Teaching for deeper political learning: a design experiment

Abstract

Is in-depth political learning possible in college-preparatory courses known for curricular breadth at an accelerated pace plus a high-stakes exam? A multidisciplinary research team conducted design-based implementation research (DBIR) for seven years across three school systems for the purpose of achieving deeper learning in an ‘advanced’ high school government and politics course. This article reports findings from the final year of research and development. The design centres on cyclical learning, projects (simulated political processes) and strategic use of texts as resources for learning the curriculum. Quantitative analysis shows comparable achievement to students in traditional classrooms on the high-stakes summative assessment despite the dramatic departure from test-prep instruction. Qualitative analyses focus on two of the design elements: learning from simulations and learning from text. The first allowed students to ‘experience’ political beliefs, institutions, and conflict, although simulated; the second required students to learn subject matter not only from simulations and teacher lectures but from texts, too. The discussion shows how these two in combination with cyclical learning required skilful attention to content selection. We conclude that when deeper learning is the goal, content selection cannot be elided or presumed, particularly with respect to the articulation of depth and breadth in curriculum and instruction.

Keywords:

• Deeper learning
• learning cycles
• content selection
• simulations
• literacy
• design experiment

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to colleague John Bransford whose learning cycles research inspired the design investigated in this study. We are grateful as well to our teacher-collaborators across the schools.

Notes

1. Frazer wrote this before the Crick (1998) committee achieved its results.

2. Loosely related theory and research on deeper learning can be found in the work of Newmann et al. (2016) and Newmann (1988).

3. This has become rather typical in contemporary education policy discourse. See the discerning analyses of Young and Muller (2015) and McPhail and Rata (in press).

4. This is an older term for curriculum decision-making (e.g. Oliver, 1957; Posner & Strike, 1976; Schwab, 1969; Taba, 1962; Tyler, 1949). We find it useful because its connotation is narrow: within courses as distinct from across a field.

5. We dub this routine ‘breadth-speed-test’ in Parker et al. (2013).

6. That study is detailed in Valencia and Parker (2016).

7. On the distinction between decoding and comprehension, see Graves and Graves (2003).

8. For results in the ‘greenhouse’ condition of the suburban school district, see Parker et al. (2011, 2013).

9. One student moved midway through the year; consequently, the final number of students interviewed about simulations was eleven.

10. This 2003 Supreme Court case decided whether the University of Michigan Law School's use of racial preferences in student admissions violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Court upheld the school’s admissions policy.