Teaching Philosophy

I teach political science as a practice of judgment primarily because political life asks people to make decisions in conditions that are rarely tidy. Evidence is often incomplete, institutions constrain action, values conflict, and people often understand the same problem from very different positions. In my courses, I want students to learn political science as a discipline of careful reasoning in precisely those conditions. They study concepts and institutions while also practicing the habits that political analysis requires, such as weighing evidence, recognizing constraint, taking perspective seriously, and making arguments that can withstand scrutiny.

 My teaching is largely built around active, experiential, and reflective learning. Students can expect to read, write, discuss, and analyze, while also working through simulations, policy problems, legal arguments, research projects, and field-based experiences. I want students to leave my courses with stronger analytical judgment, greater confidence, and a deeper appreciation for the complexity of public life.

LEARNING THROUGH PRACTICE

I use active learning because students develop deeper understanding when they have to do meaningful work with what they are learning. Research on active learning has shown that students perform better when they engage course material through activity, discussion, problem-solving, and application rather than relying only on lecture-based instruction (Freeman et al., 2014). Political science is a different field from the STEM courses studied in that large meta-analysis, but the underlying lesson fits my teaching experience that students learn more when they are intellectually responsible for using ideas.

Political science lends itself especially well to this kind of teaching. Diplomacy becomes more vivid when a student has to represent a country, make a strategic choice, and then explain that choice to others. Constitutional interpretation changes when a student must reason from precedent, institutional role, and constitutional text. And party politics takes on a different texture when students are asked to build a coalition, respond to a crisis, or defend a platform before classmates who are pursuing different goals.

I draw from experiential learning theory because it treats experience as something that must be examined, interpreted, and tested against larger concepts (Kolb, 1984). In my courses, simulations and applied projects are followed by debriefing, writing, and reflection so that students can connect what happened in the activity to the political science questions underneath it.

STRUCTURE, TRANSPARENCY, AND SUPPORT

When I design an assignment, I want students to understand what the work is for, how they should approach it, and how success will be evaluated. That commitment is shaped by transparent assignment design, including the Transparency in Learning and Teaching framework, which emphasizes making an assignment’s purpose, task, and criteria visible to students when possible (Winkelmes et al., 2016).

Backward design also shapes how I think about course planning. I start with the kinds of understanding and transfer I want students to develop, then build assignments and learning activities that give students opportunities to demonstrate those outcomes (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). This approach keeps active learning from becoming activity for its own sake.

I also think carefully about student motivation. Self-Determination Theory has shaped how I understand the relationship between challenge and support, especially its emphasis on students’ need to experience autonomy, competence, and relatedness in learning environments (Ryan & Deci, 2000). I strongly believe that a course can ask students to stretch beyond what feels comfortable while still giving them a sense that the work is purposeful and that their voices belong in the room. That balance is central to how I understand rigor.

EVIDENCE, EMPATHY, AND POLITICAL UNDERSTANDING

A phrase I return to often is “empathetic empiricism.” By that I mean the ability to reason carefully from evidence while also taking people’s experiences, incentives, and perspectives seriously. I believe that political science requires both of these commitments. Students need to evaluate sources, analyze institutions, and make evidence-based arguments. They also need to understand why political actors behave as they do, especially when those actors hold different values or face different constraints. Without empathy, analysis can become detached from the human stakes of politics. Without evidence, empathy can drift away from disciplined inquiry.

Simulations are valuable because they ask students to practice this balance. When students engage in role-playing activities, they must see through another actor’s position long enough to understand its logic. Recent political science pedagogy describes simulations as tools that can support knowledge, engagement, skills, and empathy when they are designed with clear learning goals and assessed with care (Clark & Scherpereel, 2024). Other scholarship cautions that simulations should be evaluated as learning tools rather than treated as automatically valuable because students find them engaging (Baranowski & Weir, 2015). I take that caution seriously. I aim to design simulations that I would want to take part in, and I try to incorporate fun, surprising, and creative elements when appropriate, but my overarching goal is for students to understand another position without surrendering their own judgment. It is intended to serve as a lesson in democratic education.

REFLECTION AND TRANSFER

The most important learning often comes after the activity ends. I ask students to consider what happened, what they assumed, what constrained their choices, and how they would approach the problem differently with the benefit of hindsight. Proper reflection can help students connect experience to theory and carry their learning into new settings.

This transfer is one of the main reasons I teach the way I do. Most students will use political science outside a political science classroom. Some will go to law school, graduate school, public service, advocacy, teaching, or nonprofit work. Many will use these habits in less formal but equally important ways, as citizens and community members trying to make sense of public problems. It is my desire for each and every one of my students to become, even in small ways, more careful readers of political life and more thoughtful participants in it.

At its best, my teaching helps students practice the work of political judgment. They can learn to slow down, ask better questions, recognize complexity, listen carefully, use evidence responsibly, and reflect on the consequences of collective choices. That is the kind of classroom I try to build: one that is rigorous, active, humane, and connected to the world that students are preparing to enter.

REFERENCES

Baranowski, M. K., & Weir, K. A. (2015). Political simulations: What we know, what we think we know, and what we still need to know. Journal of Political Science Education, 11(4), 391–403. (ERIC)

Clark, N., & Scherpereel, J. A. (2024). Do political science simulations promote knowledge, engagement, skills, and empathy? Journal of Political Science Education, 20(1), 133–152. (James Madison University)

Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. (PNAS)

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall. (ResearchGate)

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. (Self Determination Theory)

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). ASCD.

Winkelmes, M.-A., Bernacki, M., Butler, J., Zochowski, M., Golanics, J., & Harriss Weavil, K. (2016). A teaching intervention that increases underserved college students’ success. Peer Review, 18(1/2), 31–36. (teaching.resources.osu.edu)

Teaching Awards and Grants

  • FACET Inductee, 2026

  • FACET Innovate Award: Skills Across the Curriculum, 2025

  • Summer Faculty Fellowship, 2025

  • Applied Learning Grant, 2025

  • Undergraduate Research and Creative Activity Program (2), 2025

  • Claude Rich Excellence in Teaching Award, 2024

  • Experiential and Active Learning Award, 2024

  • Trustees Teaching Award, 2024

  • Undergraduate Research Program (2), 2024

  • FACET Innovate Award: Collaborative Activity, 2024

  • Resident Faculty Amicus Award, 2023-2024

  • FACET Innovate Award: Collaborative Activity, 2023

  • Applied Learning Grant, 2023

  • Resident Faculty Amicus Award, 2022-2023

  • Experiential and Active Learning Award, 2022

  • Applied Learning Grant, 2022

  • Undergraduate Research Program, 2021