MOVING BEYOND THE TEXTBOOK

Experiential learning ^{Footnote 1} is important for the college classroom because, too often, academics develop assignments that Trueb (2013, 137) described as “students only learn[ing] to write for the academic setting.” In response, many college instructors have adopted a wider array of teaching approaches to engage students with real-world learning activities (Bain Reference Bain2004; McKeachie and Svinicki Reference McKeachie and Svinicki2006).

For example, Kanner (Reference Kanner2007) posited that students learn best by experiencing what it is like to “put the skin on of another person” in answering important disciplinary questions. Similarly, Rinfret (Reference Rinfret2012) clearly noted how a mock city-council simulation allowed students to understand the inner workings of local government. Moreover, Rinfret and Pautz (2015, 442) candidly suggested that experiential learning “Is useful for students to come face-to-face with the often innumerable competing forces in policy making.”

Others have noted the value of this type of research, especially in the environmental-policy arena. For example, Wells, Savanick, and Manning (Reference Wells, Savanick and Manning2009) used a college seminar to conduct a campus-wide greenhouse-gas audit. In their work, they posited that “the practical realities of using a college seminar to conduct a greenhouse-gas inventory presents evidence of the advantage of this approach as an educational and practical tool” (Wells et al. Reference Wells, Savanick and Manning2009, 229). Moreover, Pennock (2011, 141) reiterated the importance of hands-on policy assignments for political science students because it “gives them the opportunity to practice the type of writing they will perform both inside and outside of academia while still developing critical thinking skills and an understanding of the political world.” Yet, Breen (2010, 687) suggested that “As endowments have dwindled and state budget crises loomed during the recent recession, securing and maintaining funds for sustainability projects has become increasingly tenuous.”

Despite these constraints, political science is an appropriate discipline for embracing experiential learning because it “…involves students coming to understand the democratic processes of a community, the problems it faces, the richness of its diversity, the need for individual commitments of time and energy to enhance community life, and, most of all, the importance of working collaboratively to resolve community concerns” (Ehrlich 1999, 246; quoted in Hepburn, Niemi, and Chapman Reference Hepburn, Niemi and Chapman2000). This article explains how experiential learning can prepare political science majors and non-majors to not only face but also effectively address the complexities of environmental policy making.

UNPACKING PROJECT DETAILS

Before describing the details of the semester project, an overview of the university carbon-neutrality commitment and class under investigation is necessary. Our campus is a public university located in the West with approximately 10,000 students. In 2007, our university president became an ACUPCC signatory. By 2010, our campus had completed its greenhouse-gas inventory and climate action plan, which clearly laid out goals of reducing campus carbon emissions by 10% of 2007 levels by 2015 and carbon neutrality by 2020. To reach these targets, part of the climate action plan also was to engage the campus in providing solutions and to pursue the use of carbon offsets. ^{Footnote 2}

The purpose of my class’s involvement with the campus carbon-neutrality goals was to provide an experiential learning opportunity for students to write policy proposals to engage in reaching the targets. I designed the carbon-neutrality project for my Spring 2015 political science environmental-policy class. Thirty undergraduate students (i.e., sophomores, juniors, and seniors) from various majors—political science, business, communications, geography, environmental studies, and art—enrolled in the course. The class met on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday for one hour. The main textbooks for the course were Rinfret and Pautz’s (Reference Rinfret and Pautz2014) US Environmental Policy in Action and Hernan’s (Reference Hernan2010) This Borrowed Earth.

Students formed five different teams to complete a series of assignments for the carbon-neutrality project and to meet course learning objectives, which included increasing knowledge about climate change, understanding the policy-making process, ^{Footnote 3} linking theory to practice, learning how to work in a team, and increasing analytical and public-speaking skills. Peer and self-evaluations were part of students’ carbon-project grade. ^{Footnote 4} However, grading is a concern from both student and instructor perspectives (Kanner Reference Kanner2007; Oros Reference Oros2007). The carbon-neutrality project was worth 195 points (i.e., 505 total points for the course) or 39% of the final grade. To provide transparency, students were given clear instructions about how they would be evaluated for each carbon-project assignment. The grading criteria were discussed in class and posted to the online course-resource page.

To evaluate the viability of student proposals at the end of the semester, a team of campus leaders—the president, sustainability committee and coordinator, and campus administrators (i.e., vice president of marketing, dean of social and behavioral sciences, and political science faculty) voted on which group option was most effective. The goal of the carbon-neutrality project was to provide a venue for students to participate in the process through hands-on learning.

Engaging Students in the Carbon Project

Before a discussion of student results and the value of an experiential-learning project, the six course assignments are described in table 1.

Table 1

Carbon Project Assignments

What Are Carbon Offsets?

For the first assignment, students were required to read the policy-process model and the 94-page campus climate action plan and to conduct their own research about carbon offsets and climate change. By the third week of the semester, students were required to submit their own four- to five-page document that defined carbon offsets, campus climate projects, and different approaches to achieving carbon neutrality. ^{Footnote 5} The semester was launched with individual papers because it was important for students to engage in critical thinking about how the topic fit more broadly within the history of US environmental policy and to use this information when teams were formed. ^{Footnote 6}

Setting up the Details

The second assignment of the project was to create teams. The class was allowed to form its own teams but was required to ensure that students from different majors were included. Each team consisted of six students, resulting in a total of five groups for the class. The groups selected individual team roles including project manager, assistant project manager, media relations expert, science expert, policy expert, and business expert. The rationale for the varied roles is that tackling climate-change policy is multifaceted and cuts across majors. This variation in expertise also was used to introduce students to effective decision making within a team (Carnegie Mellon University 2016).

Each group wrote a team contract that specified how assignments would be completed on time, the division of responsibilities, and how to maintain motivation and enthusiasm. A caveat in the contract was that each group had the ability to fire underperforming team members. That is, if any member did not adhere to the contractual specifications, they would receive a warning and be required to meet with the professor before being fired. ^{Footnote 7}

The Project Slogan and Potential Solutions

By the fifth and sixth weeks of the semester, students were well versed in the background and driving actors (institutional and non-institutional) of US environmental policy. To better understand how additional factors (e.g., the media and public opinion) have an impact on environmental policy, students began the third and fourth assignments.

For the third assignment, the teams used their specific roles to create a team slogan and then began to identify effective strategies to reach the university’s 2020 carbon goals, media tactics (e.g., creating a Facebook page and an infographic), and three to four potential approaches with their political and economic pros and cons. One student in each team compiled these ideas, documented outside research support, and submitted the report for grading.

As expected, the teams created various novel slogans, such as “Know to Grow” and “Carbon Neutrality Is the Stuff.” Some teams wanted to focus on a specific area to reach the university’s carbon-neutrality goals—for instance, recycling or a campus biomass facility—whereas others wanted only to fundraise for carbon offsets to reach the goals. To engender buy-in during this stage of the process, several teams met with community and campus leaders to discuss the viability of their potential solutions and slogans. In particular, to create buy-in, one team attempted to set up meetings with individuals who would attend its final presentation. This team had been compelled by assigned readings on how to effectively engage official and unofficial policy actors (Rinfret and Pautz Reference Rinfret and Pautz2014); if this is not done, they understood that the chances for policy adoption would decrease. This assignment helped students to continue to focus on teamwork, public speaking, writing, decision making, and connecting class readings to practice by creating their own slogans.

To engender buy-in during this stage of the process, several teams met with community and campus leaders to discuss the viability of their potential solutions and slogans.

Polling ^{Footnote 8}

For the fourth assignment, teams drafted a 10- to 15-question survey that helped them understand how public-opinion data helps or hinders policy creation and development. They could grasp from this assignment how data can be used to increase or decrease support for a policy. The survey questions included demographic information, political-party preferences, and a list of options related to the group’s project. For instance, one team was interested in a campus biomass facility and its survey asked questions about support or opposition to this project. I provided feedback regarding the wording of questions and the readability of the draft surveys, indicating whether they were ready for implementation.

Each team surveyed from 50 to 100 respondents, including students, faculty, staff, and/or administrators. Several teams administered surveys during other classes; others polled potential participants outside of the student union. Across the five teams, a total sample of 500 unique university community members had been amassed. To limit duplicate respondents, teams were not allowed to poll the same classes. The polling data were instrumental for teams to determine which proposals would be accepted by their peers. For instance, one team that focused on surveying students campus-wide quickly learned that using the terms “carbon fee” and “carbon tax” was not a beneficial framing for their final project.

Videos

For the fifth assignment, students continued their understanding of the importance of teamwork as well as the power of framing and messaging to garner support for their approach for carbon neutrality. We spent class time watching environmental and political videos, including the Crying Indian, to discuss how images can have an impact on perceptions about a topic. Therefore, one or two short clips or YouTube videos were required for the teams to market their approach. During one class session, students unveiled their videos to their classmates, who were required to critique or ask questions regarding each team’s videos and policy ideas to help refine their approach. Doing so also was instrumental for documenting which teams expended more effort in their work. For example, one team’s video used illustrative music as a team member ran up a mountainside showing statistics on each step. The strong message demonstrated why revamping the campus transportation system and charging a fee for airline travel to purchase carbon offsets were necessary. For comparison, another team filmed students recycling glass and plastic bottles, proclaiming that this was the best approach to reach our carbon-neutrality goals. The video ended by showing money washing down a drain if we did not take action immediately. These examples reiterated to the class how powerful messaging and framing can set a policy-making agenda.

Presentation and Report

During the final weeks of the semester, each team worked on a written compilation of all of the semester assignments. The purpose of the report was to demonstrate why their approach was the best, supported by their primary and secondary research. The second phase of the final assignment was a presentation explaining why their approach should be selected for campus consideration. To prepare for both assignments, students wrote drafts with instructor feedback; one class session was designated to practice giving presentations. In the final week, each team was allotted 15 minutes to present its approach to the university president, campus administrators, campus sustainability committee (representing parking, facilities, faculty, and students) and coordinator, climate-change studies director, and political science faculty. The audience participants were encouraged to ask critical questions about each team’s project. Afterwards, the instructor gave each participant a ballot to vote on which approach should be accepted and why. The ballots were given to the university president and sustainability coordinator to tally and discuss. ^{Footnote 9}

The university president provided the instructor with the final results, which were announced during the final class session. The winning team leveraged all of the assignments to produce an incremental approach, which included a travel toll to create a fund for purchasing carbon offsets from local sources, collaboration with our campus foundation and student government to ensure that the 2020 goals are reached, and videos that underscored the economic and environmental gains of its solution.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

The carbon-neutrality project was a challenging yet advantageous mechanism to actively engage students with real-life implications of major issues in environmental policy. Student feedback was obtained through final reflection, which addressed the following questions: (1) What did you learn from this project?; (2) What were the challenges and benefits of this project?; (3) Did this project meet the course learning objectives?; and (4) Any suggestions for future use?

CONCLUSION: LESSONS LEARNED AND EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING

Inevitably, what did the students learn from the carbon neutrality project?. Although drawbacks were evident, students overwhelmingly learned from this experience because of its participatory, experiential nature. For example, one student remarked, “In one semester I have learned more than I have in my college career.” Another student noted, “Thank you for allowing us to try to make a difference on campus and hopefully on a larger scale after graduation.”

Understandably, there are advantages and disadvantages to any course assignment, yet I encourage other instructors to adopt this project. Although this assignment takes significant planning, I have a few suggestions for the future. Our campus atmosphere for addressing climate change is collegial. The students were comfortable discussing the topic with classmates, community leaders, faculty, staff, and administrators. Although this comfort about the topic was a norm on our campus, students were frustrated about the lack of action at the state and federal levels. In classroom discussions, some were discouraged about the lack of congressional action but they knew that climate-change issues are being addressed by US Environmental Protection Agency regulatory efforts. However, this might not be the standard on other college campuses. Therefore, I suggest that faculty discuss with the class how to participate in active listening and how to respond to unreceptive feedback.

Despite our campus collegiality, by the end of the semester, the teams became highly competitive about having their solution selected. Students knew that their grade would not be affected by which team won or lost, but winning inevitably became a theme for two groups. After the presentations, I used this opportunity to debrief the class by asking, “Does focusing on winning perpetuate the ‘us versus them’ mentality that often pervades US environmental policy making or engender an environment in which we cannot create new environmental policy?” One student responded, “Wow, I didn’t realize how we’re starting to act like members of Congress, focusing on the ‘me’ instead of the ‘us.’ Maybe this is why we cannot pass climate legislation.” These statements led to a classroom discussion about what occurs when we place our personal preferences above collective policy decisions and, ultimately, the reasons why a major US environmental policy has not been enacted since the 1990s. Therefore, I suggest a debriefing session to discuss why a particular solution came to fruition as well as long-term benefits of class’s collective actions.

Moreover, I recommend that the “winning” team approach be implemented by university administrators. For this course, the goal was to use the carbon-neutrality project as a vehicle to actively engage students in policy-making processes. We were fortunate that portions of the selected plan are being considered and that the climate-change conversation continues on our campus. However, as budgets decrease and competition for resources increase, I encourage instructors to work with campus administrators to implement the student plan.

Finally, students remarked about the value in writing proposals to understand more broadly the issues surrounding climate change. This class project is in concert with findings on the importance of experiential learning—that is, allowing students to gain knowledge through participatory learning, which enhances their understanding about a public policy and its potential solutions. Ultimately, the carbon-neutrality project was a way for students to move from textbook theory to practice. Because of projects like this, our students are better equipped to understand the process and make informed policy decisions in the future.