What tutors bring to course design: Introducing political and policy theories to disengaged students

Article
Teaching Public Administration
What tutors bring to course
2020, Vol. 38(1) 12–23
ª The Author(s) 2019
design: Introducing political
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0144739419858682
and policy theories
journals.sagepub.com/home/tpa
to disengaged students
Prudence R Brown
The University of Queensland, Australia
Abstract
This article provides a case study of tutor’s reflection on practice leading to a different
approach to teaching an introductory course on politics and policy at a major Australian
university, aimed at better reaching disengaged students. The overhaul led to higher
levels of constructive student engagement in the tutorials, resulting in improved student
and learning outcomes. Tutors, with their broad face-to-face and individual contact, have
the means to assess student engagement and understanding in ways not always available
to lecturers. As such, they can support holistic curriculum development if they are seen
as relevant stakeholders in this process. The article demonstrates the value of seeing
tutorials and tutors as an integral consideration in curriculum development.
Keywords
Active learning pedagogies, disengaged students, learning through cases, political science,
public policy theory, student engagement
Introduction
Teaching public policy theory to disengaged students is a challenge (Clark and Jones,
2017). When a course is compulsory, there will inevitably be some students who
profess neither interest nor competency in the subject matter. When we are talking
about teaching political and policy theories to first year students, for many of whom
this is their first experience of university, the challenge is further multiplied. This is
because, as Straussman (2018: 84) notes, policy ‘concepts are often abstract, complex
and contested’.
Corresponding author:
Prudence R Brown, School of Political Science and International Studies, The University of Queensland,
Queensland 4072, Australia.
Email: p.brown3@uq.edu.au; Telephone: þ61-0401119571

---

Brown
13
The value of active learning pedagogies is well known (Leston-Bandiera, 2012).
Students are transformed from passive recipients of knowledge, to active participants in
their own learning. Active learning can take many forms, but the common feature is the
requirement that students are ‘active in the process of understanding and building
knowledge’ (Leston-Bandiera, 2012: 54). According to Leston-Bandeira, ‘active
learning facilitates the ability to apply complex concepts to specific political phenom-
ena’ (Leston-Bandiera, 2012:55). As such, it has the potential to increase student
understanding in complex areas such as political science, which require students to
develop critical thinking skills.
Furthermore, the use of cases is also a well-established method for teaching policy
analysis. It is claimed that it is ‘far more likely to produce increased student interest and
analysts better able to address complex issues’ than traditional approaches (Foster et al.,
2010: 537). Some claim that this is because cases involve both rational, positivist
methods as well as the more qualitative post-positivist methods (Yildiz et al., 2011: 347).
As well, ‘transforming the language used in policy theory so that it connects with those
involved in practice’ is a perennial issue (Fenwick, 2018). In my experience, under-
graduate students are very receptive to seeing theories applied in practice. It brings the
subject matter alive to them in ways that abstract understanding cannot.
In this article, I trace changes to better reach disengaged students that were made to a
compulsory course at a major Australian university. The course aimed to introduce first
year undergraduate students to the key theories of political science and public policy
scholarship. I trace the changes through my experience as a tutor when the course was
delivered more traditionally, as an instigator of the change to a more case-centred
approach, and then as a tutor following the changes. This is consistent with Scho¨n’s
ideas of ‘reflection-on practice’, whereby meaningful reflection on a pedagogic prob-
lems by professionals leads to adaptation and changes to teaching practice (Scho¨n,
1983). Scho¨n validates such a focus in his assertion that ‘radical critique cannot sub-
stitute for (though it may provoke) the qualified professional’s critical reflection’
(Scho¨n, 1983: 290). Indeed, Norton and Campbell (2007: 146) reinforce the value of
‘undertaking research and inquiry into one’s practice’.
By the time I joined the course, the coordinator and lecturer had been teaching the
course for 6 years. As for any course, the content evolved initially, but had fairly quickly
settled into a fairly traditional format. Lectures focused on theory, using examples to
illustrate the points made. Tutorials focused on application of the theory guided by the
consideration and critical analysis of set readings. The course rated well with many of
the students and overall, but there was a cohort of disengaged students who found the
abstract theories challenging.
Tutors1 are at the frontline of the student understanding. They have frequent face-to-
face contact with a broad cross-section of students and so are well placed to critically
reflect on the ways their experience could inform practice. For example, they can
provide early insights into the effectiveness of lecture material. It soon became
apparent, from a tutor’s perspective, that a group of students found the traditional
theoretical approach taken for this course difficult and struggled to understand the
relevance of the theories.

---

14
Teaching Public Administration 38(1)
I came to teaching with extensive practitioner experience from many years in the
public sector. This was my first experience of teaching policy at a tertiary level, although
I had previous experience of teaching other tertiary subjects (statistics) and at other
levels (public servants). Following the semester, I spent some time reflecting on my
practice and what had worked and what had not. As outlined below, the tutorials that
worked best were those where I drew on my practitioner experience to contextualize the
theory through practical examples. As a result, I suggested to the coordinator that a case-
driven approach would make it more accessible to students, and that this could be
achieved through students becoming ‘experts’ in a particular policy area, applying
theories covered in lectures to their policy area. This departed significantly from the
previous approach, but the coordinator was open to exploring the idea. The subsequent
experience described below illustrates the value of this kind of interaction between tutor
and coordinator, which does not always occur.
As a result, for the next delivery, students were asked to familiarize themselves with a
‘policy pack’ on topical public policy areas. The policy packs were available to everyone
involved with the course (teachers and students). The policy packs are explained in more
detail below, but were designed to be an introduction to the topic to prompt further
student enquiry and research. In addition, exercises in tutorials and initial student
assessment related the theory to the concrete example of the policy area that the student
had chosen. This approach stimulated student interest by allowing them to choose a
policy that resonated for them and by providing practical application to which they could
relate. As will be outlined below, on reflection after delivery, it was clear to me that the
overhaul led to higher and more constructive levels of student engagement in the
tutorials, inevitably resulting in improved learning outcomes. In my view, these
...