Teaching, Really Teaching, Political Theory

Video Presentation
Conference Discussion

To begin as confrontationally as possible: Everyone, students, faculty, the lords of our discipline (i.e. the Americanists) agree that political theory is difficult, obscure and more or less useless to the greater enterprise of political science. Theory, in its normative and historical forms, is, at best, a rainy day exercise, something to fill out time in a student=s schedule which might be taken up by such dangerous alternatives as management classes or economics. At worst, political theory is seen as taking course time away from the more valuable parts of the discipline (i.e. American Politics). Political theorists, or in the immortal words of one my fellow sufferers in grad school, >mush-headed fluff bunnies,= have become the barely tolerated step-children of political science.

Political theorists have reacted to this exile in a number of ways. Sadly, most of these ways have been self-defeating.[1] Well, I don=t plan on boring my readers with a long whiny rant about the unfairness of the universe. Instead, I will suggest some remedies for the problems facing the teacher of political theory.

In my years of experience teaching political theory at such institutions as the University of North Carolina, the University of Virginia, Bucknell University and the University of Mississippi, I have developed a few simple rules that can make teaching political theory a pleasure for the instructor and a valuable learning experience for the student.[2]

Principles of Teaching Political Theory:

1: Less is more.

One of the most important lessons I have gleaned in teaching is that students will recoil from large amounts of reading. Quite simply, >less is sometimes more.= Now, by saying >less is more= I am not counseling surrender. Instead, as teachers we should pare down our assignments to what is important for our pedagogical purpose. Make sure everything you assign plays its part in your greater goals for the course. Better ten pages that get the main point across than hundreds that confuse and dismay the student. This leads to the second point.

2: Don=t forget, this stuff is hard.

Remember, you have been immersed in this material for years. You are versed in the methods of analysis necessary to interpret political thought. You understand the key concepts and the terms of art that political theorists use. YOUR STUDENTS DO NOT. This is new to them. Many of them have never had to move beyond simply vomiting back the plot of whatever they have read. Or, to put it more politely, they describe, they don=t analyze. You must be prepared not only to impart information. You must also be ready to act like a teacher of basic chemistry and show your students some kind of >scientific method= in the approach to texts and ideas.

As a first step to overcoming this problem, be sure to define key terms. Let me give you an obvious example. >Liberalism= is a term with a clear and straightforward meaning for political scientists. But what do students make of it? Clearly most of them think in terms of liberalism as the political position of the left wing of the Democratic party in the United States.[3] So, if you fail to define your terms (repeatedly) you will have lost a large proportion of your audience right off the bat. This leads to the third point.

3: Give them the tools, they will finish the job.

At the start of each semester, I spend a couple of classes talking about the way political theorists engage the enterprise of political theory. While research methods lectures combined with piles of definitions are often snooze inducers, there is a payoff in the long run. You should also give your students some idea of what approach to political theory you will be using. Sabia=s 1984 APSA article is an excellent start in helping your students understand the various approaches to the subfield.[4] While one can quibble with his division of political theory into >historical,= >traditional,= and >perennial issues= approaches, his paper provides a useful starting point.

Here is a useful example. In my course on utopian political thought, I spend the first couple of weeks with a textbook written by a leading scholar of utopianism.[5] This book gives my students some idea of the sweep of this kind of thought, its history, and some of the means political and social theorists use for analysis.[6] This leads to the fourth point.

4: Provide some idea of what is interesting or important in the works you have assigned.

One of the best methods for directing students attention is to provide questions for them to think about as they read. This produces three happy effects. First, the students have some idea of what you consider important. Second, you can use these questions as the basis for discussion. Third, your students will have a foundation from which to build. You cannot have successful discussion if your students have no place to start their process of discovery. I have found this approach cuts down on long, uncomfortable pauses in the class. These questions give them a position from which to begin the process of critique. My method for doing this is send questions via e-mail about 3-5 days prior to each class. Alternatively, you can require that students send you questions. I have found that sometimes this approach leads to points I have not considered. Building a class from a happy mix of what you consider to be essential and from what interests the students is much more effective than trying to guess what might encourage discussion. This leads to the fifth point.

5: Provide some historical context.

In my student days, one of the most frustrating parts of the study of political theory, especially in its ancient phase, was the sense of disconnection from the authors of the text, from their lives and experiences. Given the ahistorical or anti-historical nature of American society this can be a problem even for fairly recent thinkers. Also, be prepared to >humanize= the figures you discuss. Too often, students feel that they cannot critique the works of individuals who are held up as geniuses.

I have employed a number of methods to overcome these problem. First, I provide short biographies of the figures we will be discussing.[7] You would be surprised just how much interest is created when you tell you students that Pericles= enemies called him >Squash-head= or that Socrates was notably ugly (and that the ancient Greeks saw physical beauty as a reflection of inner goodness), or that St. Thomas Aquinas was hugely fat. Second, I give the student chronologies of the events surrounding the text. The confusing events of the Peloponnesian War become less confusing if you have a time line. Finally, I discuss the actual political events around the text. Understanding the violent politics of Athens at the end of the fifth century (B.C.E.) broadens and increases the complexity of student=s insight into the trial of Socrates.[8] This leads to the sixth point.

6: The living past and the contested present.

To the extent you can do so without violence to or over simplification establish a dialog between classical and contemporary ideas. Don=t be dogmatic about this point. Remember you are teaching undergraduates and trying to get them interested. Be playful without being too extreme. J. Peter Euben puts this matter in a clear light when he states in his syllabus for his course on >Political Freedom:=

While the history of political thought is a worthy enterprise, students often require some clear cut ideas of >relevance= to pique their interest. (This is less of a problem in courses designed around >issues= such as democracy, power, citizenship.) This leads to the seventh point.

7: Where does political theory fit into political science?

You need to demonstrate how political theory has influenced the development of the discipline of political science and how theory informs practice. An couple of examples that can be used to illustrate this point. For example, Rawls= A Theory of Justice is a seminal work in modern political theory. What few recognize is that Rawls= hypotheses are, at a number of levels, testable. So, in teaching this work, it might be useful to examine some the efforts that have been made to empirically test his assumptions.

The foundations of the American constitutional order laid out in The Federalist Papers is another good example. Students need to understand how classical and historical influences affected and informed the Founders. They also need recognize how their ideas >play out= in contemporary American politics. After all, ideas like federalism and separation of powers didn=t spring fully formed from James Madison=s head.

If you prefer a more recent example Putnam=s famous article Bowling Alone is full of potentially contestable data. I have had students take this article and try to find data which refutes his conclusions, and then to have them write an alternative interpretation of community in modern America.[9] This leads to the eight point.

8: This ain=t philosophy!

Political theory is a hybrid. It is political debate and discourse, an often topical and narrowly partisan style of writing. It is social theory. It is culture. It is history. Unless you are prepared to deal with this diversity, to bring in works outside the traditional canon, to include plays, religious tracts, polemics and films, you will be shortchanging your students, and ultimately yourself.[11] This leads to the ninth point.

9: Make it fun.

Don=t be afraid to go off on tangents. Don=t be wedded to the syllabus.

Keep in mind that you are doing this because you love it. Your students must know this. A little enthusiasm goes a long way and is infectious.

REMEMBER: YOU ARE NOT HERE TO JAM INFORMATION INTO THEIR HEADS. YOU ARE HERE TO ENGAGE THEM IN TALKING ABOUT IDEAS! This leads to the tenth point.

10: Be open to different interpretations (Don=t pretend you are Socrates--look what happened to him).

There are no privileged interpretations. Students will often be interested in things you haven=t even thought about. Don=t scorn this. They are reading this material with fresh eyes. You on the other hand, have read this stuff so often that it is like a soundtrack in your brain. I have found that nothing makes good students happier than hearing the professor say, >you know, I hadn=t thought of that.= (This approach does inflect a cost. Nothing annoys bad students more, since they now have a harder time figuring out what they should barf back on the test.) This leads to the eleventh point.

11: Fight relativism.

Of course, being open to different interpretations doesn=t mean that anything goes. The rampant relativism of the modern college student makes them think any idea is a good as any other. You must clarify the traditional and current understandings of the works you assign. But, since political theory is a living discipline, one whose concerns and foci change with the times, be ready for the views of the next generation.[12] Your task is to discipline your student=s minds so the new and interesting interpretations they come up with are back by solid evidence and logical thinking. This leads to the twelfth point.

12: There is no secret knowledge.

Leave esoteric knowledge for astrologers.

If you think that texts have hidden meanings open only to some high priesthood, get out of political science today.

Don=t make it easy. But don=t make it needlessly hard. It=s hard enough for your students already, without making them play some guessing game.

Finally:

13: Don=t forget that enrollments in political science are down.

Ask yourself, >what have I done to increase enrollments today?= Seriously, while much of the decline in our enrollments is outside of our control, a focus on problems in the classroom is not misplaced. As the average age of faculty increases, the methods and styles that worked in the 70=s and 80=s are no longer acceptable. This is especially true in a marginalized subfield like theory.

Appendix: Some valuable questions to ask yourself before teaching:

1: What are the students expecting? Are you replacing someone? Did that person have a >unique= pedagogical style? Is there room for experimentation?

2: What do your students know? Do they have any previous experience with political theory? Do they have some historical understanding? Do they think political theory is something to be feared?

3: Are they used to analyzing texts? (see above)

4: How much hand-holding do they expect? How much are you willing to do? (You=d be surprised at the answers to both questions.)

5: Are the goals of the course clear to you? If they are not, how can they be clear to your students?

6: Are you ready to be a missionary for political theory?

Notes

[1] A self-righteously defensive attitude, a pretense of purity and a retreat to the murky world of post-modernity, among other strategies, while temporarily pleasing, have been, in the long run, disastrous.

[2] They used to say, "join the Navy and see the world." Now they can say, "study political theory and see the

United States!"

[3] Other obvious sources of confusion include: "Democrat" versus "democrat" and "Republican" versus "republican." Keep in mind that if you plan to use terms like "equality" that you and your students have the same definition. In my experience, most students assume equality to mean a dreary sameness.

[4] Daniel R. Sabia, Jr.'s "Political Education and the History of Political Thought."

[5] Krishan Kumar's Utopianism.

[6] I am not suggesting that you telegraph your philosophical position. You must act in a delicate fashion. Otherwise you might create the familiar situation where students attempt to "guess" or decipher your ideological position in order to pander to your apparent prejudices.

[7] I wish to thank Michael Lienesch of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for demonstrating the usefulness of this approach.

[8] I know some of my colleagues might find this pretty scary, but you better know some history. I will never forget in graduate school when a fellow student expressed shock and dismay that Ceasre Borgia was the son of a Pope. "How did that happen," he asked. "The usual way," I answered. It seems to me that its impossible to really understand Machiavelli"s Prince without some idea of the strange politics, sexual and otherwise, of Renaissance Italy.

[9] Euben, "Syllabus for Political Freedom" Political Science Course Syllabi Collection: Introduction to Political Theory, Peter Stillman, editor. American Political Science Association.

[10] Sometimes, numbers can be a political theorist's friend!

[11] Avoid textbooks! Textbooks in political theory are supplements. I have found that students get little from them as primary sources. They should be used to clarify points, or expand on ideas you have discussed, or to help your students understand some difficult texts. But nothing substitutes for the original material.

[12] If you think I am wrong, just consider the interpretation of Hobbes now versus one hundred years ago. Or consider that some central figures in political thought were practically unknown to scholarship as recently as fifty years ago.

References

Euben, J. Peter. 1991. >Syllabus for Political Freedom= In Political Science Course Syllabi Collection: Introduction to Political Theory, ed. Peter Stillman. Washington: American Political Science Association.

Kumar, Krishan. 1991. Utopianism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Sabia, Daniel R. Jr. 1984. >Political Education and the History of Political Thought,= American Political Science Review 78 (4): 985-999.