Electoral Candidate Debates for Policy Learning in Large First-Year Classes

IF 0.9 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE Journal of Political Science Education Pub Date : 2022-10-22 DOI:10.1080/15512169.2022.2130795
B. Martin, M. Redmond, Liz Woodside
{"title":"Electoral Candidate Debates for Policy Learning in Large First-Year Classes","authors":"B. Martin, M. Redmond, Liz Woodside","doi":"10.1080/15512169.2022.2130795","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The benefits of experiential learning are well-documented, but large course enrollment can be seen as a barrier to providing meaningful experiential learning experiences. Political science literature on experiential learning in large undergraduate classes has prioritized simulations of political processes over direct student engagement in actual political processes. This multiple case study analyzes two in-class electoral candidate debates, one municipal and one federal, organized in a 300-student introductory social welfare course. Detailing the tensions inherent to organizing for maximum student engagement, and drawing on qualitative data from 73 student reflections, we found that in-class electoral candidate debates are feasible and effective as an experiential civic education activity. Though preparation work was complex and substantial, in-class candidate debates resulted in a rich learning foundation for the whole course. Key components for effective learning included student generated topics and questions and a wide range of candidates. Debriefing was also essential given the varied levels of prior knowledge inevitable in large classes. This paper extends the literature on teaching in the large policy classroom to a promising new experiential learning activity. It provides useful guidance for others who wish to harness the benefits of experiential civic education in large classes.","PeriodicalId":46033,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Science Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Political Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2022.2130795","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract The benefits of experiential learning are well-documented, but large course enrollment can be seen as a barrier to providing meaningful experiential learning experiences. Political science literature on experiential learning in large undergraduate classes has prioritized simulations of political processes over direct student engagement in actual political processes. This multiple case study analyzes two in-class electoral candidate debates, one municipal and one federal, organized in a 300-student introductory social welfare course. Detailing the tensions inherent to organizing for maximum student engagement, and drawing on qualitative data from 73 student reflections, we found that in-class electoral candidate debates are feasible and effective as an experiential civic education activity. Though preparation work was complex and substantial, in-class candidate debates resulted in a rich learning foundation for the whole course. Key components for effective learning included student generated topics and questions and a wide range of candidates. Debriefing was also essential given the varied levels of prior knowledge inevitable in large classes. This paper extends the literature on teaching in the large policy classroom to a promising new experiential learning activity. It provides useful guidance for others who wish to harness the benefits of experiential civic education in large classes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
大一学生政策学习的选举候选人辩论
摘要体验式学习的好处是有据可查的,但大量的课程招生可能被视为提供有意义的体验式学习体验的障碍。关于大型本科生课堂体验式学习的政治学文献将模拟政治过程置于学生直接参与实际政治过程之上。这项多案例研究分析了在一门300名学生的社会福利入门课程中组织的两次选举候选人课堂辩论,一次是市政辩论,另一次是联邦辩论。详细描述了组织最大限度地提高学生参与度所固有的紧张关系,并利用73名学生反思的定性数据,我们发现,课堂选举候选人辩论作为一种体验式的公民教育活动是可行和有效的。尽管准备工作既复杂又充实,但课堂上的候选人辩论为整个课程奠定了丰富的学习基础。有效学习的关键组成部分包括学生提出的主题和问题以及广泛的候选人。鉴于在大型课堂上不可避免地会有不同程度的先验知识,汇报也是必不可少的。本文将有关大型政策课堂教学的文献扩展到一种很有前途的新型体验式学习活动。它为其他希望在大班中利用体验式公民教育的好处的人提供了有用的指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
36.40%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: The Journal of Political Science Education is an intellectually rigorous, path-breaking, agenda-setting journal that publishes the highest quality scholarship on teaching and pedagogical issues in political science. The journal aims to represent the full range of questions, issues and approaches regarding political science education, including teaching-related issues, methods and techniques, learning/teaching activities and devices, educational assessment in political science, graduate education, and curriculum development. In particular, the journal''s Editors welcome studies that reflect the scholarship of teaching and learning, or works that would be informative and/or of practical use to the readers of the Journal of Political Science Education , and address topics in an empirical way, making use of the techniques that political scientists use in their own substantive research.
期刊最新文献
Teaching Political Science in Times of Conflict: Introducing the Symposium Dark Horse Didactics: Design Thinking in the Teaching of International Relations How Do Simulations Affect Career Decision Making? The Case of “Model Turkish Diplomacy” The Opportunities and Challenges of Teaching Political Science in a Small Island Developing State: The Case of Mauritius Curricular Design, American Political Development, and the Future of the Undergraduate Political Science Major
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1