Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T11:19:54.720Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Areas for Postwar Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Joseph E. Mclean
Joseph E. Mclean
Affiliation:
Office of Naval History, Washington, D.C.
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the principal recommendations contained in the recent report of the Research Committee of the American Political Science Association was that mature scholars “be influenced as to the subjects selected for research by the findings of research panels and committees.” Acceptance of this general recommendation may be facilitated by the tenor of the findings and suggestions of two research committees of the Social Science Research Council—the Committee on Government and the Committee on Public Administration. The report of the former committee, based upon three years of exploration of research areas, was published in October, 1944. The report of the Public Administration Committee will presently be published by the Public Administration Service under the title “Research in Public Administration, 1934–1945,” along with a report prepared by Professor John M. Gaus surveying general research developments in the area since 1930. Although essentially a review of major accomplishments and past activities, the report of the Public Administration Committee nevertheless outlines a research program of enduring and continuing interest. The scope and nature of the research proposals advanced by both committees are the subject of this brief review.

Information

Type
Instruction and Research
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 39 , Issue 4 , August 1945, pp. 741 - 757
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1945

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 See this Review, Vol. 39, pp. 148, 165 (Feb., 1945).

2 Report and Recommendations, Committee on Government, 1941–1944, Social Science Research Council (Minneapolis, Oct., 1944).

3 This report reviews the history of the Public Administration Committee from its inception to the conclusion of its work in 1944. The research program is based in large part upon the discussions of the Committee at its spring meeting in 1944.

4 The members of the Committee on Government were: William Anderson (chairman), University of Minnesota; Robert E. Cushman, Cornell University; Simeon E. Leland, University of Chicago; Charles McKinley, Reed College; and Thorsten Seilin, University of Pennsylvania. The members of the Committee on Public Administration were: William Anderson (chairman), University of Minnesota; George C. S. Benson, Office of Price Administration; Louis Brownlow, Public Administration Clearing House; Rowland Egger, University of Virginia; George A. Graham, Princeton University; Luther H. Guliek, Institute of Public Administration; E. Pendleton Herring, Harvard University; Lewis Meriam, The Brookings Institution; Lindsay Rogers, Columbia University; Leonard D. White, University of Chicago; and George F. Yantis, Northwest Regional Council.

5 Committee on Government, Report, p. 21.

6 The Committee on Government report devotes an entire section to research methods, including the comparative method, the analytical and theoretical approach, the experimental method, the quantitative method, and collaboration between political science and other social sciences.

7 This is one of five sub-headings discussed under “(C) The Organization and Operation of Government.” The other four are: (2) Legislative-Executive Relations, and the Legislative Process, (3) Public Administration, (4) Local Government and Administration, and (5) International Organization and Administration.

8 Such an outline has now been prepared by Professor William Anderson and is being edited for publication by Mrs. Luella Gettys Key.

9 As Professor Anderson observes, neither group was influenced by the other. The letter of inquiry did not indicate to the correspondents what the Committee was planning to propose, and the analysis of the letters was not made until after the Committee's own report had been drafted.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.