Got an interesting classroom exercise, project, or experience that you’d like to share? We want to publish it. Submit a draft of a blog post in an email to firstname.lastname@example.org for the editors to review. Guidelines are on the About page.
Today we have a guest post from Matthew Wilson, assistant professor of political science at West Virginia University and a visiting researcher at the University of Gothenburg as part of the Varieties of Democracy Project. He can be reached at matthew[dot]wilson1[at]mail[dot]wvu[dot]edu.
Sometimes, existing teaching materials can be too narrow or too broad. This was the problem that I encountered when designing a lower-level undergraduate course on Latin American Politics. Many textbooks on Latin American politics are organized around conceptual issues with specific chapters on topics such as economic inequality or race. However, I wanted students to also learn about the unique paths by which countries in the region developed, without limiting the discussion or using a handful of countries to characterize the rest. Rather than cobbling together different materials myself, I saw this as an opportunity for active learning.
My idea was to create teams of students with each team seeking out information on a different country outside of class. This approach drew on distributed learning, which aims to decouple learning from the classroom constraints of time and place, by creating a learning objective outside of class that differs from but contributes to what students learn in class. The approach also reflected crowd-sourcing, where a good is produced by many people performing relatively small tasks. The assignment therefore had to involve a large number of students.
Students listed their top three preferences for countries and I matched them up as best I could. I aimed to control the quality of sources and focus of the assignment, while at the same time encouraging students to teach themselves by conducting independent research. I personally vetted the content that students used by selecting five books that covered each of the roughly twenty countries—for a total of 100 books—and placed them on hold in the university library. I also required each student to submit a list of ten additional online sources for my approval.
The assignment had two parts, for which students received separate grades. First, students had one month to consult the source materials and document major events that occurred in their respective countries. I created a spreadsheet with four tabs that corresponded to heads of state, conflicts, laws, and important documents. For each, students had to skim the respective material and fill in basic information about the event, denoted by column headings:
- The year in which an event occurred (when)
- The event (what)
- The actors involved (who)
- The source(s) consulted
I discouraged students from providing any sort of explanation. Moreover, I was purposely vague about what constituted an event to encourage them to seriously consider what mattered. I graded students’ spreadsheets in terms of thoroughness; in large part, this was determined by comparing the spreadsheets of students who were assigned the same country.
In the second step, I grouped students into teams according to the country they had researched, and each team created a combined, revised timeline that described in only a few sentences each event that had been included. I checked the accuracy of the content in the timelines with the help of graduate research assistants, and each team received a grade on its combined timeline. At the end of the course, I consolidated students’ timelines into a single manuscript, added public domain images, and handed the final product back to them.
The results of this assignment were quite positive. It enabled me to complement the country-specific knowledge students were acquiring outside of class with lectures on more general themes. Each student became a “country expert” and therefore almost always had something to contribute to in-class discussions, which in turn improved their essay responses. Students were motivated to work on a project that was not the standard research paper. Overall, the distributed learning, self-instruction, and collaboration with teammates enhanced students’ performance in the course. I will definitely use this technique in the future. Additional details can be found in my article about the assignment in the Journal of Political Science Education.
I want my final exam for this course to be its pièce de résistance — a vehicle for students to demonstrate how well they can apply their knowledge about the relationships between economics and the environment. I also want the application of knowledge to happen in an authentic, real-world context, where writing has a clearly-defined role, audience, purpose, and format. So here is the exam:
A Plan for Louisiana’s Future
You are the Director of the Office of Planning and Budget for the State of Louisiana.
The governor of Louisiana
Recommend to the governor whether Louisiana should either:
- Raise taxes to build the southern part of the state to a 10,000 year flood standard, or
- Stop all public infrastructure spending in areas unprotected by existing levees.
These are your only policy options. Write a 2-3 page rationale for choosing one of them. Discuss why your choice is economically best for the state. For evidence in support of your rationale, refer to relevant course readings and Continue reading
Saturday, September 1, marks the first of APSA’s mini-Teaching and Learning Conferences at the association’s annual meeting. I’m assuming most of you who are attending the meeting have already decided whether to register for the mini-TLC, but on the chance a few people haven’t . . . here is the program schedule and general information. As is often the case, I will be leading one of the workshop sessions — on students learning course content by designing games.
Logistics might be more important to you at this point. I lived in Boston while in college and still visit regularly. I’m happy to answer specific questions posted as comments. For example:
If you’re staying in a conference hotel or nearby, take the MBTA Silver Line 1 bus from Logan Airport (free for arriving passengers) to South Station, transfer to the Red Line inbound toward Alewife. Go to Park Street station, then get on —
- Any outbound Green Line train to exit at Copley station.
- Any outbound Green Line train but E to exit at the Hynes Convention Center.
- The outbound Green Line E train to exit at the Prudential Center.
The above makes the subway sound more complicated than it actually is. Copley, Hynes, and the Prudential are all within a few blocks of each other. Transferring between different subway lines is remarkably easy, especially since this is a public transit system in the USA. And the trip will cost you less than US$3. Here is the full MBTA subway map.
Other tidbits: Continue reading
I’ve been a fan of the quality of failure essay since Amanda introduced me to it several years ago, and I’ve tweaked it several times with varying degrees of success. In an attempt to avoid a mistake I made with it last semester, I have altered the assignment yet again by shortening the instructions considerably:
- The rubric below.
- Adam Bryant, “Soledad O’Brien: Seek Out the Curious and the Fastidious,” The New York Times, 10 June 2016, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/12/business/media/soledad-obrien-seek-out-the-curious-and-the-fastidious.html.
In a 2-3 page essay, analyze how you learned in this course. What actions helped or hurt your learning? Which components of the course most enabled you to better understand ideas or apply them in new ways?
Note that I have moved significantly away from the assignment’s original theme of failure. I am doing this for two reasons. First, in other courses this assignment has produced a lot of commentary from students about what I will label the superficial aspects of failure — as in “at the beginning of the semester I promised myself that I would get an A++ on every assignment but I failed at this because I didn’t manage my time well.” Second, I am curious to find out whether students regard the SCAMPER-based game design exercises as worthwhile, but I’m not going to influence their thoughts by explicitly asking about it.
In one of the crueller ironies of life, I’ve been working through a half-dozen doctoral theses – either as supervisor or examiner – in recent weeks, just as the weather has been so lovely as to make any work a distraction.
But, professional that I am, I have managed it, just in time for my summer leave, during which I intend – successfully, I warrant – to do absolutely nothing that doesn’t involve relaxing and/or eating.
Consuming such a volume of words, and commenting thereon, has been instructive for me, as well as for the authors (I hope).
In particular, it’s underlined a couple of key messages that apply as much to teaching as they do to research. Continue reading
My general approach to teaching is to emphasize the upper levels of Bloom’s taxonomy. Creation and evaluation are important. Memorization, not so much. While game design gives students the opportunity to create something connected to course content, they should also evaluate whether what they’ve created is on target. So, as promised in my last post, here is the relevant assignment, be due after students play the games that they have designed:
1. Read the rubric below.
2. In the form of a 3-4 page, double-spaced essay, evaluate the game you played that was designed by another team. How well did the game:
- Incorporate the principles of the golden rule and magic circle in relation to events in the real world?
- Utilize elements of conflict and cooperation?
- Facilitate meaningful decision making?
Work independently, do not discuss your essay with other students.
Yesterday was a tricky one on both sides of the Atlantic for political scientists. Between Trump’s press conference and the British government’s ever more erratic behaviour on Brexit, it felt at points like a film about politics, rather than a real-life one.
It’s not to say that these things are intrinsically wrong or bad*, but that they are exceptionally hard to understand. My own cri de coeur about not knowing any more got more traffic than anything I’ve posted for a very long time, suggesting I’m not alone.
And I’m not, which is rather the point.
One of the more prominent challenges for those who teach is that you’re expected to know everything, either by your students or by yourself.
Think to when you began teaching and how you worried about needing to cover all the bases and know all the answers. “What if they ask me a question I don’t know?” is the cry we’ve all made (except those of us with delusions of adequacy).
In my last post in this series, I discussed integrating the SCAMPER technique with student game design via a writing assignment and in-class presentations. I’m a firm believer in the benefits of iteration when it comes to learning, so I’m including a second round of game design. For the second round, students will again use SCAMPER, but this time they will actually build new games. Here is the preparatory writing assignment:
People frequently do not understand the relationships between economics, politics, and the environment. Games are powerful learning tools, but there are few high-quality games about these relationships.
Design a game that illustrates a relationship between economics, politics, and the environment.
Apply SCAMPER to an existing game other than the California Water Crisis game — for example, Risk, Mahjong, Settlers of Catan, or Monopoly — to design a framework for a new game. Choose a topic of interest. Put the game in a specific context, such as “the effects of sea level rise in Boston” rather than “climate change.”
Write a proposal to Hasbro’s Product Development Division in which you discuss the new game you have designed by using SCAMPER on an existing game. Identify the topic of the new game, what features of the existing game will change, how they will change, and why these changes are beneficial.
After students have submitted their individual proposals, I will again cluster the class into teams. The members of each team will discuss their ideas, decide on a single design to pursue, and create and deliver in-class presentations. I’ve devoted a subsequent class session for teams to physically construct the games and another one for students to actually play the games. Debriefing will occur via another writing assignment, which will be the subject of my next post.
It’s that period in the year where we’re all doing all those things we said we’d do now, because we didn’t have time then.
Personally, thanks to the continued pyschodrama of British politics, I’m still knee-deep in commitments to lots of people, with only scant sight of any end. Indeed, I’m increasingly of the opinion that ‘summers’ (in the sense of a break) don’t really exist.
Fortunately, my habit and commitment to write a weekly post here reminds me that this project has fallen off the wagon somewhat. By the end of February I had a good sense of what I was going to do with my revised module on negotiation, so I parked it.
And now it’s July and I need to get the handbrake off once more.
Those with better memories will recall that I plan to create a series of interlocking activities that shape subsequent work and allow for a mix of exploring different issues, while also deepening their understanding of the interlinkages.
The main issue has been to find a topic that can link these all together.
While the shores of IR promise the potential of conflict and peril, I am concerned that it doesn’t let me drop down to more mundane and domestic issues.
Likewise, modelling an environment in politics risks having to make use of structural divisions on ideological lines that might be difficult to sustain over a semester.
If the framework is to work, then it needs to give enough space to allow for a range of activities, while also generating meaningful consequences to handle down the line.
With this in mind, I’m inclining to make the group into some fictional advisory committee to a government, which can then pronounce on assorted issues, sometimes representing different interests, sometimes acting on personal conscience.
An interesting opener to this – and the idea that came to mind this morning – is that this structure lends itself to a nice ice-breaker, where students can get to know each other and begin to assess their capacities.
Historically, I’ve used Victor’s Hobbes card game for this, mainly to highlight that people are shits (not Victor, obvs) and that since negotiation requires you to deal with people, you need to work on how you handle them.
However, what I have in my mind’s eye is something that speaks more to building some trust and confidence in each other, given that they will be having to have a functional relationship over 11 weeks.
Of course, knowing what you’re aiming for isn’t the same as actually having it mapped out, but it’s an important start: as and when I find myself trying to escape the turmoil of Brexit, I can at least have a clear point to work from.
Unless the football thing intervenes.
Today’s post discusses part of a previously-mentioned workshop on managing difficult conversations in the workplace. The workshop was led by Pamela Heffernan of Performance Management Associates. If you want to find out more about leadership development workshops like this one, she can be contacted at PHeffernan [at] PerformanceManagementAssociates [dot] com.
Difficult conversations can be managed effectively by following a process of preparation, engagement, exploration, and resolution.
To prepare, focus on the specific problem you want to resolve. Question your story; don’t rely on assumptions. What don’t you know about the situation that might be relevant? Also define your opening statement – the first words that will come out of your mouth – to frame the conversation around the issue at hand. This statement should be a maximum of two to three sentences and include an open-ended question that minimizes the other person’s defensiveness.
To engage, take a position of neutrality, talk with the person rather than at them, and ask questions to find out what you don’t know – what are the reasons the person is acting the way they are acting? Identify the person’s fear and address it: “I think you’re afraid of X. Is that correct?” Your task is to listen with curiosity. Only then will you be able to respond in an appropriate manner.
Next, explore potential alternatives. Focus on outcomes. What does success look like, and how do we get there? Ask “If you were in my shoes, how would you see this?” At this point you will probably know if the other person understands the impact of their behavior, wants to change, and is coachable, or if the person lacks the necessary self-awareness. In the latter case, the only choice, if you’re in a managerial position, as an instructor is with a student, is to require compliance.
Finally, develop a plan for resolving the situation. Establish agreement on who is going to do what when, and document it to hold the person accountable. A follow-up email becomes the launch point for the next conversation.