Political polarization affects the daily work of public administrators. Despite its global prevalence, the public administration teaching literature has given little attention to how students can be prepared to work in polarized environments. We describe how we teach key components of polarization including theories of political polarization, the role of narratives in deepening polarization, the impact of social media, and the influence of cognitive biases on the power of political narratives. Next, we introduce four tools designed to help students confront polarization in their professional roles followed by a class-tested case study that demonstrates how students can apply course concepts in practice. We conclude with twelve key lessons learned from teaching the course.

ABSTRACT Despite food being essential to an individual's well‐being, food insecurity and hunger are often politicized, with political ideologies significantly influencing public perception and policy regarding food assistance programs. We explored Lerner and Miller's “just world theory,” Schneider and Ingram's “social construction framework,” Lakoff's “parenting metaphors,” and the Narrative Policy Framework to better understand the political ideological underpinnings of food policy. This study then examined how political ideology is related to an individual's food security status. A nationwide survey ( N = 4170) was collected in May and June 2021 during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Ordinal logistic regression was used to examine food security status as measured by the USDA, after controlling for demographics and political landscape. Initially, liberal ideology was associated with significantly lower odds of food insecurity (OR = 0.24) compared to conservatives. However, a sensitivity analysis excluding Idaho (38% of the sample) found that political ideology was not a significant predictor. Regardless of context, non‐Hispanic Other (OR = 6.39) and Hispanic (OR = 3.45) participants had significantly higher odds of food insecurity. The study concludes that while policy disagreements are deeply ideological, the association between an individual's personal food security status and their political ideology is inconsistent. Considerations for future research are included.

Public administration and policy analysis education has long emphasized tidiness, stages, and rationality, but practitioners frequently must deal with a world where objectivity is buffeted by, repressed by, and sometimes defeated by, value conflict. Too often public administration education has failed individuals who must deal with the hustle and bustle and complexity of policymaking. Public Policy Praxis equips students to grapple with ambiguity and complexity. By emphasizing mixed methodologies and through the use of cases, students are encouraged to develop a workable and practical model of applied policy analysis. Throughout the book, Clemons and McBeth argue that pragmatism demands that analysts learn to think politically and to understand that public problems are socially constructed. As such, in addition to analytical models, the authors examine specific tools of policy analysis, such as stakeholder mapping, content analysis, group facilitation, narrative analysis, cost-benefit analysis, futuring, and survey analysis. Students are given the opportunity to try out these analytical models and tools in varied case settings (county, city, federal, urban, and rural) facing wide-ranging topics (economic development, expansion of human services in an urban area, building a health care clinic in a small town, an inner-city drug program, and the bison controversy in Yellowstone National Park) that capture the diversity of public policy and the intergovernmental nature of politics. With chapters written to the student and in a nearly conversational style, Public Policy Praxis is an ideal textbook for undergraduate and graduate courses in public policy analysis, community planning, leadership, social welfare policy, educational policy, family policy, and special seminars.

Focusing events are important in understanding policy change, as demonstrated in Birkland's work on agenda setting, the multiple streams framework, and the narrative policy framework. These frameworks emphasize the role of focusing events in drawing public attention to broader issues. Policy entrepreneurs leverage narratives to capture the meaning of these events and advocate for policy changes to prevent future occurrences. The COVID-19 pandemic is a prime example of a massive global focusing event, characterized by a flood of information, misinformation, disinformation, and political polarization. We contend that these factors have diminished the impact of focusing events and the effectiveness of narratives in conveying their significance and attracting public attention. Our study examines the power of focusing events and narratives in the context of natural disasters. We analyzed 18 hurricanes, 6 pre-COVID, 6 during COVID, and 6 post-COVID. Using Google Trends searches, we measured public interest in these disasters over a one-year period for hurricanes on the systemic agenda. Our findings indicate a significant decrease in public attention to hurricanes both during and post-COVID. (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)Birkland(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),"(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)"(sic)"(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)"(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)18(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)6(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),6(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),6(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)Google Trends(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic). Los eventos focalizados son importantes para comprender el cambio de pol & iacute;ticas, como lo demuestra el trabajo de Birkland sobre la definici & oacute;n de agenda, el Marco de M & uacute;ltiples Corrientes y el Marco de Pol & iacute;ticas Narrativas. Estos marcos enfatizan la funci & oacute;n de los eventos focalizados para atraer la atenci & oacute;n p & uacute;blica hacia problemas m & aacute;s amplios. Los emprendedores pol & iacute;ticos utilizan las narrativas para captar el significado de estos eventos y promover cambios en las pol & iacute;ticas para prevenir futuros incidentes. La pandemia de COVID-19 es un excelente ejemplo de un evento focalizado global masivo que tambi & eacute;n se caracteriz & oacute; por una avalancha de informaci & oacute;n, desinformaci & oacute;n y polarizaci & oacute;n pol & iacute;tica. Sostenemos que estos factores han disminuido el impacto de los eventos focalizados y la eficacia de las narrativas para transmitir su importancia y atraer la atenci & oacute;n p & uacute;blica. Nuestro estudio examina el poder de los eventos focalizados y las narrativas en el contexto de desastres naturales. Analizamos 18 huracanes: 6 antes de la COVID-19, 6 durante la COVID-19 y 6 despu & eacute;s de la COVID-19. Mediante b & uacute;squedas en Google Trends, medimos el inter & eacute;s p & uacute;blico en estos desastres durante un per & iacute;odo de un a & ntilde;o para los huracanes en la agenda sist & eacute;mica. Nuestros hallazgos indican una disminuci & oacute;n significativa de la atenci & oacute;n p & uacute;blica a los huracanes tanto durante la COVID-19 como despu & eacute;s de ella.

Understanding how individuals make decisions is an increasingly important topic in today’s political world. Teaching political science students different cognitive biases and how they impact decision making is important. This paper discusses eight cognitive biases taught in an Introduction to Politics course. Students were pre-tested and post-tested on their self-reported biases and their perceptions of the bias of another person who they disagree with. Our findings show that while students increase their own understanding of their self-bias, they become more aware of the bias of the other person. We discuss the importance of these findings for teaching cognitive bias in the political science classroom as well as education and other social science classrooms and call for more attention to this important teaching theme.

These are difficult times. Challenges such as climate change, a global pandemic and declining life expectancy confront us. Perhaps more importantly, democracy itself is under strain globally. Yet, there are also encouraging developments including reductions in poverty, increases in literacy and expansion in health care. Today’s college students need tools to navigate this complex world, including an understanding of the benefits of political engagement and democracy, and a degree of optimism about the possibilities to address or solve existing problems. While there is literature on how teaching impacts civic engagement and political efficacy (see Rice and Moffett in this volume), there is a dearth of work on how pedagogy itself impacts a student’s view of the world. Thus, in this chapter we examine this topic from a theoretical perspective, first suggesting that pedagogy should promote civil discourse while also exploring opposing views. Second, we contend that faculty should focus on balancing optimism and pessimism, helping students recognize today’s problems, and believe in the possibility of solutions.

The reintroduction and protection of native fish species frequently creates conflict with fish management and policy. This study uses the Social Construction Framework to examine anglers’ social construction of nine fish species in the Idaho portion of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. This exploratory study uses a sample of 179 anglers to examine perceptions of fish species, and perceived and desired power of fish species. Despite clearly stated support for native species, findings indicate positive and negative constructions of native and non-native fish species. The native Yellowstone Cutthroat and Bonneville Cutthroat are socially constructed as Advantaged (viewed as powerful and positive) in both descriptive and normative social constructions. Whereas the native Mountain Whitefish and Utah Sucker are socially constructed as Deviants (viewed as powerless and negative) in both the descriptive and normative social constructions. We use multiple independent variables to find predictors of support for the various fish species. The implications of our findings are discussed.

Political ideology is an increasingly powerful force in support of public policy. Historically, nuclear energy has found more support among political conservatives. This study updates the literature on political ideology and support for nuclear energy by examining how political ideology is associated with perceptions of nuclear energy and trust of nuclear information sources. After excluding participants with incomplete data, and participants within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor, the analytical sample size for the analysis examining political ideology and perceptions of nuclear energy was 4153. The analytical sample includes a total of 1035 participants within a 50-mile radius of INL, 710 participants from within Idaho who lived further than 50 miles from INL, 1899 participants from other states (more than 50 miles from a nuclear reactor), and 509 Non-Idaho participants living within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor. Logistic regression was used to determine how political ideology was associated with perceptions of nuclear energy and trust in different sources regarding radioactive waste, after controlling for demographics and location. While liberal participants near INL were less favorable towards nuclear energy, and more trusting in impact scientists to tell the truth about radioactive waste than their conservative counterparts, this was not consistent across the US. Our findings reveal the complexity of political ideology and the perceptions of nuclear issues and how proximity influences perceptions. The perceptions of political moderates were particularly important in providing a more complex understanding of political ideology and nuclear energy issues.

The Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) illuminates the dynamic role of narratives in the policy process. For more than a decade, NPF scholarship has examined the power of narratives at the micro-, meso-, and macro-levels. This body of scientific work demonstrates that narratives do, indeed, matter at various junctures of the policy process. In this chapter, we detail NPF assumptions, describe the three levels of analysis, identify associated hypotheses, and summarize findings and themes from the extant literature. We expound on what constitutes a narrative, unpacking the linkages between form and content. Because our goal is to understand policy change, we specify narrative mechanisms of persuasion, manipulation, and attention as pathways to policy change. We also reflect on emerging NPF trends of comparative analysis, international applications, big data analyses, and growth in NPF applications by an increasingly diverse community of policy scholars. We acknowledge the NPF's normative commitments to science and now to liberal democratic values and processes as well. The NPF continues to aspire to be "clear enough to be wrong" and remains dedicated to the social construction view of ontology and the precision and testability of science.

Nuclear energy is proposed as part of the solution to a net-zero carbon future. However, environmental issues with nuclear energy remain. In this study, a total of 1616 participants from across the U.S. stated their position on the following statements: “Nuclear energy is a clean energy source”, “Nuclear energy may be part of the solution to climate change”, “I am willing to accept the building of new nuclear power stations if it is environmentally friendly and had a zero-carbon footprint”, and “Nuclear power may lead to more pollution and environmental contamination”. Participants were also asked “Do you think nuclear energy is a zero-carbon energy?” Logistic regression was used to determine how concern around climate change and nuclear waste predicted participant responses. Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to determine segments of respondents based on their perceptions of nuclear energy and the environment. Nuclear energy was perceived as being zero-carbon (74% agree), but not necessarily clean (50% agree). Nuclear energy was perceived as part of the solution to climate change (51% agree), but concern around more pollution and environmental contamination remained (42% agree). Concern around climate change was associated with greater odds of acceptance of nuclear energy, while concern around nuclear waste was associated with the opposite. The LCA suggested a “favorable”, “neutral”, and “negative” class, for which approximately 40%, 52%, and 8% of participants, respectively, belonged. This study suggests conditional (or reluctant) support for nuclear energy is occurring.

The scholarship of teaching and learning is primarily concerned with improving student learning. Of course, we want our students to learn our disciplines, we want them to become critical thinkers, and we want them learn to write. But this study looks at how learning impacts a student’s optimism or pessimism. We believe that it is an important topic in today’s world and provides an important new topic in the scholarship of teaching and learning. This study is co-authored by two team-teachers and three honors students. Using an Introduction to Politics course as case material, the study provides a pre and post-test measuring student optimism versus pessimism on a wide variety of political issues facing Generation Z students. Then we provide a content analysis of honors essays which were collected during the semester and interviews with our three honor student co-authors. We draw initial conclusions about optimism versus pessimism in teaching and argue that a larger research agenda around this topic would benefit the scholarship of teaching and learning literature.

Critics like to call students in Generation Z (those born in 1995 onward) “coddled” and resistant to ideas that they disagree with. A series of high profile protests at universities have led to the impression that Generation Z is political intolerant of those who they disagree with. At the same time, Generation Z is a more diverse, more educated, and more active political generation. Given political polarization, teaching Generation Z students about political tolerance presents challenges. This paper presents an approach to teach political tolerance in an Introduction to Politics course. Grounded conceptually in the cognitive and neurosciences, the course helps students understand the limitations of rational decision-making in politics and the centrality of emotion and identity. The paper presents a day-by-day recount of an approach to teaching political tolerance including an original survey that measures student political tolerance. The survey indicates that only 30% to 34% of the 69 Generation Z students completing the survey were politically intolerant using a variation of the “least preferred” approach. Additionally, the students were more tolerant of progressive speech, books, and teachers. The paper draws conclusions about teaching political tolerance to Generation Z students and includes suggestions for future research.

The Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) is a comprehensive approach to studying public policy that aspires to capture the policy process at multiple levels of analysis, across time, and within any context. This chapter proceeds by first asking the reader to consider if the NPF is the right approach for them by assessing their research goals in terms of the NPF’s theoretical assumptions. One of the first issues that an NPF researcher will need to consider—usually concurrently with assumption alignment and research question development—is determining the level of analysis. NPF theory specifying the relationships between concepts is the scaffolding of the NPF. Consequently, valid concept operationalization is foundational to any NPF study and also critical to achieving reliability within and between NPF research models. Given the principal aim of the NPF to understand the power of narratives in the policy process, policy narratives lie at the heart of the framework.

In today's world characterized by political tribalism, narrative is an increasingly important concept for understanding politics. The Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) seeks to describe, explain, and predict the role of narrative in politics and policy. We wanted to explore whether the assumptions and postulates of the NPF could help students in Introduction to Politics: Critical Thinking and Analysis to understand how narrative relates to politics. We present the results of an introductory politics course taught at a public four-year university that used narrative as a central concept. We focused our course on cognitive processes such as confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance, political theory and political ideology, young people and politics, political tolerance, motivated reasoning, political identity, selective perception, the use of evidence, and fake news. We used the NPF to explore how narrative plays into each of these topics. Our findings suggest that students were surprised by the large role narrative plays in politics, and at the end of the course they better understood the role of narrative in the current state of United States politics. Some students, however, accepted narratives as being more reflective of political reality even when evidence presented in the course disputed the narrative. Of course, this may show the power of narrative, motivated reasoning, and political identity even among students who were primed to use critical reasoning when encountering narrative. We conclude that helping students understand the power of narrative, via the NPF, is one way to keep political science relevant to young people.