UNIVERSITY OF DAR ES SALAAM DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION LE 101: PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

COURSEOUTLINE FOR ACADEMIC YEAR 2012/2013-SEMESTER II Instructor: Mr. Respicius Shumbusho Damian, +255713 428318 Office: CASS Quadrangular Building, Office Number 01
Consultation: 24 hours online. Physical consultation would need appointment to avoid disappointment.

Course Description LE 101: Public Administration and Law Enforcement is an introductory course offered by the department of Political Science and Public Administration. The course is specifically for students of Law Enforcement. For most of the world-class universities, Law Enforcement knowledge is part of Public Administration program. In this regard, the course is designed to introduce Law Enforcement students to the basic concepts of public administration, relationship between public administration and law enforcement and the other basic problems of Public Administration, as they are applicable in the execution of law enforcement function. Objectives and Outcomes This is a participatory course. The core objective is to introduce students to the basics of public administration. This will involve three tasks. First, the course will orient students to the concept, approaches, and key paradigms of public administration as both an activity and field of study. Second, the course will equip students with the conceptual and practical tools for understanding the relationship between public administration and law enforcement functions. Third, the course shall introduce students to the core public administration functions (and skills) required for effective administration of Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs). Course Delivery Shall include physical and electronic methods. There will be 30 lectures, 15 seminars, and continual online consultation with the instructor and among student groups. Students must register for seminars and each student will have a seminar topic/aspect to work on. Seminar assignments and summaries shall be submitted online through the Learning Management System (LMS). Each student should register and get enrolled inthere. The Moodle enrollment key for the course is le101. Assessment Coursework (40%) and University Examination (60%).The marks will be distributed as follows: 1. 5% Individual seminar presentation on a selected aspect of a topic 2. 10% writing a 4-5 pages standard seminar paper (in-group of 3-4 students). Must be in 14 single spaced Georgia Font 3. 10% In-class 40 minutes Literature based quiz. Students must read compulsory readings carefully. 4. 15% in-class mid semester test to be attempted within 55 minutes of lecture hours 5. 60% Final University Examination TOPICS 0.1: Academic writing in Political Science and Public Administration [1 lecture] [Read Stephen Bailey (2011), John Wolfe (2007), and NUS (2011) Topic 1: The Key Concept s and Scope of Public Administration [3 lectures] 1.1. What is administration? 1.2. Components of administration 1.3. Defining Public Administration: (Publicness vs. Privateness debate) 1.4. The focus and locus of public administration 1

Topic 2: Approaches and Development of Public Administration [6 lectures] 2.1. Development of Public Administration (activity, and field) Paradigmatic Shifts (core landmarks) Old versus New models of Public Administration The effect of shifts in models and paradigms on law enforcement functions 2.2. The Core approaches for Studying Public Administration Managerial Approach Political Approach Legal Approach Topic 3: Relationship between Public Administration and Law Enforcement [3 lectures] 3.1. Power Relationship 3.2. Functional Relationship 3.3. Structural Relationship 3.4. Relationship between Politics, Administration , and Law Enforcement Topic 4: Organizing and Administering Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) [3 lectures] 4.1. Types of LEAs and their Power Sources 4.2. Scope of Jurisdiction in Operations of LEAs 4.3. Powers and Legal exceptionalities for LEAs. 4.4. Principles of Public Administration/Administrative Law in Democratic State and how they affect LEAs Topic 5: Leadership for Law Enforcement [3 lectures] 5.1. Meaning and Role of a leader (as opposed to manager) 5.2. Leadership Styles for Effective Law Enforcement Leaders 5.3. Strategic Leadership skills for Law Enforcement Leaders Topic 6: Introduction to Planning and Decision Making for Law Enforcement [5 lectures] 6.1. Planning and Decision-Making: Conceptual Relationship 6.2. Public Decision Making and Planning as Processes, Strategic Orientation 6.3. The basic models of Public planning/decision making (rational comprehensive, incremental, mixed scanning) 6.4: Barriers to Planning and Decision Making in the Context of Law Enforcement Topic 7: Introduction to Public Sector budgeting (3 lectures) 7.1. Meaning, nature and Scope of Budgeting (levels, types, actors, and components) 7.2. The Process of Budgeting In Public Sector Organizations 7.3. Features of a Sound Budgetary System (using selected criteria) 7.4. The importance of budgeting for Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) Topic 8: Accountability in Law Enforcement [2 lectures] 8.1. The Concept of Accountability in Law Enforcement 8.2. Types of Accountability in Law Enforcement 8.3. Mechanisms for Holding Law Enforcers Accountable Core Readings 1. Amitai Etzioni (1967), Mixed-Scanning_ A Third Approach to Decision-Making, Public Administration Review, Vol. 27,( 5), pp. 385-392 2. Amitai Etzioni (1986), Mixed Scanning Revisited, Public Administration Review, Vol. 46,(1), 8-14. 3. Dillon, Buchanan and Corner (2010), Comparing Public and Private Sector Decision Making_ Problem Structuring and Information Quality Issues 4. Edwin Mees (1993), Community Policing and the Police Officer 2

5. Frank J. Goodnow (2003), Politics and Administration: A Study in Government, New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers 6. George D. Greenberg (1976), The Coordinating Roles of Management: A Typology for Analysis, Midwest Review of Public Administration, Vol. 10 (2), pp. 67-76 7. Guy Peters (1978), The Politics of Bureaucracy, pp. 202-240 8. Guy Peters (2003), The Changing Nature of Public Administration, Vieoji Politika Ir Administravimas, Nr. 5, pp. 7-20 9. Henry Nicholas (1999), Public Administration and Public Affairs, Chapter 8 (Budgeting), Chapter 13 (Accountability), pp. 399-412 10. Herbert A. Simon, Donald W. Smithburg, Victor A. Thompson (1950), Public Administration, chapter 1, pp1-24 11. John C. Coffee Jr.(2007), Law and the Market_ The Impact of Enforcement, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 156 (2) pp. 229-311 12. John M. Bryson (1988), Strategic Planning for Public and Non-Governmental Organizations, Long Range Planning, Vol. 21, ( 1), pp. 73 -81 13. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (2007), The Theory of Public Enforcement of Law, Handbook of Law and Economics, Volume 1, pp.404-454 14. Nicos Poulantzas (1974), Politics, Power and Social Classes, Part V(I) 15. OECD (1999), European Principles for Public Administration, Sigma Papers, No. 27,Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kml60zwdr7h-en 16. Owen Hughes (2003), Public Management and Administration: An Introduction (3rdEd), Pagrave: Macmillan 17. Samuel Paul (1990), Accountability in Public Services: Exit, Voice and Capture: Mimeo Seminar Questions 1. What does it mean when somebody says that a student of Public Administration and Law Enforcement has written an academically excellent paper? Why does the University of Dar es Salaam hate plagiarism? 2. When two men cooperate to roll the stone that neither of the two could have moved alone, the rudiments of administration have appeared (Simon et al. 1950). Identify and describe these rudiments of administration providing examples from any Law Enforcement Agency of your choice. 3. Some scholars argue that Law Enforcement deserves to be a pure public administration. Is there a clear distinction between public and private administration? What makes public administration public? 4. The Weberian bureaucratic model is not relevant to the administration of modern public organizations Would you agree? How do the New Public Management models differ from the Weberian model? 5. According to Guy Peters (2003), at least the four chestnuts that have guided our thinking about public administration are no longer as canonical as they once were is this true about law enforcement institutions including the police? Give examples. 6. The police are the administrators who belong to the state. Illustrate this statement with reference to Nicos Poulantzas theory of bureaucracy. From Mitchell Polinsky and Steven Shavell (2007), is it possible for the government to rely on private law enforcers?

7. With reference to Charles Clark (1935), discuss the relationship between Public Administration and law enforcement? Which of the two, Public Administration or Law Enforcement can be treated as a standalone process that is not associated with politics? 8. Identify any three to four categories of Law Enforcement Agencies and explain how they differ in their powers of jurisdiction? What are the common legal exceptions that allow the police departments as law enforcers to function flexibly? 9. Identify and explain the key public administration /administrative law principles that administrative authorities in democratic countries are required to abide by? How do these principles affect the functioning of Law Enforcement Agencies? 10. Is there difference between an administrative leader and manager? Which of the two is most suitable in law enforcement institutions? Which leadership style would you consider useful for effective law enforcement leaders? 11. What is the relationship between decision making and planning? What do you understand by strategic planning? Give examples from any LEA of your choice. 12. Which of the three models of planning would you consider most useful for LEAs? Identify and describe the main planning challenges that LEAs face? 13. What do you understand by the term budgeting? Identify and describe the main components of a standard public sector budget. 14. Do you think that budgeting is an important administrative tool for law enforcement institutions? What factors may make a government budget bad or good? 15. To whom are law enforcers accountable? With examples, discuss why is it difficult to hold law enforcers accountable? Grading Scale Rubric
Grade A Excellent Marks Range 7.00-10.00 Strength Well introduced, exhaustive, clearly argued out, evidenced, logical, allowed formats, use of relevant examples and illustrations, accomplishing the level of objective, originality, rich analysis and organization, correct grammar and spelling, general layout, well concluded. Introduced, exhaustive, clearly argued out, logical, tolerable formats, examples and illustrations, evidence, addressing the level of objective, understood language, concluded. Introduced, addressing the matter, clear, examples, and illustrations, linked to the matter, relatively understood language. Tolerable Weaknesses Minor typological error, rare displacement of vocabulary, minor grammatical errors

B+ Very Good B Good

6.00-6.99

Organization, minor grammatical and spelling errors, Satisfactory, but lacks strong evidence, consistency, evidence, and has correct materials but not well supported arguments.

5.00-5.99

C Satisfactory

4.00-4.99

D Poor E Very Poor

3.50-3.99

0.00-3.49

Addressing the matter and demonstrating the understanding of the key issues of the topic, but weak in terms of analysis, little capacity to link right materials presented with the needs/objectives of the question (e.g. discussion, context, etc). A student understands the question, but addresses it poorly or in the way that cannot accomplish the objective (dumping) Student addresses the question with wrong materials, or right materials, but on basis of wrong purpose (e.g. copied work), failure to address the question

All above plus minor factual errors, analysis, failing to accomplish the academic objective, irrelevant examples, weak and unsupported arguments All above plus major factual errors, lacking clarity, deviating from the question. All the above, plus plagiarizing, demonstrating no understanding of the subject matter, outright wrong answer

Oral Presentation Grading Rubric Grade Marks Credit Factor Range A 3.50-5.00 Preparedness, time management, Excellent keeping the group engaged, brevity, clarity of argument, evidence used, use of simple and clear language, originality, addressing the matter correctly, confidence, loudness, eye contact, grammar, spelling B+ 3.00-3.49 ABAVE, with exception of the Very Good already stated weaknesses and these ones

Tolerable weakness Minor grammatical errors and code switching for learning purpose. Reading breaks for EVIDENCING, reliability and flow

B Good

2.50-2.99

ABAVE, with exception of the already stated weaknesses and these ones ABOVE, with exception of the already stated weaknesses and these ones ABOVE, with exception of the already stated weaknesses and these ones

C 2.00-2.49 Satisfactory

D Poor

1.75-1.99

E Very Poor

0.00-1.74

ABOVE, with exception of the already stated weaknesses and these ones

Grammatical and language slips that dont affect meaning, reading but not losing emotional contacts with class, prolonged clarification Contradicting evidences, clarity doubted, arguments questionable, reading for oneself Bringing in irrelevant issues (dumping), not audible, not clear, lack of ownership of the presentation Showing that one does not understand the matter, failure to defend what says, major fact errors, disengaging the class at some point. Plagiarism, major fact errors, disengaging the class to the end.