How do intellectual leaders of professional schools of international affairs, whose institutions primarily educate and train master's students for careers in government, the non-governmental sector, and the private sector, differ from academic administrators in disciplinary departments, whose primary raison d’être is producing the next generation of scholars whose primary task is to conduct basic research, in terms of how they see the academic enterprise and their expectations of faculty research and writing? The results of our recent survey of deans of the Association of Professional Schools of International Affairs (APSIA), the leading professional body for international relations-oriented policy schools, and chairs of Top-50 political science departments, reveal some predictable differences but also some surprising overlap. Specifically, we find a clear convergence between disciplinary departments and APSIA schools on the core requirements for promotion and tenure: Peer-reviewed publications in high-impact scholarly journals and leading university presses. But rather than relax demands for other activities by their faculty as they hold them to the expectations of their disciplines, APSIA deans still expect significant policy and broader public engagement from them. In other words, policy schools’ faculties face a greater array of professional demands than their disciplinary colleagues. APSIA schools simultaneously embrace the disciplinary criteria for excellence and still try to maintain a close policy focus as they seek to bridge the gap between these two worlds. How feasible this effort will turn out to be hinges on whether policy school faculty can indeed do it all.

中文翻译：

---

政策学院院长想要一切：APSIA 院长和前 50 名政治学系主任关于招聘和晋升的调查结果

国际事务专业学校的知识领袖，其机构主要教育和培训硕士生在政府、非政府部门和私营部门的职业生涯，与学科部门的学术管理人员有何不同，其主要存在理由是培养以进行基础研究为主要任务的下一代学者，他们如何看待学术事业以及他们对教师研究和写作的期望？我们最近对国际事务专业学校协会 (APSIA) 院长的调查结果，该协会是国际关系导向政策学校的领先专业机构，以及前 50 名政治学系的主席，揭示了一些可预见的差异，但也揭示了一些惊人的重叠。具体来说，我们发现学科部门和 APSIA 学校在晋升和任期的核心要求上存在明显的一致性：在高影响力的学术期刊和领先的大学出版社发表同行评议的出版物。但是，APSIA 的院长们并没有放松他们对其他活动的要求，因为他们要求他们遵守学科的期望，他们仍然期望他们有重大的政策和更广泛的公众参与。换句话说，政策学院的院系比他们的学科同事面临着更多的专业需求。APSIA 学校同时接受卓越的学科标准，并在寻求弥合这两个世界之间的差距时仍试图保持密切的政策重点。这项工作的可行性取决于政策学院的教员是否真的能做到这一切。