Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T22:05:57.796Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Examining the Impact of the Wahlke Report: Surveying the Structure of the Political Science Curricula at Liberal Arts and Sciences Colleges and Universities in the Midwest

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2005

John Ishiyama
John Ishiyama
Affiliation:
Truman State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In recent years, sparked by the path-breaking reports issued by the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AACU) in 1991 (Wahlke 1991), the political science profession has paid an increasing amount of attention to the relationship between the structure of the political science major and student learning outcomes. A few studies have recently sought to examine this relationship empirically (Breuning, Parker, and Ishiyama 2001; Ishiyama and Hartlaub 2003; Ishiyama and Breuning 2003). However, these studies have focused largely on using the political science curriculum as an independent variable (i.e., affecting student outcomes) and in most cases have been limited to one or two institutions (with the exception of Ishiyama 2004). No study has broadly and systematically examined variations in curricular design across several institutions, nor has any study examined which factors affect how institutions have structured their majors in the way they have. This paper addresses this dearth by broadly surveying a number of liberal arts and sciences colleges and universities across 10 Midwestern states (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Minnesota, Nebraska, Ohio, and Wisconsin) to determine how many political science programs structure their majors in ways according to the recommendations made by the Wahlke report.

Type
The Teacher
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 38 , Issue 1 , January 2005 , pp. 71 - 75
Copyright
© 2005 by the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Association of Colleges and Universities (AACU). 1991. “Political Science.” Reports from the Fields: Project on Liberal Learning, Study-in-Depth, and the Arts and Sciences Major, vol. 2. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges.Google Scholar
Breuning Marijke, Paul Parker, and John Ishiyama. 2001. “The Last Laugh: Skill Building through a Liberal Arts Political Science Curriculum.” PS: Political Science and Politics 34 (September): 657– 661.Google Scholar
Hesli Vicki L., Evelyn C. Fink, and Diane M. Duffy. 2003. “Mentoring in a Positive Graduate Student Experience: Survey Results from the Midwest Region, Part 1.” PS: Political Science and Politics 36 (July): 457– 460.Google Scholar
Ishiyama John, and Stephen Hartlaub. 2003. “Sequential or Flexible? The Impact of Differently Structured Political Science Majors on the Development of Student Reasoning.” PS: Political Science and Politics 36 (January): 83– 86.Google Scholar
Ishiyama John. 2004, forthcoming. “The Structure of an Undergraduate Major and Student Learning: A Cross-Institutional Study of Political Science Programs at Thirty-two Colleges and Universities.” Social Science Journal.Google Scholar
Schwartz-Shea Peregrine. 2003. “Is This the Curriculum We Want? Doctoral Requirements and Offerings in Methods and Methodology.” PS: Political Science and Politics 36 (July): 379– 386.Google Scholar
US News and World Report. 2000. America's Best Colleges and Universities.Google Scholar
Wahlke John C. 1991. “Liberal Learning and the Political Science Major: A Report to the Profession.” PS: Political Science and Politics. 24 (March): 48– 60.Google Scholar