Assessing both the immediate and longitudinal effects of dif- ferent types and amounts of civic education presents a serious research challenge, but two papers met this issue head-on by ana- lyzing how varying types of civic education can influence college students’ voting activities and lifelong civic behavior (Diana M. Owen, “The Influence of Civic Education on Electoral Engage- ment and Voting”; Jennifer Bachner, “From Classroom to Voting Booth: The Effect of High School Civic Education on Turnout”). Both studies found that personalized, active curricular approaches to engaging students were critical to activating them and cultivat- ing lasting, public-oriented habits. Students voted more often when either high school or college instruction included personal appeals. They took part in campaigns, used social media to follow campaigns, and attended community meetings, among other activ- ities, when their experiences in political science or government courses conveyed the value of civic engagement. Thus, all of the studies presented by track participants support the general con- clusion that active learning and an explicit focus on the value of engaged citizenship can produce measureable differences in lev- els of civic engagement. Several members of the track recommended Bob Graham’s model for teaching civic leadership skills. By requiring students to define a problem, research it, gauge public opinion, identify the decision-makers, build coalitions, use the media, meet with decision- makers, capitalize on victory, and learn from defeat, instructors are allowing students to practice and develop the skills they will need as citizens and civic leaders.Yet there is much we still do not know about the best ways to promote lifelong engagement. Track participants suggested many ways that the APSA can facilitate the scholarship on civic education and engagement in political science, including: 1. Publish a monograph providing a literature review, model exam- ples of scholarship across the discipline, and an assessment toolkit for teacher-scholars; 2. Create an apsanet.org–linked wiki providing a collective anno- tated bibliography and detailed summaries of past research, to which scholars could add their own work as it is completed; 3. Support a Journal of Political Science Education–published meta- analysis of what we know and what we need to know; 4. Provide links to other resources, including relevant profes- sional associations, national surveys, rubrics, assessment plans, and syllabi; and 5. Support grants and/or conference space for working groups dedicated to multicampus, longitudinal civic engagement scholarship. As Dewey once wrote, “Democracy needs to be reborn in each generation and education is its midwife.” As educators, we have an opportunity to participate in that rebirth. TRACK: CORE CURRICULUM AND GENERAL EDUCATION Bobbi Gentry, Millikin University William J. Miller, Southeast Missouri State University Erin E. Richards, Cascadia Community College Issues addressed in the Core Curriculum and General Education track at this year’s conference are more important than ever. With the release of Academically Adrift (Arum and Roksa 2011), increas- ing budget shortfalls as a result of the economic recession, and calls for assessment and accountability, higher education and its usefulness have come under scrutiny. While this increasing scru- tiny is a concern that others besides those in political science should address, our field’s expertise within the political arena would suggest that we have insight into political decision-making and can act as experts that translate information from the class- room to the real world in a variety of ways. Central to addressing this scrutiny is a need to consider what we teach and how our students learn. It is apparent that there is no agreement among political scientists about what constitutes the core of our discipline. While on one hand, this disagreement is an artifact of the methodological and topical pluralism that characterizes our discipline, on the other hand, this diversity could undermine the role of political science in the core of a college curriculum. The only agreement appears to be that students should take American government courses (Bobbi Gentry and Christopher Lawrence, “What’s Core in the Undergraduate Polit- ical Science Curriculum?”), but even then, there is a lack of agree- ment over what should be taught in introductory American government courses (William J. Miller and Jill Miller, “So Many Freshmen! The Challenges and Goals of Introductory American Government Courses”). We are further challenged by the fact that many of our stu- dents do not take introductory courses with the intention of becoming political science majors. Students enroll in our general education classes to fulfill requirements, often vary in interest level, and face challenges besides academics that affect their class- room performance. Furthermore, no matter which institution or student body we face, we ask a lot from a single political science course. In our core courses, we balance the goals of teaching stu- dents the basics of our trade and teaching them important skills such as how to register to vote, how to analyze and criticize points, and how to apply content knowledge to the real world. Our track also found that we expect students to leave our classes with a wide variety of skills. One larger concern is that we ask students to do critical thinking in our courses without necessarily scaffold- ing in the steps to teach them to become critical thinkers (Nicholas Spina and Tara Parsons, “The Many Objectives of a Political Sci- ence Education: A Study of Introductory American Government Classes across Four Institutions”). We also increasingly find ourselves faced with teaching a class- room full of students at varying levels of academic preparedness (Emily Neal and Kimberly Turner, “Opportunities and Chal- lenges in Teaching Research Methods in a General Education Course at a Community College”). Given this diversity, there are several key questions we must address, including: How do stu- dents learn? How can we better use assessment as a tool to learn the best methods to help students learn while not being evalua- tive? (Dana Dyson, William Laverty, and Derwin Munroe, “Gen Ed on our Minds: What Can Assessment of ‘Introduction to Amer- ican Government’ Tell Us about General Education Outcomes?”) Future inquiry not only should concern the development of best practices, but should also use these practices as recommendations— not fundamental truths—that can be applied to every classroom and every student to help students succeed. Further complicating the matter is the challenge of a new type of student who expects different outcomes than those to which we, as teachers, may be accustomed. The ongoing debate between The Teacher: 2011 APSA Teaching and Learning Conference Track Summaries ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 656 PS • July 2011