English | 简体中文
Agent skill stack for manuscripts targeted at Public Administration Review (PAR) — the flagship journal of the American Society for Public Administration (ASPA), published by Wiley, and the field's premier venue for bureaucracy & governance, public-sector performance & management, public personnel/HR, public finance & budgeting, collaborative governance, public service motivation, and policy implementation. PAR's defining feature is that it bridges research and practice: every article is expected to speak to practitioners as well as scholars, via Evidence for Practice.
This repository is opinionated. It is not a generic social-science writing toolbox and it is not a public-policy pack repurposed for administration. It is a PAR-specific stack: a question of field-wide significance to public administration, a credible practitioner "so-what," a design defended on its own methodological terms, double-blind preparation, and a TOP-compliant transparency package (Dataverse / QDR).
Official basis checked 2026-06 (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准). Volatile specifics (editors and term,
exact caps, fee/APC, portal, policy wording) change — items not directly confirmed are marked 待核实
in resources/official-source-map.md. Verify on the official
journal page.
PAR's constraints differ from a theory-driven PA journal or a policy-analysis journal:
| Constraint | PAR | Implication |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Whole field of public administration & management | The paper must matter beyond its niche |
| Premium on | Field-wide significance + practitioner relevance (research↔practice bridge) | A purely academic finding with no "so-what" is off-fit |
| Methods | Quantitative, experimental, qualitative, mixed — judged on own terms | Do not force one template onto every paper |
| Signature requirement | Evidence for Practice — 3–5 takeaway points for practitioners | Draft it with the contribution, not at the end |
| Publisher / owner | Wiley / ASPA | Wiley submission system; confirm the live portal |
| Review model | Double-blind | Anonymize the manuscript; refer to prior work in the third person |
| Fee | No submission fee stated | Do not budget a submission fee (verify) 待核实 |
| Length | ≤ 8,000 words incl. abstract/endnotes/references; abstract ≤ 150 | Tables/figures/appendices are excluded from the count |
| Style | APA author–date | Confirm the current edition |
| Transparency | TOP-guidelines signatory — Dataverse/QDR, data-availability statement | Build materials as you go; document design/prep decisions |
| Article types | Scholarly Take · Conceptualizing PA · Early Career Intel · Practically Speaking | Choose the right type up front |
- Scholarly Takes — submitted research manuscripts; the main empirical format.
- Conceptualizing Public Administration — conceptual/theoretical thought pieces and "state of PA."
- Early Career Intel — research manuscripts by junior scholars; same rigor, tighter scope.
- Practically Speaking — practitioner–scholar co-authored pieces (often from PAR Talk / On PAR).
- Public Administration in Print — book reviews (out of scope for this empirical stack).
/plugin marketplace add https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/public-administration-review-skills
/plugin install public-administration-review-skills
/reload-pluginsgit clone https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/public-administration-review-skills.git
cd public-administration-review-skills
mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -R skills/pubar-* ~/.claude/skills/
# or
mkdir -p ~/.codex/skills && cp -R skills/pubar-* ~/.codex/skills/Use pubar-workflow to tell me which skill I should use next for my PAR manuscript.
pubar-topic-selection
▼
pubar-literature-positioning
▼
pubar-theory-building
▼
pubar-research-design
▼
pubar-data-analysis
▼
pubar-tables-figures
▼
pubar-writing-style (polish + Evidence for Practice)
▼
pubar-transparency-and-data
▼
pubar-review-process
▼
pubar-submission
▼
pubar-rebuttal
pubar-workflow is the router — it tells you which skill to use next based on where you are and which
article type you are targeting. Draft the practitioner "so-what" alongside the contribution, not at
the end.
| Skill | Purpose |
|---|---|
pubar-workflow |
Router — decides which sub-skill to invoke next |
pubar-topic-selection |
Field-wide significance + practitioner fit; pick the right article type |
pubar-literature-positioning |
Engage core PA debates; speak past your niche; guard against JPART/JPAM drift |
pubar-theory-building |
Build a portable mechanism with a managerial lever (the dual test) |
pubar-research-design |
Defend the design — reform DiD, bureaucrat/citizen experiments, case, mixed |
pubar-data-analysis |
Analysis norms, uncertainty, robustness; estimates that bear Evidence for Practice |
pubar-tables-figures |
Accessible, self-contained exhibits that show magnitude to managers |
pubar-writing-style |
APA style; reach scholars + practitioners; write honest Evidence for Practice |
pubar-transparency-and-data |
TOP transparency; Dataverse/QDR; data-availability statement; restricted data |
pubar-review-process |
Double-blind review, desk screening, article-type routing, decision spectrum |
pubar-submission |
Preflight — anonymization, word/abstract caps, Evidence for Practice, portal |
pubar-rebuttal |
R&R response-letter strategy protecting the contribution + Evidence for Practice |
resources/external_tools.md— PA data sources (FedScope / FEVS / Census of Governments / WGI / QoG) + R / Stata / Python and qualitative/CAQDAS toolingresources/official-source-map.md— official Wiley / ASPA URLs behind every fact, with 待核实 markers on unverified itemsresources/worked-examples/01-introduction.md— a before→after PAR-style introduction (fictional)resources/exemplars/library.md— real, web-verified PAR papers by subfield × methodresources/code/— vendored Stata + Python causal-inference skeleton
| Journal | Owner / publisher | What it is | How it differs from PAR |
|---|---|---|---|
| PAR | ASPA / Wiley | Practice-bridging PA flagship | Demands a credible practitioner "so-what" (Evidence for Practice) |
| JPART | Oxford | Theory-driven PA | More formal/theoretical; no practitioner-takeaway requirement |
| JPAM | APPAM / Wiley | Policy analysis & evaluation | Contribution is to policy choice, not administration |
| Governance | Wiley | Comparative institutions / governance | Lens is regime/institutional design, not public-management practice |
| ARPA / Public Administration | Sage / Wiley | General PA field journals | Distinct venues; do not attribute PAR policies to them |
- It does not write a submittable manuscript for you
- It does not simulate any specific editor's or reviewer's taste
- It does not assert volatile metadata (current editors and term, exact caps, fee/APC, portal, policy wording) — verify on the official page; unverified items are marked 待核实
- It does not decide whether your question is of field-wide significance or whether your practitioner takeaway is honest — that is the researcher's call
- awesome-journal-skills — Index of journal-specific skill packs
- Public Administration Review (Wiley Online Library) — publisher home
- PAR at ASPA — owner, journal information
MIT