Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

The Service/Politics Split: Rethinking Service to Teach Political Engagement*

  • Tobi Walker (a1)
Abstract

Over the past few years, I have experimented with a classroom exercise that encourages students to think about how they perceive service and politics. I ask the students to create lists of service activities and political activities in which they and their friends and families engage. The service list typically includes such activities as working in a soup kitchen, delivering meals to the homebound, tutoring in the school system, and cleaning up parks. The list of political activities usually includes things like voting, protesting, raising money, lobbying, letter writing, and running for office.

Turning students' attention to the list of community service activities, I ask them to give some adjectives that people might use to describe the listed projects. The students usually offer such descriptors as altruistic, caring, helping, selfless, and giving, as well as individualistic and one-on-one. Often, the students will also add the words selfish or insincere to describe those students who engage in community service to enhance their resume or earn academic credit.

Asked for adjectives that describe politics, the words come fast and furious—dirty, corrupt, ambitious, crooked, dishonest, compromising, slow. After the initial rush of negative descriptors and with little prompting on my part, students will also talk about politics as a means to affect social change and make a difference for groups of people.

I have used this exercise with audiences ranging from young women uninterested in politics, to young people planning careers in politics and policy making, to foundation officials.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Baker Paula. 1984. “The Domestication of Politics: Women and American Political Society, 1780-1920.” American Historical Review 89:620–47.
Corporation for National Service. 1996. National Service News 4, June 17, 1.
James William. 1967. “The Moral Equivalent of War.” The Writings of William James, ed. McDermott John J. New York: Random House.
McCarthy Kathleen D. 1990. “Parallel Power Structures: Women and the Voluntary Sphere.” In Lady Bountiful Revisited: Women, Philanthropy, and Power, ed. McCarthy Kathleen D. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Moskos Charles. 1988. A Call to Civic Service. New York: The Free Press.
National Association of Secretaries of State. 1999. The New Millennium Project – Part I: American Youth Attitudes on Politics, Citizenship, Government and Voting <www.nass.org/nass99/youth.html>. Washington, DC: NASS. Accessed: June 1999.
Pascoe Peggy. 1990. Relations of Rescue. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Panetta Institute. 2000. “Institute Poll Shows College Students Turned Off by Politics, Turned On by Other Public Service” <www.panettainstitute.org/newsl.html>. Accessed: February 2000.
Ryan Mary P. 1979. “The Power of Women's Networks: A Case Study of Female Moral Reform in Antebellum America.” Feminist Studies 5(Spring): 6685.
Scott Anne Firor. 1990. “Women's Voluntary Associations: From Charity to Reform.” In Lady Bountiful Revisited: Women, Philanthropy, and Power, ed. McCarthy Kathleen D. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Welter Barbara. 1966. “The Cult of True Womanhood, 1820-1860.” American Quarterly 18:151–74.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

PS: Political Science & Politics
  • ISSN: 1049-0965
  • EISSN: 1537-5935
  • URL: /core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 6 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 175 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 22nd October 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.