Political Science Educator: volume 29, issue 2
Reflections
By Charles Crabtree (Charles.D.Crabtree@dartmouth.edu) and Maria Proulx (Maria.S.Proulx.26@dartmouth.edu)
Introduction
Independent studies are a durable feature of political science education. They create space for students to pose focused questions, work closely with faculty mentors, and produce sustained scholarly work. A large body of peer-reviewed research finds that direct research experiences deepen learning, build research skills, and support cognitive, personal, and professional growth (Hunter, Laursen, & Seymour 2007; Russell, Hancock, & McCullough 2007; Seymour, Hunter, Laursen, & DeAntoni 2004).[1]
While much has changed in higher education over the past quarter century, the format of independent study remains heavily text-centric. In many departments, including Dartmouth’s Department of Government, independent studies culminate in a substantial paper with largely paper-based milestones along the way. That model is effective for cultivating writing and research design skills. Still, it can obscure other critical capacities political scientists need: explaining complex ideas concisely, designing compelling visuals, and communicating to a wider audience.
As a correction, this essay details our experience as a faculty member and student using videos, rather than an essay, for an independent study. We provide concrete guidance on how to reproduce this video assignment in your own classes.
A Video-First Independent Study
During Winter 2025, Maria Proulx completed an independent study on international subversion in the Baltics that replaced most paper-based assignments with four public-facing, five-minute video essays–one per unit–alongside a concise final paper. In addition to the research a comprehensive paper demands, each video required scripting, interviewing, visual design, and promotion to a lay audience. The videos (the first three publicly available on her YouTube channel[2]) reached international viewers beyond our campus and elicited passionate feedback.
The syllabus maintained rigor through weekly scholarly readings, selected the term before with an advisor, anchored each unit; arguments had to be evidence-based; and Maria was evaluated using criteria adapted from established assessment frameworks (Gulikers, Bastiaens, & Kirschner 2004; Sambell, McDowell, & Montgomery 2013). This structure asked the student to do what political scientists do across settings: translate research into accessible analysis.
Why Multimodality?
It aligns with learning research. Undergraduate research experiences are linked to motivation, persistence, and skill development (Lopatto 2007; Taraban & Logue 2012). Adding authentic, public-facing tasks can further strengthen these benefits (Wiggins 1990; Gulikers et al. 2004). Students may be better able to engage peers from different disciplines through video essays than through conventional deliverables such as papers. Maria’s peers, from medical school students to English majors, regularly watched and provided feedback on her videos.
It broadens access. Universal Design for Learning recommends multiple means of engagement, representation, and expression (Rose & Meyer 2002). Video, podcasting, and visual essays provide legitimate alternatives for demonstrating analytical mastery without lowering standards. Navigating video editing software like Adobe Premiere Pro is a transferable skill which can distinguish a student to a future employer from a pool of candidates.
It mirrors the discipline’s communication demands. Political communication increasingly occurs via video and multimedia. Student-created videos can cultivate audience awareness, concision, and design–skills valuable for public service, policy analysis, and research dissemination (Greene & Crespi 2012). Compared to posts on the DartWrite Digital Portfolio (that Dartmouth automatically creates for every undergraduate, which have a limited reach), each video Maria published to her YouTube channel received, on average, 500 views.
What We Did
Clear objectives. Each unit is mapped to learning outcomes (e.g., identify and evaluate Kremlin information operations; assess Baltic cyber defense; analyze energy security trade-offs; reason about evolving security architectures). Even as students immerse themselves in new video-editing software, the syllabus structure helps them balance high-quality motion graphics with comprehensive research, thereby prioritizing visual storytelling.
Transparent evaluation. Rubrics emphasized argument quality, evidence integration, attribution and citation, clarity for non-experts, and design choices that serve the argument (Sambell et al. 2013).
Public but safe. Students can choose public or unlisted hosting, providing privacy options. Respectful engagement with comments can facilitate guidance on professional tone, fact-checking, and local insight. Maria’s videos successfully reached her target demographic. After she referenced the Cyber Battle of Estonia in her video, an Estonian student commented that they were in attendance!
What We Learned
Depth through brevity. Constraining analysis to twelve minutes or less forced prioritization, sharpening argument structure and causal logic. Maria learned to write for her audience and not her peers. She framed each video for a lay audience: Why does this matter?
Transferable communication skills. Storyboarding and script revision clarified claims and evidence chains, thereby improving the final paper. Maria conducted interviews with experts, from a political scientist at Dartmouth College to a Lithuanian energy economist at Stanford University. Here, she learned to approach professionals, set up the equipment to record a video interview, and frame questions to prioritize audience understanding. In addition, professional testimony reinforced the message to viewers.
Authentic accountability. A public audience increased attention to clarity, citation, and fairness. In one instance, when she described the Baltics as a region “no one has heard of,” Maria received candid criticism. “Dumb thumbnail.” “Touch some grass.” The comments depicted the range of reactions a hot-button issue elicits. It also gave her a chance to choose how to handle real-world emotions. She reuploaded the video and apologized to her audience.
Inclusive demonstration of mastery. Multimodal options allowed the student to leverage strengths in voice, pacing, and visual design while still meeting research standards (Rose & Meyer 2002).
A Practical Starter Kit (One Term)
Before The Term: Develop syllabus/reading list collaboratively between student and advisor; contact college about free license to video editing software (e.g. Maria had access to Adobe Premiere Pro through Dartmouth, but edited her first video on iMovie, which is free for MacBook users); reach out to library media center to rent equipment (Maria borrowed a Blue Yeti Microphone and a 4K Canon G70 Video Camera but filmed her first video on iPhone)
Week 1: Define questions and audience; review sample video essays; agree on number and length of deliverables and rubric.
Week 2: Annotated bibliography + 250-word video treatment. Drafting a treatment is a decisive moment in the video production process. Having achieved a robust initial exposure to sources, a student can establish the direction he or she wants to take the project. Moreover, a faculty mentor can conceptualize the student’s vision at this formative stage and provide critical feedback. A complete video treatment picks a story angle to turn facts into a narrative. A student can expand on his or her story angle in a one-sentence logline and two- or three-sentence synopsis (Detisch 2024). Moreover, a student should determine a call to action beyond “inform.” How does a video essay’s target audience, distribution platform, and run time impact its purpose?
Week 3: Script draft with citations; storyboard. A video essay, much like a written deliverable, entails multiple elements. The order in which they are presented is integral to reader comprehension. A good storyboard can be the difference between a jumble of ideas the student wants to communicate in the script to a polished final product with a logical procession. This “visual script” creates a structured flow of building blocks to facilitate the video production process (Knott 2024). Each cell answers a question: How does the student want to begin? Maria often opened her videos with the current event which inspired her interest in the unit topic. For example, she started her video on energy independence by discussing the fiber optic cable between Sweden and Latvia purportedly damaged by Russia’s shadow fleet. If the introduction presented a problem, Maria tried to bring up a solution in the conclusion (e.g. when the Baltic States broke with the Soviet-era BRELL alliance to synchronize with the European continental grid). Alternatively, the end of the video is a good place to connect to larger social movements. Maria, for example, tied Baltic resistance to cyberwarfare into regional unity during the Baltic Way anti-occupation protest. A storyboard can also help a student decide where to situate interview footage.<
Week 4: Rough cut; peer feedback using rubric.
Week 5: Final cut; reflective memo; if desired, publish video essay to YouTube or other video-sharing platforms; share link to online communities passionate about unit topic (Maria’s solicitations for honest feedback on her videos received over 100,000 views across five prominent Baltic-related subreddits). Maria focused her reflective memo on audience reaction as a barometer of future changes to make. For example, when a Reddit commenter described her reading as “robotic,” Maria realized she was writing her scripts to be read, not spoken aloud. She modified her style going forward. Negative comments are easy to brush off. However, Maria found it was transformative to have a designated stopping point to contemplate feedback. If a student decides not to share his or her videos with a wider audience, constructive criticism from peers can serve the same purpose.
if desired, publish video essay to YouTube or other video-sharing platforms; share link to online communities passionate about unit topic (Maria’s solicitations for honest feedback on her videos received over 100,000 views across five prominent Baltic-related subreddits).
Weeks 6-10: Repeat cycle for new unit topics; compile brief final paper synthesizing lessons across videos.
Assessment Notes
Use an argument-first rubric: claim clarity; evidence accuracy and sufficiency; counterargument handling; audience-appropriate language; visual design in service of reasoning.
Require visible citations: on-screen references or end-credit citations; submission of a bibliography accessible to viewers.
Keep accessibility in scope: captions, readable color contrast, and alt text for visuals, consistent with UDL practices.
Implications for Political Science Educators
Independent study is a natural laboratory for pedagogical experimentation. A video-first model retains the intellectual core of independent research while expanding the means of scholarly expression. Done well-grounded in clear outcomes, rigorous sourcing, transparent evaluation, and attention to accessibility, multimodal independent studies can complement traditional papers and prepare students for the communication environments they will encounter beyond the academy.
Acknowledgments
We thank campus media partners for production support and our colleagues for feedback.
References
Detisch, AJ. 2024. “How to Write a Film Treatment.” studiobinder [website], January 2. https://www.studiobinder.com/blog/how-to-write-a-film-treatment/
Greene, H., & Crespi, C. 2012. The value of student created videos in the college classroom-an exploratory study in marketing and accounting. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 5(1), 273.
Gulikers, J. T., Bastiaens, T. J., & Kirschner, P. A. 2004. A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(3), 67-86.
Knott, Ryan. 2024. “How to Create a Video Storyboard.” TechSmith [website], January 2. https://www.techsmith.com/blog/video-storyboards/
Hunter, A. B., Laursen, S. L., & Seymour, E. 2007. Becoming a scientist: The role of undergraduate research in students’ cognitive, personal, and professional development. Science Education, 91(1), 36-74.
Lopatto, D. 2007. Undergraduate research experiences support science career decisions and active learning. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 6(4), 297-306.
Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. 2002. Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1703 N. Beauregard St., Alexandria, VA 22311-1714.
Russell, S. H., Hancock, M. P., & McCullough, J. 2007. Benefits of undergraduate research experiences. Science, 316(5824), 548-549.
Sambell, K., McDowell, L., & Montgomery, C. 2012. Assessment for learning in higher education. Routledge.
Seymour, E., Hunter, A. B., Laursen, S. L., & DeAntoni, T. 2004. Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three‐year study. Science Education, 88(4), 493-534.
Taraban, R., & Logue, E. 2012. Academic factors that affect undergraduate research experiences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(2), 499.
Wiggins, G. 1990. The case for authentic assessment. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.7275/ffb1-mm19
—
Charles Crabtree is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Government at Dartmouth College.
Maria Proulx is a senior majoring in Government and Environmental Studies at Dartmouth College.
[1] See Taraban & Logue 2012 for some caveats.
[2] https://www.youtube.com/@mariaproulx2004
Published since 2005, The Political Science Educator is the newsletter of the Political Science Education Section of the American Political Science Association. As part of APSA’s mission to support political science education across the discipline, APSA Educate has republished The Political Science Educator since 2021. Please visit APSA Educate’s Political Science Educator digital collection.
Editor: Matt Evans (Northwest Arkansas Community College)
Assistant Editor: Colin Brown (Northeastern University)
Submissions: editor.PSE.newsletter@gmail.com
