If you agree with House that education is human development,
then what is our educational responsibility to seek out and involve
audiences who otherwise have little or no access to the policy proc-
ess to register their interests and preferences? Depending on your
answer, is this education or advocacy? Is it balanced or biased?
To summarize Hahn’s observations, he said: “Our research has
led us to wonder if balance or fairness is not a more useful standard
than nonadvocacy. Regardless of whether public affairs educators
advocate or adhere to the neutrality model, should the foremost con-
sideration be a serious effort
1. to identify as full a range of perspectives on the relevant issues
as possible,
2. to remain open to new definitions of balance as additional per-
spectives come to light, and
3. to ensure that each perspective is given fair treatment?
Should neutrality be rejected as unfair if it covers only a partial
range of perspectives? Is advocacy irresponsible if it fails to ac-
knowledge and make sure that learners understand the advocated
position’s weaknesses, uncertainties, and opposing viewpoints? Is
special assistance to people with poorly represented interests and
perspectives defensible on grounds of balance, with the correction of
serious power imbalances understood as a prerequisite for fairness
and the mutual understanding of all points of view on an issue?”
(Hahn, p. 31).
Also at last year’s conference, I made a presentation that sug-
gested the need to go beyond the alternatives-consequences ap-
proach on some issues. I argued that presenting the information was
a necessary, but not sufficient, condition. The educational role in
public policy education should strive to reach understanding among
all relevant interest groups about the interests and preferences of
each other and the reasons why.
I also said that conflict resolution and interest-based negotiation on
some issues may require the educator to remain an integral part of
the process all the way through to decisions.
Otto Doering, in an unpublished paper earlier this year, asks if
there is still a constructive role for public policy education (Doering).
He argues persuasively that there is less interest in, and impact
from, traditional public policy education programs than there was
even a decade ago. He attributes this to the fact that more cen-
tralized decision making and government professionals have taken
over much of the policy process leaving mostly lobbying and de-
manding services as remaining citizen roles.
Otto does call, however, for increased policy education on certain
issues on which the local citizen still has discretion, either because
38