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

In: PS: political science & politics, Band 40, Heft 1, S. 147-151

Abstract

Argues that the "gap" between scholars & practitioners is improving in some ways. Dire evaluations of the situation fail to recognize the recent evolution of institutions that use scholarly analysis. Even though public engagement in traditional disciplinary departments has decreased, other institutions like think tanks, schools of public policy, & professional organizations have taken their place. Nonetheless, the discipline of political science has experienced a decrease in relevance, engagement, & impact. The positive & negative implications of institutional differentiation in communities of practice are examined for both the political science profession & public affairs. On the positive side, scholars & practitioners have more career choices & more congenial environments in which to work while policymakers can search for the best fit between their own preferences & those of the institutions that supply analysis. On the negative side, think tanks often miss the broader societal & comparative contexts of their research; the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake is becoming rarer; & political science departments may become more homogeneous over time. References. J. Lindroth