Civic Engagement I

Alan R. Gitelson, Loyola University Chicago
Robert M. Mauro, Rockefeller College of Public Affairs & Policy, SUNY
Elizabeth O’Shaughnessy, University of Illinois at Chicago
Amy L. Brandon, University of Houston

Track I on Civic Engagement explored teaching and learning techniques available to instructors to educate and join students in civic engagement. Presentations and papers covered pedagogies employed in the subfields of American politics, political theory, and international relations with emphasis on both empirical and normative approaches. Tools for modeling civic engagement included service learning, internships, and experiential learning requirements.

Civic education and civic engagement have gained broad recognition in recent years as popular pedagogical themes and effective teaching models in higher education. However, with this recognition has come disagreement over the justification and means by which civic education and civic engagement have been incorporated into the classroom. At the 2007 APSA Teaching & Learning Conference Track I: Civic Engagement, at least four issues surfaced repeatedly as the stream of discussion developed. First, what is civic education? Responses to this question included a debate about the appropriate skills a civic education course should impart to students. How do we weight the relative importance of general knowledge about the political system with the need to develop specific analytical skills that enhance critical thinking aptitude? Second, are civic education and civic engagement central to the mission of the university? What are our normative and empirical expectations of course work emphasizing civic education and engagement? Third, what pedagogies and curriculum should a course on civic education and engagement underscore? What is the balance between focusing on normative and empirical pedagogies and curriculum? Fourth, what means of assessment and evaluation are appropriate in evaluating the utility, goals and outcomes of courses focusing on civic education and civic engagement. How do we best learn what pedagogies are optimums and which are of limited or no value in meeting the goals and outcomes of a course focusing on civic education and engagement (including but not confined to longitudinal studies that measure the impact of college civic education/engagement course work on political knowledge and civic activism over the life span).

Paper presenters and discussants answered these questions differently reflecting an ambiguity among the participants in defining and fine-tuning the meaning and requirements of civic education and its accompanying skill sets. Some suggested that civic education is the education of tolerant, rational political actors while others claimed that a civic education is one that gives students the organizational and participatory skills necessary to negotiate American democracy. Still others suggested that civic education is about understanding the possible ranges of the “political” both from a normative and empirical perspective. Attending these differences about the meaning of civic education was a diversity of teaching theories that supported specific models of civic education and engagement.

Throughout the discussion, participants grappled with different and competing perspectives on what politics is and what the ends of the polity are in the academy. Many participants suggested that politics is about communal interests and democratic citizenship. Some suggested that the communal interest comes from the community’s history and American political history. Others approached politics in a less historical or normative direction and relied on competing interests to define politics and political ends. These differences have clear ramifications for the definition of civic education and its realization in fostering civic engagement outside the classroom. Some participants argued that what one believes about politics and the goals of political institutions shapes how one behaves towards and within government. It also impacts our expectations of what skills are necessary to act as an informed and active citizen in the political system.

Discussion also focused on the need for academics to conduct and publish teaching/learning-related research on the justifications and applications of civic education and engagement in scholarly outlets including the Journal of Political Science Education, PS, and other mainstream political science journals. Future conferences should also include discussion on private, state, and federal funding that may be available for the study of pedagogies focusing on civic education and engagement as well as funding for the implementation of civic education/engagement programs at college-based institutes.

An important conclusion of the Track discussion reflected a similar conclusion of the 2005 Teaching & Learning Track on Civic Education/Engagement. “While political scientists cannot ‘own’ civic engagement, we should lead it by being the academic catalyst for discussion and action.” Most if not all of the presenters and discussants in our Track would agree with this statement.