Making and remaking the political: Lessons from the US experience of civic and political engagement in the teaching of political science
| Author | Alasdair Blair |
| Published date | 01 November 2017 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0263395716685932 |
| Date | 01 November 2017 |
| Subject Matter | Learning and Teaching in Politics and International Studies |
research-article2016
Learning and Teaching in Politics and
International Studies
Politics
2017, Vol. 37(4) 486 –499
Making and remaking the
© The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
political: Lessons from the US
https://doi.org/10.1177/0263395716685932
DOI: 10.1177/0263395716685932
journals.sagepub.com/home/pol
experience of civic and political
engagement in the teaching of
political science
Alasdair Blair
De Montfort University, UK
Abstract
This article sets out the case for the need for a greater level of academic debate by UK political
scientists with regard to the teaching of civic and political engagement. Drawing on lessons from
the United States, the article notes the relative absence of debate by UK scholars on these
matters. This is despite similar concerns about levels of civic and political activity within society.
The article argues that a greater focus on civic and political engagement in the teaching of political
science would improve the overall health of the discipline, enhance levels of student knowledge
and understanding, as well as responding to wider societal concerns.
Keywords
active citizens, civic engagement, democracy, political engagement, service learning
Received: 19th January 2016; Revised version received: 28th August 2016; Accepted: 13th October 2016
Introduction
This article contributes to a discussion on the relevance of political science that has for
the most part been analysed within the United Kingdom from a research and impact per-
spective. While discussions regarding the nature of the discipline are not in themselves
new, there has in recent years been an increase in the number of articles that have focused
on the relevance of the discipline, not least since the introduction of the impact measure-
ment in the Research Excellence Framework (REF). Notable contributions include
Flinders and John (2013) and Wood (2014a). The latter sparked a debate that resulted in
a special forum of this journal discussing these issues in 2014, with contributions from
Corresponding author:
Alasdair Blair, Department of Politics and Public Policy, Faculty of Business and Law, De Montfort University,
The Gateway, Leicester LE1 9BH, UK.
Email: ablair@dmu.ac.uk
Blair
487
Wood (2014a, 2014b), Peters (2014), Paun (2014), Gentry (2014) and Birkett and Marsh
(2014). However, what is particularly noticeable about these contributions is the absence
of any discussion relating to the relevance of the discipline from a learning and teaching
perspective. This is despite the fact that teaching remains a vital way in which academics
are able to make an ‘impact’. Indeed, this is a very point that was made in a recent edito-
rial of this journal which noted that:
… teaching is an important (if under-acknowledged) way for universities to make an impact. …
While some areas of research are more conducive to possible impact beyond academia, others
have a fairly limited impact potential. Yet all of us have an opportunity to shape the future
through teaching. (Politics, 2014: 1)
This is an area where the discipline in the United Kingdom has much to learn from the
United States, where since the late 1980s there has been a considerable discussion among
academics, policy-makers, professional associations such as the American Political
Science Association (APSA), and members of civil society about the relevance of political
science. A particular focus of this work has been on civic engagement, which in itself has
stemmed from broader debates that have charted the role that higher education institutions
(HEIs) should undertake in enhancing the civic fabric of the nation. In looking at these
issues, this article argues that there is a need for a renewed debate about the nature and
contribution of the teaching of political science within the United Kingdom. The article is
structured as follows. First, it identifies the problem that frames the argument of the article.
Second, it reviews existing practices within the United States and highlights the lessons
that can be learned. Third, it sets out the case for political as opposed to merely civic
engagement. Fourth, it identifies potential areas of investigation in response to the article’s
underlying argument before discussing the implications in the conclusion.
The problem
Recent decades have seen a growing concern in many democratic countries about levels
of ‘civic’ and ‘political’ engagement’. While both civic and political engagement are
often viewed as being two sides of the same coin, in reality civic engagement is the
broader and more catch-all term. Civic engagement refers to the sort of activities that are
either undertaken on an individual or group basis that involve some sort of active engage-
ment in the life of the community. Among others, these include:
… collecting and disseminating information; voting; working voter registration drives;
designing, distributing, or signing petitions; participation in civic and political associations;
attending public meetings, rallies, or protests; and entering into public or private discussions of
community and political issues of various formats. (McCartney, 2013: 14)
By contrast, political engagement refers to activities that have a particular political dimen-
sion and which have a direct political impact, such as on policies, the nature of the politi-
cal system, as well as on structures and governance. Thus, while working with a local
school to improve grade performance would not be regarded as having an explicit politi-
cal dimension, working with local groups to improve funding levels for schools would
have a political angle (McCartney, 2013: 14).
A concern about declining levels of civic and political engagement has been chronicled
in a number of important works (Norris, 2002; Putnam, 1995). Of these, the work of Robert
Putnam (2000) has probably made the greatest contribution to the debate through
488
Politics 37(4)
his critique that Americans were ‘Bowling alone’ and less likely to get involved in civic
organisations such as religious groups and membership organisations like Rotary
International. In responding to these trends, observers have often emphasised levels of
voter apathy, especially among the young (Marsh et al., 2007). This focus on elections has
been reflective of a longer trend whereby political scientists have tended to record levels
of political engagement through studies of electoral participation (cf. Verba and Nie, 1972).
To this end, debates on civic and political engagement have often been framed around
ways in which engagement can be measured. In the United Kingdom, Stoker (2006) and
Hay (2007) have sought to counter conventional approaches to the measurement of politi-
cal engagement, such as in the form of electoral turnout, by stressing the significance of
other developments, such as the public’s level of engagement with social media.
What is significant about these discussions is that they have for the most part been
devoid of serious critique from scholars writing from a learning and teaching perspective.
This is despite the fact that since the turn of the millennium there has been a growing – but
nonetheless still limited – discussion among a number of UK academics about civic
engagement (e.g. Annette, 2003, 2005, 2009; Hart et al., 2007; McIlrath and Mac
Labhrainn, 2007; McIlraith et al., 2012; Tonge et al., 2012). A theme in much of this lit-
erature is that universities need to attach greater importance to promote civic engagement
as higher education has undergone a process of change and reform, with reports from
government and research councils stressing the need for HEIs to take a more active role
within society, including the creation of a more democratic society (e.g. Dearing
Commission, 1997; Goddard, 2009).
But while these contributions are significant, there has traditionally been less evidence
that UK universities have responded to these developments, such as by having a focus on
civic engagement in their mission statements (Annette, 2005). Indeed, it is only in recent
years, and in particular since the financial crisis of 2008, that universities have begun to
seriously consider civic engagement. A notable example is the University of Birmingham,
which has sought to develop civic engagement within the curriculum as a means of devel-
oping student understanding to enable them to tackle societal problems. Yet for many
more universities, such as the likes of Liverpool and Newcastle, emphasis has tended to
be attached to the ‘civic’ nature of the university as opposed to the integration of civic
engagement into the curriculum. Elsewhere, other universities such as Kingston have
often viewed civic engagement through the lens of volunteering rather than embedding it
in the curriculum. This mixed story is somewhat similar at the discipline level, where
there has been a relative lack of debate about the implications of teaching civic and politi-
cal engagement, with studies instead tending to focus on active learning strategies that
have included the likes of role plays, simulations and placements (Curtis and Blair, 2010a;
Gormley-Heenan and Lightfoot, 2012). This is quite distinct from focusing on the role
that political scientists can take with regard to how the teaching of the discipline can
make a contribution to society in the manner of the civic engagement thesis, or the way
by which...
To continue reading
Request your trial