Flipped Learning

Some of my students mentioned to me after I gave a public lecture earlier in the year that they’d never seen me lecture before! I am very proud of this and although a lecture can be a fun and lovely thing, I think my students benefit a lot from my alternative approach, flipped learning.

The other day I answered a call to provide a case study for a book on flipped learning by Robert Talbert and ended up writing loads. I understand that you are now marking the days on your calendar, waiting, waiting, waiting for this book to be published, longing for the moment that you can read about my flipped classroom! Don’t worry! I have empathy for you and I will here give you the full answers to all his questions so after you’ve read it, you can get on and live your lives after all…..

In seriousness, this post is a lightly edited version of a questionnaire that I answered on my longstanding flipped learning practice (with a few examples and some advice towards the end). If there’s anything you’d like to know more about, just hit me in the comments.

Continue reading “Flipped Learning”

Reference lists: The good, the bad, and the ugly

I have, barring a few late submissions that will slowly filter in over the coming days and weeks, finished marking for the summer. Generally, the quality of the assessments has been good and it’s always satisfying to see how students have developed their thinking and their work over the semester.

Obviously, one of the things we assess when examining students’ academic work is how they engage with and reference literature. Despite guidance and recommendations on literature (i.e. on module reading lists and suggestions for journals that particularly fit the brief of a given course etc.) there are still some significant differences in how students approach sourcing for their work. 

So, fresh out of marking, I have been pondering how, next semester, I can help students further engage with considering the quality and relevance of the sources that are making up their reference lists. With that in mind, I am thinking of running a brief in-seminar exercise I am calling ‘Reference lists: The good, the bad, and the ugly’. 

Continue reading “Reference lists: The good, the bad, and the ugly”

5 Strategies for AI-Resistant Assignments

I recently got to attend the University of Central Florida’s Teaching and Learning with AI Conference in Orlando, and it’s one I highly recommend for anyone interested in practical ideas on how to think about, resist, and use Generative AI in higher education. The presentations are all 25 minutes and the presenters make the most of their short time. I want to share some ideas from one of those presenters, Ashley Evans, professor and Program Chair of Software Development and Cloud Computing at Valencia College. While her field is obviously far from political science, her strategies for transforming assignments from AI-vulnerable to AI-resistant are easily adapted to our field, and worth considering. I want to note that these are my recollections and takes on Evans’ presentation; all ideas here are hers, not mine (excepting the adaptations to polisci). Her website is https://ashley-evans.vercel.app/ and she has told me she’s happy to talk AI with other faculty; contact her by email.

Evans’ stated goals for creating AI resistant assignments include:

  • Reduce student ability to get high marks from solely AI-generated submissions
  • Eliminate the ability of AI to complete the task in place of the student
  • Challenge students to think critically about AI generated output, if used.
  • Relieve instructors from the role of AI-detectives.

All of these seem like worthy goals to me. Most importantly in my mind, she’s interested in taking the weight off of faculty of trying to root out unauthorized AI use, not by banning it, but by revising assignments so that AI is genuinely not useful on the assignment, and by establishing grading criteria that focuses on completion of tasks that AI cannot do well. This is a tough balancing act, but one that I think faculty need to wrestle with as they figure out how much they want to incorporate AI into their classes.

With that, here are her five strategies:

Continue reading “5 Strategies for AI-Resistant Assignments”

A Field Experiment in Campaigns and Elections

Today’s guest post comes from Dr. Jeffrey Broxmeyer from the University of Toledo!


In the Fall of 2024, I introduced a field experiment project into my Campaigns and Elections course. Students set up a basic experiment that followed campaign communications across two congressional races during the 2024 elections in the United States. During the semester, they collected original data, analyzed findings, and presented them to the class.

Goals

The purpose of this experiment was to have students analyze patterns in campaign communication to better understand electoral dynamics. My teaching objective, however, was to demonstrate how social science thinking differs from punditry, journalism, or personal viewpoints.

Specifically, I wanted students to approach the 2024 election cycle as political scientists with research questions rather than as partisans armed with ready-made talking points. Conducting a field experiment demonstrates that scholars do not begin with answers. Instead, we use transparent and systematic methods to examine evidence that can support verifiable claims. 

My other hope was that the hands-on process of designing and implementing a field experiment would encourage maximum buy-in and classroom participation.

Continue reading “A Field Experiment in Campaigns and Elections”

Mapping Assessments Against Learning Outcomes: A student-led project

Today I’m very excited to present a student-authored blog by two undergraduate students, Alex Farsari and Moulika Shoume, from the UCL Political Science department. Thanks to them for running this project and writing a post about it and to Dr Manuel Vogt for supporting them.

Imagine a classroom where assessments don’t just test knowledge but actively guide students toward mastering the skills and competencies they need for success. What if every exam, essay, and project were carefully aligned with key learning outcomes (LOs), ensuring both theoretical knowledge and practical application? Educators hold the power to shape this experience—but are they using the right tools? As Political Science students at University College London (UCL), we embarked on a project to explore whether our academic journey truly fosters the skills we need to thrive in our future careers.

Continue reading “Mapping Assessments Against Learning Outcomes: A student-led project”

Course Evaluation With Perusall

Students have been so engaged with reading assignments on Perusall that I decided to use it for my own end-of-semester course evaluations. I upload a pdf of my course syllabus to Perusall and create an assignment that contains the following instructions:

Review the Course Description and Learning Outcomes on page 1 of the syllabus and answer the questions below.

What elements of the course were the most helpful in helping you achieve these outcomes? Why?

What elements of the course were the least helpful in helping you achieve these outcomes? Why?

How does this course compare to others that you have taken (learned more/less/about the same, topic more/less interesting, etc.)? Why?

What aspects of your life outside of this course helped or hindered your learning? How?

What parts of this course should continue? Why?

Which parts should I eliminate? Why?

What should I add (assignments, exercises, books, articles . . .)? Why?*

The feedback that I get from this Perusall assignment is far more useful than the results of my university’s official evaluation instrument.

*The last three questions come from Simon’s ABC Post-It note exercise.

Random photo of a cat in a box.

Have fun, be flexible and encourage feedback….

It has been an exciting month for me and podcasts. Here I am again, this time talking on the Mahara podcast about portfolio assessment, which I am sure I will write about here again.

This could also be a good moment to re-up a previous episode I did for the same pod:

Let me know if you have any questions about portfolio assessment that you’d like me to write more about for ALPS!

Explain and justify

Students often think that there is a ‘right’ or a ‘wrong’ approach to every aspect of an assignment. This is a thought that can often lead to intense anxiety around an assessment period.

There are, of course, many areas in which this is correct. There are things that are simply ‘right’ or ‘wrong’, depending on the context and form of the assessment. If a department insists that a student submit with Harvard-style referencing, for example, it’s good practice for them to cite in Harvard, rather than footnotes.

However, students often take these concerns to a degree that might limit the potential for going out and exploring exciting and original cases or approaches, as they feel the need to double check every detail before committing – “is it right to use China as a case study for this essay question?”, “is it suitable to use liberal intergovernmentalism as a theory in my essay?”, etc. To students that are worrying about whether their approach, case, method, is the ‘right’ one to employ in completing an assessment, I usually reply with the simple advice to ‘explain and justify’.

Continue reading “Explain and justify”

Guest Post: Feminist Pedagogy within Constraints: Teaching Reflective Writing in a UK Higher Education Institution

Dr Cherry Miller
Dr Jenny Morrison

Today’s guest post is by Cherry Miller from University of Helsinki and Jenny Morrison from University of Glasgow.

Assessments are a core area for feminist teaching. Traditional assessments such as the essay or exam can reinforce gendered or other hierarchies in education through favouring ‘masculine’ forms of learning that prioritise disimpassioned objective expression. Thus, feminists have called for greater diversity of assessments in general, and assessments that value the personal alongside the ‘objective’ political in particular. While feminists engage with a range of assessments, the reflective journal (RJ) has become commonplace on feminist courses. 

Nonetheless, research cautions against the assumption that ‘alternative’ assessment automatically fosters more effective learning and teaching. Rather, all academic assessments include implicit expectations and exist within the constraints of the academy. That the reflective journal remains a less familiar – albeit growing – format in higher education means there can be greater uncertainty regarding the expectations of such an assessment. Therefore, we believe the drive to diversify assessments leads to certain tensions for feminist pedagogy.

Continue reading “Guest Post: Feminist Pedagogy within Constraints: Teaching Reflective Writing in a UK Higher Education Institution”

Pondering the future of political science education


Guest post by Dr. Jeremy F. G. Moulton at the University of York!

As political scientists, we often teach students not to speculate about the future in their work and that they should, instead, champion critical analysis based on verifiable trends.

However, I have recently been doing a fair amount of speculation. Specifically, I have been wondering about what the future of teaching and learning in political science will look like – a topic that greatly intrigues me and I’m eager to hear others’ thoughts on.

This came about because I have been recently involved in the work of the Faculty of Social Sciences’s ‘Faculty Futures Group’ at York. The group seeks to get away from the short-term reactivity that we can all be guilty of in Higher Education; focusing on the next week, the next semester, maybe, at a push, the next year, but rarely the proper “long term”. The Faculty Futures Group, therefore, has the mission to ‘Scan the horizon to identify important new directions for social science education and research in the medium to long-term (next 5-15 years)’. 

Whilst the project focuses on the Social Sciences as a whole, I have, of course, been thinking of the future of political science. And, as is fitting with this blog, I have been thinking about the future of political science’s approach to teaching and learning. 

There are a few themes that have struck me as particularly pressing and interesting; themes that I can most imagine significant change in the coming years. There are two that are at the forefront of my mind:

The first is assessment. When I undertook my undergraduate degree in Politics, the exam, the coursework essay, and the dissertation were the only assessment formats. This was not an uncommon experience at all, and still today, these feel like the dominant forms of assessment in our field.

However, it seems that there is some significant change happening now and that there is more on the horizon. Experiments with pass/ fail rather than graded assessment, with assessment optionality, with inclusive assessment design are all big themes that I can see really shaping how we assess political science courses in the coming years. 

Course-level innovations, tailored to the subject matter or to hoped-for employment outcomes, could be a path of potential for future innovation. I have also been thinking about what innovations could be made to champion the potential for fun or enjoyment in the assessment process. It probably won’t be a shock to anyone that, as an academic, I quite like the essay format. But I also totally get that many students might not love it and that we could occasionally vary our approaches in a way that makes students more enthused when it comes round to assessment time. For example, for a while now, I have been considering the potential of using creative writing in our classrooms and expanding that to assessment.

The second is AI. To be honest, I am a bit skeptical when anyone is a bit too enthused about AI and the future of education. This piece from Smolansky et al. has solidified my thoughts that some can be too keen on adopting the use of AI in assessments, whilst students might have genuine concerns about “watering down” the education experience. However, it’s nigh on impossible to turn our backs on AI as an important educational development. As this great ALPS piece from Amanda Rosen shows, there is a clear need for academics to engage with AI in our approach to assessment. It’s already apparent that some students are making quite liberal and not exactly productive use of generative AI as a writing resource.  

But should this mean that we welcome AI into our teaching and learning environment? There are already some in Higher Education that are leading the way on this. Auburn University provides a free, self-paced online course for those interested in employing AI in their teaching, for example. But this might be outpacing what contemporary students want from their education.

Recent conversations I have had with students indicate that there is quite strong opposition to AI replacing traditional forms of student-to-academic communication. Where there is enthusiasm is where AI chatbots might be a quick go-to tool for asking the “embarrassing” questions that students might be afraid to ask but are really important to them, e.g. “I know you’ve mentioned it a dozen times but… how long is the essay meant to be?”. 

That these themes are the ones that seem the most pressing and interesting is almost certainly a result of my own pressing teaching concerns and areas of interest. And so, I’d be very interested to hear from anyone else! What do you think the future holds? What are the pressing, interesting themes that we should all actually be worrying about or embracing? And finally, I would love to know if anyone has a crystal ball I can borrow so I can finally get to the bottom of all this ‘future’ business…