No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A Compass During the Storm: Offering Students Critical Rigor for Polarizing Times
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 June 2021
Abstract
Teaching and learning in higher education is occurring, unavoidably, within the broader civic context of today’s extraordinarily polarizing political times. We seek to help students situate themselves with respect to and, above all, thoughtfully assess others’ as well as their own perspectives on issues of profound contention, without contributing to exacerbated polarization ourselves. Specifically, we offer students in our first-year exploratory political science course a vital tool—critical rigor—for navigating but not being inundated by the storm. This article discusses our experiences in teaching the course titled, “The Worlds of Politics,” as we attempt to help students deeply engage in cognitive processes of critical thinking and analysis, without undue infringement from their own—and least of all our own—personal political biases. Our focal learning objective is the cultivation of critical-thinking skills that promote students’ drawing of distinctions between advocacy and analysis, as well as their discerning civic engagement.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association
References
REFERENCES
Bhargava, Rajeev. 2012. What Is Political Theory and Why Do We Need It? New Delhi, India: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Çavadar, Gamze, and Doe, Sue. 2012. “Learning Through Writing: Teaching Critical-Thinking Skills in Writing Assignments.” PS: Political Science & Politics 45 (2): 298–306.Google Scholar
Elbow, Peter. 1997. “High Stakes and Low Stakes in Assigning and Responding to Writing.” In Writing to Learn: Strategies for Assigning and Responding to Writing across the Disciplines, ed. Sorcinelli, Mary Deane and Elbow, Peter, 5–14. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Fassin, Didier, and Harcourt, Bernard E.. 2019. “Introduction.” In A Time for Critique, ed. Fassin, Didier and Harcourt, Bernard E., 1–12. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Fisher, Sarah, and Justwan, Florian. 2018. “Scaffolding Assignments and Activities for Undergraduate Research Methods.” Journal of Political Science Education 14 (1): 63–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeden, Michael, and Vincent, Andrew. 2013. “Introduction: The Study of Comparative Political Thought.” In Comparative Political Thought: Theorizing Practices, ed. Freedom, Michael and Vincent, Andrew, 1–23. London and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallie, Walter Bryce. 1955–1956. “Essentially Contested Concepts.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 56:167–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giersch, Jason. 2019. “Professors’ Politics and Their Appeal as Instructors. PS: Political Science & Politics 53 (2): 281–85. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909651900194X.Google Scholar
Hartog, François. 2017. Regimes of Historicity: Presentism and Experiences of Time. Translated by Saskia Brown. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Moon, Jennifer A. 2008. Critical Thinking: An Exploration of Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Morris, Errol, and Williams, Michael (Producers), and Errol, Morris (Director). 2003. The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara [motion picture]. New York: Sony Pictures Classics.Google Scholar
Reese, William L. 1996. Dictionary of Philosophy and Religion, Eastern and Western Thought. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Tully, James. 2016. “Deparochializing Political Theory and Beyond: A Dialogue Approach to Comparative Political Thought.” Journal of World Philosophies 1:23–57. https://scholarworks.iu.edu/iupjournals/index.php/jwp/article/view/623/79.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, Jonathan. 2019. “‘Social Justice,’ According to Whom?” The Chronicle of Higher Education, Special Reports, September 22. Accessed on January 20, 2020. www.chronicle.com/article/Social-Justice-/247171.Google Scholar
Wender and D’Erman supplementary material
Appendices A and B
PDF
619.4 KB