{"id":563,"date":"2024-10-31T15:59:37","date_gmt":"2024-10-31T15:59:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/connect.apsanet.org\/tlc2025\/?page_id=563"},"modified":"2025-02-06T19:56:14","modified_gmt":"2025-02-06T19:56:14","slug":"pre-conference-short-courses","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/connect.apsanet.org\/tlc2025\/pre-conference-short-courses\/","title":{"rendered":"Pre-Conference Short Courses"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n
\n
\n

Extend Your Conference Experience: Attend 2025 TLC Pre-Conference Short Courses<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Friday, February, 7, 2025<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pre-register for 2025 TLC short courses when completing your TLC registration<\/a>! If you have already registered for TLC but would like to add a short course, please email meeting@apsanet.org.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
Pre-register for a Short Course \u2197<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

*All pre-conference short courses will take place on Friday, February 7, 2025.<\/strong>*<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Civic Engagement Short Courses<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\u200b\u200bCivic Competence, Civic Engagement, and Trust in Government<\/strong>
9:00 a.m. \u2013 10:15 a.m.<\/b> | Banneker<\/b><\/summary>\n

\u200b\u200bCivic Competence, Civic Engagement, and Trust in Government<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

9:00 a.m. \u2013 10:15 a.m. | Banneker
<\/b>Emily Lynch, Tolani Olagundoye, and Todd Dresser, University of Rhode Island<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We seek to develop and implement an interdisciplinary approach to promote civic competence and action on campus and in the community at the University of Rhode Island (URI). We believe that a top priority for higher education institutions is to instill democratic values across campuses by preparing students to become engaged citizens who promote the common good. As a growing team of scholars at URI who are interested in university-community connections to promote civic engagement on campus and beyond, we are interested in extending existing research about practicing democracy in the classroom. Specifically, we plan to develop a student survey that explores the relationship between civic competence skills and various civic engagement activities and assignments, especially activities that connect students to the broader campus and local communities. This survey will gauge whether students\u2019 level of local interpersonal and government trust is enhanced at the end of the semester.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As we plan to promote the practice of democracy on campus and beyond, we seek to host a roundtable that can bring together political scientists and scholars from multiple disciplines to discuss ways to implement activities that promote civic competence skills, civic engagement, and trust. This research agenda stems from a research conference paper where Lynch (2023) extended Bernstein\u2019s (2018) definition of civic competence that was presented at the 2023 APSA TLC Conference. In this paper, Lynch compares student self-assessments about how several active learning activities are related to different types of civic competence skills. We continue the research by connecting civic competence skills with different conceptualizations of civic engagement (Matto 2017) and activities in classrooms across multiple disciplines on campus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Civic Knowledge and Responsibilities Learning Outcome (C1) at the University of Rhode Island \u201cencourages students to participate in civic discourse and activities of personal and public concern that benefit both individuals and the community\u201d where \u201cstudents have the opportunity to develop civic mindedness through meaningful interactions on campus and within the surrounding community throughout their academic careers.\u201d The goal to promote the practice of democracy on campus is not limited to only the courses that are listed as \u201cC1;\u201d these assignments and activities can be used in any class where faculty is interested in connecting the course material to democratic practices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We plan to implement a pilot student survey to gauge the level of civic competence skills in classes that use assignments or activities to explicitly promote the practice of democracy and compare them with classes that do not use these types of assignments. We plan to include multiple trust items on the survey, including interpersonal trust as well as measures of trust in different levels and systems of government. Our research connects to the broader political science literature about trust in government (e.g., Hetherington 2006; Hibbing and Elizabeth Theiss-Morse 1995; Wilkes 2015; Klein and Robison 2020) and recent research on trust in elections (e.g., Atkeson, Alvarez, and Hall 2015; Stewart III 2022). Barrett and Greene (2017) underscore the need to address civic education and trust when they state in Teaching Civic Engagement Across the Disciplines<\/em>, \u201c\u2026how, indeed, can people trust a powerful entity that they do not understand?\u201d (p.66). We will create a survey that draws from a previously developed student survey (Lynch 2023) and resources in Bennion\u2019s (2017) \u201cMoving Forward with Assessment: Important Tips and Resources,\u201d which lists resources on assessing civic engagement. Furthermore, we seek to build off Nicholas Longo\u2019s (2023) \u201cPracticing Democracy\u201d toolkit, Matto\u2019s Citizen Now<\/em> book (2017), several chapters from Teaching Civic Engagement Across the Disciplines <\/em>(2017), and Bennion and Laughlin\u2019s (2018) Journal of Political Science Education<\/em> article on civic education.<\/p>\n<\/details>\n\n\n\n

Transforming Civic Engagement: How to Influence Leaders & Drive Community Change<\/strong>
10:30 a.m. \u2013 11:45 a.m.<\/b> | Banneker<\/b><\/summary>\n

Transforming Civic Engagement: How to Influence Leaders & Drive Community Change<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

10:30 a.m. \u2013 11:45 a.m. | Banneker<\/b>
<\/b>Dr. Nancy Elizabeth Pearson<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a rapidly evolving democratic landscape, the voices of youth are often underestimated despite their potential to shape and influence societal change. This workshop, designed by a former elected official and researcher, introduces an evidenced-based approach to empowering minors to become effective agents of change within their communities, even without the legal right to vote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The session will delve into the presenter\u2019s original methodology of the Civic Empowerment Pyramid, a strategic framework developed to guide minors and individuals in navigating the complexities of civic engagement. This step-by-step methodology provides actionable insights into how young people can leverage their unique perspectives and energy to influence decision-makers, from local leaders to policymakers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Participants will be guided through the various levels of the Civic Empowerment Pyramid, which include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Awareness and Education: Building a foundational understanding of civic issues and the mechanisms of governance.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. Community Building: Engaging peers and forming alliances to amplify voices and concerns.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. Strategic Advocacy: Learning how to craft persuasive arguments and campaigns that resonate with decision-makers.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  4. Direct Engagement: Interacting with leaders and institutions to effect change through dialogue and action.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    The workshop is designed for educators, community organizers, and advocates who are committed to fostering democratic values and civic engagement in younger generations. By the end of the session, participants will be equipped with practical tools and strategies to inspire and mobilize minors, empowering them to drive meaningful community change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    This short course not only emphasizes the importance of youth participation in democracy, but also demonstrates that minors can be powerful catalysts for change, shaping the future of their communities through informed and strategic civic action.<\/p>\n<\/details>\n\n\n\n

    \n\n\n\n

    Artificial Intelligence Short Courses<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
    Grading and Feedback in the Age of AI<\/strong>
    9:00 a.m. \u2013 10:15 a.m. | Bell<\/b>
    <\/b><\/summary>\n

    \u200b\u200bGrading and Feedback in the Age of AI<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    9:00 a.m. \u2013 10:15 a.m. | Bell
    <\/b>Amanda M. Rosen, U.S. Naval War College<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Most faculty receive very little formal training in how to teach, and one subject that tends to be missed at teaching and learning conferences is the one we complain about most: how to grade and give students feedback that they will actually use. This hands-on workshop will guide attendees through practical tips to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of providing students with grades and giving them targeted feedback they will actually use. Based on the strategies and tips in the new book, Teaching Political Science: A Practical Guide for Instructors<\/em>, participants will learn and practice giving feedback and grades, with particular attention given to how to design and use rubrics effectively; what to do if you suspect unauthorized use of AI; the differences between formative and summative feedback; how to ensure there is alignment between the time you and your students spend on writing\/responding to feedback; and alternative grading systems such as Ungrading and Specifications Grading.<\/p>\n\n\n\n


    Amanda M. Rosen<\/strong> is Professor of Teaching and Learning and Interim Director of the Writing and Teaching Excellence Center at the US Naval War College. A co-founder of the award-winning Active Learning in Political Science blog and a member of the NATO\/Partnership for Peace DEEP Faculty Development team, Dr. Rosen is also the founding associate director of the Naval War College\u2019s Teaching Excellence Center, which offers extensive programming and training to faculty on teaching and learning. Dr. Rosen specializes in the scholarship of teaching and learning, particularly on educational games, wargames, and simulations; experiential learning; inclusive teaching; and teaching research methods, with work published in multiple edited volumes and pedagogy-oriented journals such as International Studies Perspectives, Journal of Political Science Education, and PS: Political Science & Politics<\/em>. She is author of the 2024 book, Teaching Political Science: A Practical Guide for Instructors, <\/em>with Palgrave Macmillan. She is currently writing another book on Simulations and Games under contract with Edward Elgar.<\/p>\n<\/details>\n\n\n\n

    Promise and Peril: Artificial Intelligence in Political Science Education<\/strong>
    10:30 a.m. \u2013 11:45 a.m. | Bell<\/b><\/summary>\n

    Promise and Peril: Artificial Intelligence in Political Science Education<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    10:30 a.m. \u2013 11:45 a.m. | Bell<\/b>
    <\/b>Eric Loepp, University of Wisconsin, Whitewater<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The exponential growth of artificial intelligence (AI) in the last two years has prompted faculty and higher education leaders to rapidly adjust to a technological new normal. Initially, we observed \u2013 and participated in \u2013 broad efforts to understand both how it disrupts teaching and learning (e.g., detecting AI-generated student submissions) as well as the potential benefits it offers to promote and elevate it. Numerous surveys and reports published in 2023 and 2024 sought to provide clarity and recommendations on these questions, but a vast majority of this work centered on the impact and promise of AI in higher education as a whole. Increasingly, it will be essential that disciplines further explore AI\u2019s implications in a more narrow, targeted way that allows them to maximize its potential benefits and minimize its inevitable drawbacks. The present project contributes to this effort in our field. The proposed roundtable will focus on issues and questions informed by the results of a research project underway that evaluates the student experience with AI specifically within the discipline of political science. Using a student survey in conjunction with focus groups, the project will enrich our understanding of student attitudes, experiences, and expectations of AI in our field relative to others. The roundtable will explore crucial inquiries such as:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \u2022 What kinds of AI-informed experiences and assessments are most productive to learning about political phenomena?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \u2022 What types of content and activities (if any) can instructors \u201chand off\u201d to AI in foundational survey courses in political science to free up time for other learning objective?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \u2022 What kinds of AI literacy\/skills are most valuable for students studying politics and government?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \u2022 How political science students view the value and potential of AI in their major field relative to other areas of study (e.g., minors, general education requirements, etc.)?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \u2022 How AI shapes\/informs student goals and aspirations related to careers in government or politics?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The goal of this short course at the TLC conference is thus two-fold: first, to share highlights of a political science-specific research project about AI in the teaching and learning space; second, and primarily, to use those data to stimulate a conversation about how these localized findings compare and contrast to the experiences of instructors across a variety of institutions. Although AI remains a relatively new development in higher education, we have learned a great deal about its general applications, approaches, and attitudes through the initial generation of scholarly research on the subject. It is urgent that we further develop and refine this work at the disciplinary level.<\/p>\n<\/details>\n\n\n\n

    \n\n\n\n

    Pedagogy Training Short Courses<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
    Teaching to Teach: Developing Teaching Workshops & Courses for Graduate Students<\/strong>
    9:00 a.m. \u2013 10:15 a.m. | Edison AB
    <\/b>

    <\/span><\/p><\/span><\/summary>\n

    Teaching to Teach: Developing Teaching Workshops & Courses for Graduate Students<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    9:00 a.m. \u2013 10:15 a.m.
    <\/b>Edward F. Kammerer, Idaho State University; Kelly Bauer, George Washington University<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Faculty in Political Science are rarely, if ever, taught how to teach. We may find some mentorship and support from senior colleagues or our campus\u2019s teaching center (if we are lucky enough to have one). But formal training is hard to find, and most often faculty and graduate students learn by doing. The result is costly to our discipline; we are less efficient teachers and researchers as we learn to teach, and students miss out on empirical research on the best practices of teaching and learning. This remains true for graduate students in most programs. Faculty spend a significant amount of time ensuring that graduate students will be competent, ethical researchers. But rarely do we do the same for teaching, despite frequent calls for more focus on pedagogy in the field, and the reality that more graduate students will find jobs at teaching-intensive institutions than at R1 research schools. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    In this short course, we will provide examples of teaching workshops and activities to help faculty develop and formalize teaching training as part of their graduate programs. Topics will include how to structure a teaching workshop, overviews of topics, reading lists, and hands-on examples of ways to help graduate students work through several of the common challenges facing new instructors. The short course will be appropriate for graduate students and early career scholars looking for pedagogy training, as well as faculty looking for support to build out pedagogy training at their institution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Presenter Bios<\/span><\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Edward Kammerer<\/strong> is an Associate Professor in the Political Science Department at Idaho State University, where he teaches courses on law, courts, and inequality. He is also currently teaching the required pedagogy course for all doctoral students in the Political Science program at ISU. His research focuses on two main issues: LGBTQ law and politics and active learning pedagogy. He is currently co-editing a volume on teaching LGBTQ politics to be published with SUNY Press. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Kelly Bauer<\/strong> is an Associate Professor and Director of Undergraduate Studies in the Political Science department at George Washington University, and a member of the Red De Polit\u00f3logas \u2013 #NoSinMujeres. Her research explores identity and development politics in Latin America, as well as political science pedagogy; it has been externally supported by the U.S. Fulbright Program, Inter-American Foundation’s Grassroots Development Fellowship, and APSA Centennial Center. She is the author of two books: Negotiating Autonomy: Mapuche Territorial Demands and Chilean Land Policy<\/em> (2021), and Introduction to Comparative Politics: Political Challenges and Changing Agendas<\/em> (2025, with Kesselman, Krieger, Joseph, Brown).<\/p>\n<\/details>\n\n\n\n

    Incorporating Pedagogical Training into Graduate Programs<\/strong>
    10:30 a.m. \u2013 11:45 a.m.| Edison AB<\/b><\/summary>\n

    Incorporating Pedagogical Training into Graduate Programs<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    10:30 a.m. \u2013 11:45 a.m.| Edison AB<\/b>
    <\/b>Julie L. Mueller, Southern Maine Community College; Sally Bonsall, University of Nebraska Omaha; Christine Cahill, Rutgers University<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Rationale for the short course:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Graduate programs in political science need to do a better job of preparing graduate students to teach. Tenure-track positions decreased by 9% and non-tenure-track and contingent teaching positions increased by 13.5% from 2020 to 2022 (McGrath and Diaz, 2021). This gap is a frequently lamented problem, but there is little guidance on how to remedy it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The APSA Presidential Task Force report on Rethinking Political Science Education notes that graduate programs have done a poor job of preparing their graduates to teach undergraduate courses, which is likely to be the majority of their future work. Graduate students, the report also notes, face so much pressure to produce research during graduate school and to learn research methodologies, that teaching and learning how to teach become afterthoughts (Ishiyama, 2024, p. 31): “Furthermore, Ph.D. students are often poorly prepared to teach courses for UGs in a public policy\/civic engagement or a liberal arts track. For example, students trained at large Research I institutions may not be exposed to smaller classes with policy and civic engagement components, even though they may be expected to teach these courses. Training up students with methods courses necessarily takes time away from substantive courses as well as efforts to train students in pedagogy and create opportunities for students to teach courses of their own design (p. 32).” The report recommends that, ideally, programs would provide required courses in pedagogy, but at a minimum should utilize other resources on campus, such as a Teaching and Learning Center, to provide this training.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Moreover, the landscape of teaching in higher education is quickly changing. Instructors need to be equipped to facilitate often contentious classroom discussions with increasingly diverse student populations in the midst of growing public skepticism of higher education and challenges to academic freedom and free speech.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    This short course is designed to bring graduate students and faculty together to discuss solutions to this important pedagogical gap in graduate student training. The workshop facilitators are all at different stages of our careers and at different types of institutions, so we each bring a unique perspective to this problem. We will begin with an overview of our thoughts on the practical skills that are needed, and then shift to a discussion with the participants of ways to incorporate these skills into graduate programs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The goals of this short course will be to: <\/p>\n\n\n\n