ISI Faculty Resource Center

I've been toying with this for some time, but my experienced colleagues all warn me away--not that they've ever tried it, but that they think it is a good idea because students in poli sci courses "demand" current-events-type material. I have found, however, that students at this level can be very attracted to primary source documents, so long as a.) you let them know that you are engaged in following contemporary politics and can see the connections yourself and b.) you remind them that this is a good way to understand permanent questions in politics. If you do a little bit of the work for them in the beginning (bringing in news sources that affirm the connections, using contemporary examples in your discussion of the texts), they can usually pick up the idea and run with it. And if you frequently remind them that this is a way of doing political science, they'll get over the "this is too much of a history course" objection that you will inevitably get in the beginning. If you don't address that objection, they'll take it out in the evaluations. You might also consider assigning a shorter textbook (I use the Wilson brief edition). I use a textbook mainly to help them connect the primary sources to contemporary political science concepts. I very rarely refer to the textbook and tell them that it is largely supplementary, but it is useful to occasionally point to it in class to remind them that what I am doing, with The Federalist for instance, has relevance to what the rest of the field is doing. Of course, part of what you're trying to tell them is that contemporary political science is often not all that helpful in obtaining a right understanding of politics, but reminding them that you know about the contemporary political science stuff helps you overcome some of the credibility issues that can arise from this kind of approach.

Having taught four versions of American political thought courses, I can tell you that I've had great success teaching almost entirely from primary sources. I will usually assign one secondary source, usually as part of a book review project. The problem with secondary sources is that they filter the primary sources too much to students to construct the material for themselves in such a way that they can then evaluate and critique secondary sources. There are exceptions--for instance, I draw heavily on Donald Lutz's The Origins of American Constitutionalism for lectures and discussion early on in my American Political Thought survey. The principle downside with primary sources is the ability of students to cope with the English of an earlier time. But they can be taught to read it. There's also the problem of anthologies--which is that there is no anthology that incorporates everything one might want to assign. I've tended to use Levy's anthology (published by Waverly) but supplemented with handouts. This year, however, I'm giving the Hackett 2-volume set a shot. I might add, that in assigning primary sources, I try always to frame segments of the course in a dialectical manner--for and against religious establishment, for and against the revolution, for and against the Constitution, etc. This gives the course a kind of debate feel that, in my experience, students find engaging. I also frame the course as an exercise in ascertaining the basic political values underlying the way in which a regime might be designed but also underlying various policy proposals. Students are always surprised, for instance, to discover that liberty might be conceived in terms other than those proposed by John Stuart Mill. They either love or hate the way Winthrop thought of liberty--and either response works quite well for making the course interesting.

Go for it. If not in the university, then where will students learn how amazingly, beautifully relevant classic political writings are to our political life today? And surely juxtaposing references, allusions, claims-to-the-mantle-of in current political debates with the originals is a legitimate way of teaching students how to be good judges of current political speech. I agree with Paul that you will have to walk them through the readings, read aloud the passages in class and draw out their relevance--teaching them to do it.

Justin, I too taught AG at a small university that had a College of Education. Fully one half of the students took the course, not out of a desire to learn about their regime, but merely to satisfy the requirement for a teaching certificate. Another quarter of the course enrolled to satisfy a general education requirement. Thus, roughly three-fourths of my students could be described as "reluctant learners." To complicate matters, my education majors were divided into underclassmen and post-grads. The post-grads all had taken conventional majors (History, Biology, Math, etc.) All of these students were highly motivated, and they "set the curve". In contrast, my underclass education majors dragged their feet throughout the entire semester. Even the political science majors resented the course, as they were convinced that they learned all there was to know about American politics in high school. The result, in statistical terms, was a "bi-modal distribution."

But I am a firm believer that current events are merely the epiphenomena, and that to understand the contemporary American regime requires an understanding of and appreciation for "the thing in itself." I encourage you to assign primary texts. Your responsibility is to challenge your students, and to lead them from the form of the regime to the activity of politics.

But do not be surprised if your students, especially those pursuing an education certification, do not share your desire to understand the very government that required their attendance in your class. And while you should require them to read the primary texts, do not be surprised if they refuse to do so.

Justin, my experience is much like Warner's as the vast majority of the students in my American Government courses are there because they have to be. That being said, I still require them to read a number of primary documents (Declaration, Articles of Confederation, Constitution, and select Federalist Papers)that we will have recourse to throughout the semester. I made the decision to emphasize these texts in response to a question my late mentor, Ross M. Lence, asked me: What type of student do you teach your class for? I do not teach for those students who are there because they have to be. I teach for that one student in a class who may be see the value of these texts and be inspired by them. In short, I teach for those who want to learn and not those whose sole focus is on grades.

Where to find the RSS button?