Patricia M. Shields

Patricia M. Shields (born 1951) is a Regents' Professor in the Political Science Department at Texas State University. Since 2001 she has been Editor-in-Chief of the international and interdisciplinary journal Armed Forces & Society. She is also a Contributing Editor to Parameters: The US Army War College Quarterly and the Section Editor of the Military and Society section to the Handbook of Military Sciences. Shields is notable for her publications focusing on research methods, civil military relations,   gender issues, pragmatism in public administration, peace studies, and the contributions of Jane Addams to public administration and peace theory. She received a BA in Economics from the University of Maryland - College Park, an MA in Economics and a PhD in Public Administration from The Ohio State University.

Scholarship
As a scholar, Shields promoted the classical pragmatism of C. S. Peirce, William James, and John Dewey as an "organizing principle" for the discipline of public administration. Her publication, "The Community of inquiry: Classical Pragmatism and Public Administration" (2003), began an ongoing, interdisciplinary, academic debate in the journal Administration & Society. Patricia M. Shields, (2003). "The Community of Inquiry: Classical Pragmatism and Public Administration." Administration & Society 35 (November): 510-538. The debate began with Miller, Hugh. (2004). Why old pragmatism needs an upgrade Administration & Society Vol. 36 (May): 243-249. Miller asserted that the neopragmatism of Richard Rorty was an upgrade to classical pragmatism. Miller took issue with the Community of inquiry concept defined through 1) problematic situation, 2) scientific attitude, and 3) participatory democracy. The primary dispute occurred over scientific attitude. Shields responded: (2004) Classical Pragmatism: Engaging Practitioner Experience Administration & Society 36 (July):351-362. Other public administration scholars contributed: Snider, Keith. (2005). Rorytan Pragmatism: 'where's the beef' for public administration Administration & SocietyVol. 37 (May):243-247; Evans, Karen. (2005). Upgrade or a different animal altogether? Why old pragmatism better informs public management and new pragmatism misses the point Administration & Society Vol. 37(May) 248-255; Stocis, Gregory. (2005). A view from the trenches: Comments on Miller's Why Old Pragmatism Needs an Upgrade Administration & Society Vol. 36 (July):362-369; Hildebrand, David. (2005) "Pragmatism, Neopragmatism, and Public Administration." Administration & Society 37(July): 345-359; Hickman, Larry. (2004). On Hugh Miller on 'Why old pragmatism needs an Upgrade' Administration & Society Vol. 36: 496-499; Webb, James. (2004). Comment on Hugh T. Miller's Why old Pragmatism needs an upgrade.' Administration & Society Vol. 36: 479-495; Hoch, Charles. (2006) "What Can Rorty Teach an Old Pragmatist Doing Public Administration or Planning? "Administration & Society" 38(3) 389-398. Hugh Miller responded to these critics: (2005) Residues of foundationalism in classical pragmatism Administration & Society Vol. 37(May):360-374, which was countered by Shields (2005) summarizing the responses and reiterating classical pragmatism's applicability to public administration: "Classical Pragmatism Does Not Need and Upgrade: Lessons for Public Administration". Administration & Society 37 (September), 504-518. In 2010, Karen Evans re-energized the discussion: "Into the Woods: A Cautionary Tale for Governance." Administration & Society 42(November): 859-883. Keith Snider (2011) responded to Evans' call for pragmatism with skepticism in "On the problem of adopting pragmatism in public administration." 37: 243-247. Philip Salem and Patricia Shields responded (2011)."Out of the Woods: Facilitating pragmatic inquiry and dialogue." 43:124-132, the debate was concluded (for now) by Travis Whetsell and Patricia Shields (2011). "Reconciling the Varieties of Pragmatism in Public Administration." Administration & Society 43:474- 483. Oliver Kasdan re-articulated the neopragmatist upgrade claim - (2011) A neopragmatist approach to administrative authority: Using rorty's liberalism for social progress. Administrative Theory & Praxis. Vol. 33.No. 4.- which was countered by Whetsell, Travis. (2012). Theory Pluralism in Public Administration: Epistemology, Legitimacy, and Method. American Review of Public Administration. Forthcoming. She applies the feminist pragmatism of Jane Addams to Public Administration.

Shields is also notable in the public administration community for utilizing pragmatism to advance research methodology in the field. For example, Shields is responsible in part for popularizing Dewey's notion of the working hypothesis as a method of preliminary, qualitative, exploratory research, in addition to the concept of the practical ideal type for program evaluation.

Recognition
She received recognition by the American Society for Public Administration, the Section for Women in Public Administration with the Rita Mae Kelly Award for her contribution to gender studies in public administration, National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration with the Leslie A. Whittington Award for excellence in teaching research methods, the Inter-University Seminar for Armed and Society with the Morris Janowitz Career Achievement Award and the journal Public Administration Review with the Laverne Burchfield Award. Texas State University has recognized her with the Presidential Seminar Award, The Presidential Award for Excellence in Teaching and the Everett Swinney Faculty Senate Excellence in Teaching Award. She is a fellow of the National Academy of Public Administration.