Rebecca A. Glazier

Running Simulations Without Ruining Your Life: Simple Ways to Incorporate Active Learning into Your Teaching

Despite the growing availability and popularity of simulations and other active teaching techniques, many instructors may be deterred from using simulations because of the potentially high costs involved. Instructors could spend a preponderance of their time and resources developing and executing simulations, but such an approach is not necessary. Instead of investing a great deal of time and effort into running a complex simulation, I recommend developing low-intensity simulations, using three possible strategies: (1) using ones own scholarly research to develop simulations, (2) using current events as the basis for simulations, and (3) using student research to create simulations. These strategies provide a starting place for the professor who has held off on trying simulations before and practical information for the professor who is accomplished in using active learning techniques and wants to take the next step by designing his or her own simulation.

Building Rapport to Improve Retention and Success in Online Classes

ABSTRACT As the prevalence of online education continues to grow, so do concerns about student success. Online students tend to withdraw more often and earn lower grades, compared to students in traditional classrooms. Explanations for this disparity range from student characteristics to institutional shortcomings to course design. Attempts to counter this trend are often resource intensive and yield mixed results. I hypothesize that the difficulty of establishing student–instructor rapport in online classes contributes to lower student success. Without rapport, students are less likely to remember and prioritize online classes. Thus, improving rapport with online students may lead to improvements in student success. To test this hypothesis, I implemented rapport-building teaching strategies—including video updates, personal e-mails, and personalized electronic comments on assignments—in some online classes (student n = 143) and compared student outcomes in those classes to online classes taught without rapport-building strategies (student n = 322). Difference of means tests, logit models, and OLS regression models all show significantly lower attrition and significantly higher grades in the rapport-building courses. Qualitative student comments identify the high-rapport relationship with the instructor as a key factor in student success. Thus, rapport building represents a simple, instructor-driven intervention that can significantly improve online retention and grades.

Bridging Religion and Politics: The Impact of Providential Religious Beliefs on Political Activity

Past research shows that religious beliefs can shape political activity. Yet current literature leaves open many questions about the mechanisms at work. I point to the key role of a particular religious belief found across denominations: providentiality, or the belief that God has a plan that humans can further. When these beliefs are connected to politics, providential believers are likely to be active and dedicated participators. I test this notion using survey data collected during the 2012 election campaign from congregants in Little Rock, Arkansas. In general, providential believers are less likely than their non-providential counterparts to participate in politics. However, when providential believers report hearing political sermons from their clergy, they are significantly more likely to participate. These findings illustrate one pathway by which religious beliefs can influence politics: through a cue that links providentiality and politics.

Agenda Control in the 2008 Presidential Debates

Research indicates that, when engaging their opponents, strategic candidates will draw (and redraw) lines of conflict, pulling attention to their advantaged topics. But do these expectations hold up in debates, where candidates are at the mercy of those asking the questions? And do strategic debate behaviors matter? This study draws on past literature to hypothesize the specific types of agenda-control behaviors we should see in debates. These hypotheses are tested in the 2008 presidential debates, using quantitative content analysis to examine candidate agenda setting, issue framing, and tone. The results show that both Obama and McCain used all three means of agenda control to continually displace the line of conflict in their favor.  These findings offer empirical support for theories of strategic agenda control and heighten our understanding of agenda setting, framing, and tone as agenda-control mechanisms.  Additionally, media and public opinion data suggest these debate agenda-control behaviors had real effects during the 2008 election.

Satire and Efficacy in the Political Science Classroom

Political satire has become increasingly prominent in recent years, leading some political science instructors to use satire in their courses. Yet, recent work suggests that political satire may encourage cynicism and decrease political efficacy. In this article, the author develops and tests an approach to teaching effectively with satire. Frequent use, source diversity, and critical evaluation engage students while allaying satire’s potential detrimental effects. The author evaluates this pedagogical approach through a classroom experiment using both in-person and online classes (student N = 163). Qualitative and quantitative data offer suggestive evidence that refutes the warning that satire fundamentally depresses political efficacy and indicates that students enjoy satire and endorse its use. By deliberately using diverse satirical sources, instructors can maximize the benefits of satire while minimizing potential drawbacks. For interested instructors, the author’s website contains a searchable catalog of satirical articles, video clips, and cartoons that can be used to teach specific political science concepts.

In the wake of a terrorist attack, do Americans’ attitudes toward Muslims decline?

When a terrorist attack occurs, a natural response may be increased public concern about terrorism. But when a self-described Muslim perpetrates a terrorist attack, do negative attitudes toward Muslims also increase? If so, is this effect conditional on the nature of people’s past personal experiences with Muslims? We present natural experiment data based on a 2015 web-based survey of 2105 non-Muslims in the US, a survey that happened to span the terrorist attacks in Paris on 13 November and San Bernardino on 2 December. We thus test Americans’ feelings toward Muslims immediately before and after both an international and a domestic terrorist attack. We find that, although the attacks significantly affected Americans’ concerns about radicalism both in the US and abroad, they did not negatively affect Americans’ thermometer feelings toward Muslims in the aggregate—a null finding conditioned only slightly by the nature of past personal experiences with Muslims.

For God or Country? Comparing the Sources of Anti-American and Anti-Muslim Attitudes

ABSTRACT Negative attitudes about Americans pervade the Muslim world. And many Americans hold negative views of Muslims. Although prior literatures provide many explanations for the sources of antagonism in each population, scholars have yet to provide a direct comparison between the two. Thus, instead of explaining the attitudes themselves, this research compares them. When the same questions are asked of Americans and Muslims, are the same variables significant predictors of antagonism? We use 2008 and 2011 survey data from the Pew Global Attitudes Project and ordered probit models to answer this question at two distinct points in time. The results illustrate the importance of domestic politics for both populations, providing insight into the potential utility of foreign policies designed to improve attitudes. Additionally, we find that the story of religions influence on anti-American attitudes is a complex one, which changes depending on how religiosity is operationalized. This research represents a first step in bringing the literatures on anti-Muslim and anti-American attitudes together, while also revealing important similarities and differences in the sources of antagonism.