Pedagogy for Engagement: Alternative Texts to Increase Civic Engagement and
Knowledge
Tanya B. Corbin, Political Science. Allison K. Wisecup, Sociology, Radford University
Abstract: Research consistently demonstrates the benefits for high-impact pedagogical practices
such as service learning projects for student learning and engagement. However, these practices
often require significant resource investments. Research regarding the benefits of textbook
alternatives is ambiguous, though some studies document increases in student learning. The current
research explores whether the use of an alternative text influences students’ feelings of civic
engagement and knowledge. We explore the effects of assigning an alternative textbook as a
supplement, using a quasi-experimental design, with survey data. We find a significant increase in
student learning, especially for those students assigned a combination of standard and alternative
texts.
Literature Review
Putnam’s seminal work, Bowling Alone, sounded the alarm on a long-term downward trend in civic engagement in
America (Putnam 2000). One potential avenue for addressing the generational decline in civic and political
participation in America is to incorporate “pedagogies of engagement” which encourage students to develop
political engagement skills and foster critical thinking about their democratic republic (Beaumont, et al. 2006).
Much of the research on the efficacy of diverse pedagogical practices focuses almost exclusively on those activities
that take place beyond the four walls of the classroom, and finds that service learning projects increase student
engagement (e.g. Astin and Sax 1998; Schumer 2001). To be sure, projects of this magnitude require the investment
of significant time and resources for proper development and execution (Birge, Beaird and Torres 2003). Resources,
financial or otherwise, may limit instructors’ ability to pursue, develop, and execute these high engagement
pedagogies. Despite conflicting evidence (e.g. Huerta and Jozwiak 2008; Weiden and Phippen 2005), about the
efficacy of alternative reading assignments on student learning and civic engagement, the incorporation of
alternative reading assignments is one potential pathway for increasing political knowledge and engagement. There
are limited studies that examine whether using alternative texts affects levels of student learning, and the results are
conflicting. In this research, we test whether assigning an alternative to the traditional textbook will increase
students’ political knowledge and engagement more than assigning only a traditional textbook.
Methodology
We employ a pre and post-test quasi-experimental design to assess the impact of standard text, alternative text, and a
combination of standard and alternative texts in introductory level courses taught at a public university in Southwest
Virginia and a public, two-year college in Southern California. The instructors used identical texts (standard and
alternative) and collaboratively developed detailed reading guides to aid students in active reading, note taking, and
the retention of pertinent information. Using anonymous student surveys administered to students at the beginning
and conclusion of the course, we analyzed measures of efficacy and knowledge developed by The Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (Colby, Beaumont, Ehrlich, and Corngold 2007). In our analysis, we
employ independent samples t-tests to compare the sample means by condition for pretest and posttest measures to
draw conclusions about where students begin and end with regard to the dependent variables. We then proceed to
estimate three Ordinary Least Squares regressions. The OLS models allow us to control for other factors, such as
sociodemographic characteristics, to determine if students’ self-reports are significantly different by condition,
independent of other possible confounding variables.
Results
Table 1.Comparisons of Means - Political Knowledge and Efficacy
Pretest
Posttest
Current Events Knowledge Scale
Standard
1.65 (.81)
2.74 (1.01)
Standard & Alternative
1.94 (.75)*
2.83 (1.11)
Standard
1.74 (1.05)
2.48 (1.19)
Standard & Alternative
2.15 (.96)**
2.52 (1.29)
Foundational Political Knowledge Scale
Internal Political Efficacy Scale
Standard
2.60 (.95)
Standard & Alternative
2.90 (.96)*
3.22 (.99)
3.57 (.99)*
Note: *= p>.05, **=p>.01
Table 2. OLS Regressions of Students' Self-reports of Foundational Knowledge
Foundational knowledge
Male
.18 ( .11)
White
-.16 (.16)
Hispanic
.22 (.16)
Institution
-.29 (.13)*
Underclass status
-.02 (.12)
Other class requirement
.30 (.11)**
Posttest
.48 (.11)***
Standard & Alternative text
.36 (.13)**
Intercept
1.07 (.23)***
Note: * indicates p>.05, ** indicates p>.01, and *** indicates p>.001
Discussion
The significant, positive coefficient for the Posttest variable indicates that students report feeling more internal
efficacy, on average, at the end of the semester compared to reports from the beginning of the semester. Similarly,
the significant, positive coefficient for the Text condition variable suggests that students who use a supplemental
text report feeling more efficacy and engagement than students who only use the standard format text. As such, the
model in Table 2 provides support for the research hypothesis regarding the use of a supplemental text and students’
reports of engagement and efficacy. All students, regardless of assigned text, demonstrate an increase in political
knowledge. Importantly, the use of an alternative text is associated with the largest increases in knowledge. The
results of this study indicate the use of an alternative text is positively associated with students’ knowledge. As an
alternative to other pedagogical practices such as service learning, which require a substantial investment of
resources, the use of alternative texts is a viable pathway for increasing student knowledge.
References
Astin, A.W., & Sax, L.J. (1998). How Undergraduates Are Affected by Service Participation. Journal of College
Student Development, 39(3): 251-263.
Birge, J., Beaird, B. & Torres, J. (2003). Partnerships among Colleges and Universities for Service Learning. In
Jacoby B. (Ed.) Building Partnerships for Service-Learning. San Francisco : Jossey Bass.
Beaumont, E., Colby,A., Ehrlich, T. & Torney-Purta, J. (2006). Promoting Political Competence and Engagement in
College Students: An Empirical Study. Journal of Political Science Education, 2:249-270.
Colby, A., Beaumont, E., Ehrlich, T., & Corngold, J. (2007). Educating for Democracy: Preparing
Undergraduates for Responsible Political Engagement. Stanford: Jossey-Bass.
Huerta, J.C. & Jozwiak, J. (2008). Developing Civic Engagement in General Education Political Science. Journal
of Political Science Education 1(4): 42-60.
Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Renewal of American Community. New York: Simon &
Schuster.
Schumer, R. (2001). Service Learning is for Everybody. In Canada, M., Speck, B., and Kramer, M. (Eds),
Developing and Implementing Service Learning Programs. San Francisco : Jossey Bass , 2001.
Weiden, D.L., & Phippen, E. (2005). Engagement or Regurgitation? Teaching American Government without a
Textbook. Politics & Policy 33(1): 183-197.