Creating an Interactive Classroom: Enhancing Student Engagement and Learning in Political Science Courses

ABSTRACT

Students of the pedagogy of teaching have found that cooperative/problem-based learning activities engage the learner, promote ownership of the material, advance the development of higher-level cognitive skills and increase retention better than more passive learning activities. Despite broad recognition within the political science discipline that classroom activities can and should facilitate better student learning outcomes, political science classes (both large and small) frequently have characteristics that make cooperative/problem-based learning activities more difficult to employ and less likely to succeed. Anonymity in large sections, a steep learning curve of complex concepts, and students who see passivity as the least costly approach to success combine to produce these subpar learning outcomes. Recent developments in classroom technology, however, facilitate the use of cooperative learning techniques in a wide variety of political science classroom settings. In this article, we first explore the challenges associated with promoting student engagement in political science classes. Second, we review solutions to these challenges in the instructional psychology and technology literature. Finally, we describe specific tools and techniques professors can use to promote greater student engagement in their courses. In doing so, we draw on our own recent experiences with interactive voting technology in introductory political science courses at Brigham Young University. We also make suggestions about other class venues where similar technology could be employed.

Notes

By placing quotation marks around the word “cover,” we mean to imply that when professors focus on covering the material in a course, they may literally do so. They might actually cover or obscure the deeper meaning and significance of content by promoting a student focus on memorization of facts and details. An alternative view suggests that professors ought to uncover or reveal content to students and help them interrogate it in a deeper, more sophisticated way.

While there is nothing inherently ineffective or inadequate with lecturing as a teaching method, we argue that listening to lectures ought to be one of several teaching and learning experiences professors provide students in political science courses.

While this assertion may be cynical, we maintain that erring in this direction is more appropriate than optimistically assuming student altruism. Although we do not discount students' intrinsic desire to learn for learning sake, the assumption that students are satisficers should impel professors to redouble their efforts to engage students in a more critical, analytical mode. While the temptation to become too cynical is very real, ignoring students' utility maximizing behavior might yield a false sense of optimism and a concomitant lack of urgency about taking proactive, even aggressive steps in our teaching to promote critical thought and deeper learning.

Leamnson seems to agree, noting that students' “modus operandi is to never attract attention to themselves, speak only when spoken to, and say as little as possible” (1999, 56).

Students receive a substantial discount on the voting device when it is bundled with a Thomson learning textbook. It is possible for instructors to use TurningPoint devices and software without using a Thomson Learning textbook, but the end-user costs (whether born by the student or the institution) are higher. This is a growing problem for faculty and students because most publishers have made alliances with specific interactive technology vendors. Brigham Young University is currently investigating a publisher-independent, campus-wide interactive classroom technology solution. The results of this study will be made public upon completion.

Burnstein and Lederman report using “wireless keypad systems” for these and similar purposes (2003).

When Damron conducted this simulation in the past without the voting transmitters, students often expressed frustration with the inaccuracy and time demands of a hand count and with the time it took to tally vote results. In an online questionnaire after using the voting technology, students reported that “the ‘voting device’ really sped things along. It was quicker than counting hands or writing votes. It also added to my feeling of involvement.” Another student concurred noting that “the voting process did not take up a lot of time from the debate.”