Political Science Review 94 (March): 1–19.Google Scholar
Jentleson, Bruce. 2002. “The Need for Praxis: Bringing Policy Relevance Back In.” International Security 26 (spring): 169–83.Google Scholar
Lepgold, Joseph. 2000. “ Policy Relevance and Theoretical Development in International Relations: What Have We Learned?” In Being Useful Policy Relevance and International Relations Theory, eds. Miroslav Nincic and Joseph Lepgold. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lepgold, Joseph, and Miroslav Nincic. 2002. Beyond the Ivory Tower—International Relations Theory and the Issue of Policy Relevance. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowi, Theodore J. 1992. “ The State in Political Science: How We Become What We Study.” In Discipline and History—Political Science in the United States, eds. James Farr and Raymond Seidelman. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Mueller, Milton L. 2002. Ruling the Root: Internet Governance and the Taming of Cyberspace. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Newsom, David. 1995–1996. “Foreign Policy and Academia.” Foreign Policy 101 (winter): 52–67.Google Scholar
Nincic, Miroslav, and Joseph Lepgold, eds. 2000. Being Useful: Policy Relevance and International Relations Theory. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Putnam, Robert D. 2003. “APSA Presidential Address: The Public Role of Political Science.” Perspectives on Politics 1 (June): 249–55.Google Scholar
Schwab, Susan Carroll. 2003. “In Praise of a Public Policy/International Affairs Education.” Carnegie Reporter 2 (fall). Available at www.carnegie.org/reporter/07/backpage/index.html.Google Scholar
Weaver, Kent R. 1989. “The Changing World of Think Tanks.” PS: Political Science and Politics 22 (September): 563–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson III, Ernest J. 2000. “ How Social Science Can Help Policy Makers: The Relevance of Theory.” In Being Useful—Policy Relevance and International Relations Theory, eds. Miroslav Nincic and Joseph Lepgold. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 109–28.Google Scholar
Wilson III, Ernest J. Forthcoming. “Analyzing and Governing Global Networks.” Conclusion, In Governing Global Electronic Networks, eds. William Drake, and Ernest J. Wilson III. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar