This text has been translated from Norwegian with the assistance of GPT UiO.
– Which teaching program would you like to highlight for your colleagues at the faculty right now?
– I must admit, with some embarrassment, that I’ve not got much that’s innovative to highlight just now! This is a field where you should always be ahead of the curve, always think creatively and break new ground. And yet it doesn’t always turn out that way, whether in research or in teaching.
– This semester has, for me, been filled with the good old-fashioned kind of teaching. What I’ve enjoyed most is an undergraduate module on British politics with many international students. Comparative politics, under which the module sits, works best when you can compare by drawing on people who know other systems better than our own.
– I’ve also spent quite a lot of time on reading and giving feedback to students, and here’s something I’ve been thinking about. Being part of a mass university can mean poorer follow-up because busy people don’t manage to reach everyone. But it needn’t be so. Formative tasks, short written feedback and peer assessment — once you set such a system in motion, it’s a lot of work but the pay-off is substantial. There’s little sadder than seminars people attend out of duty, and there’s not much more uplifting than seminars with people who make every effort - for their own sake, for one another and for the seminar leader. Seeing the self-reinforcing effect in a good learning environment is truly encouraging!
– Who are you collaborating with?
– I’m involved in a lot of collaboration — on modules within ISV and some outside, both at SV and HF. I also have a rather fabulous collaboration with Lisa Weldehanna and Thomas Huh Tangen here at the department on Political Breakfast. I think the three of us enjoy it immensely! The breakfasts are sponsored by UiO Democracy and aren’t part of any teaching setup as such. But in practice they at least provide civic education to everyone involved, and it feels like the Humanities and Social sciences (Humsam) as one would wish them to be when guests come and speak freely about the big questions of our time. It’s also lovely to see how ready sensible people from NRK, the press and politics are to show up on Blindern.
– In your opinion, what are the three most important factors for achieving good teaching in this field?
– A physiotherapist once said there are two things that give you away when you lie: the stomach (which tenses) and the eyes (where the spark isn’t genuine). He was more concerned with the stomach muscles. Students are probably more interested in the spark. So genuine enthusiasm and a willingness to go the extra mile would be my first element, if you ask me. Without that, it’s hard to deliver teaching that really engages.
– Number two, and related: the ability to put yourself in the position of those who are listening. When you meet young people who have come flying in from assorted part-time jobs to hear you lecture at two o’clock on a Monday: what do they need to hear to move forward? How does learning work, here where we meet?
– Third, I’d emphasise awareness of the meeting points between political science as a discipline and politics and public administration out there. What does an academic perspective on politics entail, and in what sense should it differ from that of a newspaper reader or a journalist? When, in turn, can the discipline be enriched by insights from the political or the civil society activist? These are fascinating discussions to have with students in our field, who to very varying degrees have any involvement with politics at all in their own lives.
– If you were to give one piece of advice to new teachers at the faculty, what would it be?
– No one knows everything, and genuine scholarly curiosity matters more than presenting yourself as a walking encyclopaedia. The things you don’t know as well as you’d like to can bring new joys if you turn them into a shared search for good answers. Students are mature people — if you let them be!