Experience and (Civic) Education

In: PS: political science & politics, Band 48, Heft 1, S. 61-64

Abstract

Publish or perish, so the formula goes. Beyond that familiar binary, tenure committees occasionally offer the cruel third option to publish and perish. Tales from the front hammer home the message that productive research trumps all else, including teaching. Especially teaching. That message is far too stark. Care for publication should be intensive but not exclusive. In fact, publication and teaching can often complement each other. The first half of that relationship may already be apparent: we know what we research, and we teach what we know. Structuring our courses on our recent or current scholarly work can infuse our teaching with energy and expertise. Less obviously, however, teaching can also drive and direct our research. Other authors in this symposium address the potential for our teaching to generate research questions and involve students in our research projects. In addition, we faculty can teach subjects that we want to know better, furthering our research as we learn alongside our students. Those prospects for producing publications comprise low-hanging fruit, and we should reap it. But I also advocate for a slightly more challenging approach: the pedagogy of experiential learning, which can turn political science into civic education and turn civic education into publishable research. This represents good news for civic education, which political scientists should care about but generally ignore (Battistoni 2013). Our failure to care stems less from an intrinsic lack of interest, as is commonly supposed, than from a lack of understanding, which is easier to remedy. Political scientists do not overlook civic education because our research interests preclude it. Rather, we misunderstand what collegiate civic education actually comprises, how little we would have to do to promote it more effectively, and the incentives that exist for doing so. Adapted from the source document.