Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T08:08:56.722Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

I. The Introductory Course in Government

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Francis O. Wilcox
Francis O. Wilcox*
Affiliation:
Legislative Reference Service, Library of Congress
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Introductory Comments. How and what to teach has been one of the most engaging topics of conversation in political science circles for many years. Yet it is a remarkable fact that not a single department of political science in the United States, so far as the writer is aware, offers its graduate students a seminar on teaching problems. Seemingly we have been content with the old formula for teaching success: “If you would be a good teacher, saturate yourself with your subject-matter and teach like hell.” Unfortunately, some of our teachers have done just that.

If we needed to reëvaluate our teaching before the war, it is imperative now that a little individual and collective soul-searching be done. The tremendous changes ushered in by the war and the uncertainties of the future emphasize more than ever the importance of our work. The world is entering a new era in which democracy will be put to real test as it continues to meet the challenge of more militant ideologies. It will be an era of bewildering social change accompanied by an increasing awareness of political power on the part of individuals and organized groups. The ideological conflict will be characterized by tension between management and labor at home and the old familiar pattern of power politics—with new forms of nationalism and militarism—in our relations abroad. Students will be bombarded with propaganda from every quarter.

Type
Undergraduate Instruction in Political Science
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , June 1947 , pp. 489 - 500
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1947

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.)

Footnotes

*

The reports here presented on teaching problems in political science grew out of a series of round tables held in Washington during the war years, and were prepared by an editorial board of the American Political Science Association's Committee on Undergraduate Instruction. While they were submitted to Committee members for comment and criticism, responsibility for preparing them rested with the editorial board, and they do not necessarily reflect the views of all members of the Committee. The reports are of a preliminary character, being designed primarily to stimulate further discussion of important problems in the teaching field. Members of the Committee during the past year included: Francis O. Wilcox (chairman), Charles Aikin, Ethan P. Allen, Herbert W. Briggs, Asher N. Christensen, Finla G. Crawford, Royden J. Dangerfield, Marshall E. Dimock, Harold M. Dorr, James W. Fesler, George A. Graham, John Russell, Harvey C. Mansfield, Roscoe C. Martin, Charles McKinley, John D. Millett, Victoria Schuck, John A. Vieg, Robert A. Walker, Benjamin F. Wright, and Charles G. Post.

References

1 The University of Michigan will offer such a course next year. I am also informed that Syracuse University has offered one for some years, although it deals mainly with evaluation techniques.

2 One committee member considered this list of objectives too comprehensive. It would seem, however, that most general education courses should have at least one or two objectives in each of the following areas: (1) acquisition of information; (2) critical thinking; (3) development of study skills; and (4) interests and attitudes.

3 These questions, I believe, can best be answered by a brief excursion of from two to three weeks into political theory and comparative government so that democratic ideals and principles can be compared with fascist and communist ideologies.

4 It is my argument that the objectives outlined above can be reached by means of a revised American government course. With this argument, one committee member vigorously disagrees. “The old nag is cancerous,” he writes, “and a few blood transfusions are not going to save it. Major surgery is in order.”

5 One committee member feels strongly that the lecture method and the textbook must both be eliminated—that we should use “important original writings and the seminar method.”

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.