The Use of Debates in Political Science Courses

Abstract

Structured in-class debates are a valuable addition to courses that seek to foster students’ development as citizens. In this study, we examine how different debate formats can impact their effectiveness as a pedagogical tool for advancing students’ civic learning outcomes. We consider moderated dualistic debates that ask students to bring empirical evidence to bear on a yes/no question about a particular policy issue and unmoderated pluralistic debates that ask students to engage with multiple perspectives about essential political values. We find that both debate formats contribute to students’ civic education: Moderated dualistic debates cultivated some political skills while unmoderated pluralistic debates deepened—and complicated—students’ thinking about democratic values. From these results, we conclude that students’ civic development benefits from experience with a variety of different debate formats that can prepare students for effective citizenship in distinct ways.

Keywords:

• Civic education
• political skills
• democratic values
• debates

Notes

1 The racial composition of the student body is 70% white, 7.1% African American, 12.1% Hispanic, and 10.8% other.

2 The party composition of the surrounding counties is 32.21% registered Democrats, 24.93% registered Republicans, 42.29% unaffiliated with a party, and 0.57% affiliated with third party. Information comes from the statewide voter registration summary.

3 Policy questions dealt with distinct policy areas, including health care, immigration, energy, gun control, minimum wage, and paid family leave policies. Students were assigned to groups based on their interests in particular policy areas.

4 The author wishes to thank Désirée Weber for sharing her in-class debate format, from which the unmoderated pluralistic debates described here are adapted.

5 Introduction to Political Theory has an enrollment of between 30 and 35 students each semester. For each debate, there are six teams total (two teams per thinker, although these teams work independently to form their arguments), each with 5 or 6 students. For example, the debate over the nature of freedom included: Tocqueville 1, Tocqueville 2, Mill 1, Mill 2, Marx 1, and Marx 2.

6 As a follow-up assignment after the in-class debate, students were then asked to individually write and submit a short “summation” statement in which they synthesized the debate arguments to formulate their own personal response to the debate question.

7 Introduction to American Politics was offered in all four semesters included in the study; Introduction to Political Theory was offered in Fall 2016 and Fall 2017.

8 This research was approved by the Stockton University Institutional Review Board in 2016 (approval #2016.090); approval was renewed in 2017 (approval #2017.098) and 2018 (approval #2018.107).

9 See the survey instrument in the Supplementary Appendix. Where relevant, the existing survey instruments where the questions were drawn from are noted.

10 In relying on students’ self-evaluations of their skill levels, we necessarily take students at their word that they are assessing their development of these skills accurately. We discuss these limitations in more detail in the conclusion. However, we view this subjective self-assessment from students as capturing their confidence in their abilities and thus representing an important measure of students’ capacity to exercise these skills.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Claire Abernathy

Claire Abernathy is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Stockton University. At Stockton, she teaches courses on American political institutions, political parties, and campaigns and elections. Her research focuses on members of Congress and how they develop their understanding of their constituents’ policy preferences.

Jennifer Forestal

Jennifer Forestal is the Helen Houlahan Rigali Endowed Assistant Professor of Political Science at Loyola University Chicago. She specializes in political theory; her research investigates the political consequences of digital technologies, software design, and physical architecture for democratic practices. At Loyola, she teaches courses in political theory and feminist theory.