In the APSA Public Scholarship Program, graduate students in political science produce summaries of new research in the American Political Science Review. This piece, written by Raymundo Lopez, covers the webinar highlights from “Making the Founding Documents Relevant in the 21st Century.”
The United States celebrated its 250th anniversary in July 2026, a moment that has renewed interest in the founding documents and the ideas that have long shaped American democracy. To mark this historic milestone, the American Political Science Association launched its Engaging America’s 250th Webinar Series with its first installment, titled “Making the Founding Documents Relevant in the 21st Century.”
The webinar featured four distinguished scholars: Dr. Roosevelt Montás (Bard College), Dr. Jeremy Bailey (University of Florida), Dr. Jocelyn Evans (University of West Florida), and Dr. Lisa Pace Vetter (University of Maryland, Baltimore County). Dr. Paul Carrese, director of the Center for American Civics and professor in the School of Civic and Economic Thought and Leadership at Arizona State University, moderated the discussion and asked the panelists to consider the following themes:
- Why should American colleges continue to study and debate the Declaration of Independence (Declaration)?
- How can educators connect campuses and the broader public to the Declaration?
- What role should reflective patriotism play in civic education today?
Why Should Americans Care about the Founding Documents?
For many Americans, documents written nearly 250 years ago can feel like relics of the past. But Carrese invited the panelists to challenge this assumption by asking why college students should continue to study and debate the founding documents and what role these texts play in shaping citizenship in the modern era.
Bailey argued that the American founding remains largely understudied despite its influence on American law and political life. He pointed to ongoing Supreme Court debates over executive power as evidence that foundational texts remain unsettled and actively contested. Meanwhile, for Evans, the Declaration is not merely a historical document but a measuring stick against which American political rhetoric has long been judged. She illustrated this point through several historical texts that invoked its principles, including the Seneca Falls Declaration of Sentiments and Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail.”
These texts drew upon the Declaration’s principles to challenge the gap between the nation’s ideals and practices, a tension that carried into Montás’s remarks. He connected the Declaration’s reference to “one people” with the principle of informed consent. Because the republic rests on political consent, citizens must understand the principles to which they consent. This, he argues, raises a fundamental question of what it means to be “a people.” Where Montás focused on what constitutes “a people,” Vetter turned to what sustains one. She recognizes that the Declaration itself is a democratic endeavor, grounded in fairness and mutual reciprocity. Yet she also stressed the difficulty of that endeavor. The document draws emotional power from moral struggles while holding together different appeals, including religious and secular ones.
Taken together, the panelists presented the Declaration as an enduring standard for assessing whether the nation has lived up to its professed ideals. Seen this way, rather than a text frozen in time, the Declaration remains a living argument that asks each generation of Americans to consider how fully the nation has honored its promises.
Why Should American Colleges Continue to Study and Debate the Declaration?
The second question asked how panelists are using the nation’s 250th anniversary to encourage students and the broader public to engage with the founding documents.
“Taken together, the panelists presented the Declaration as an enduring standard for assessing whether the nation has lived up to its professed ideals. Seen this way, rather than a text frozen in time, the Declaration remains a living argument that asks each generation of Americans to consider how fully the nation has honored its promises.”Bailey drew on nearly two decades of working with high school history teachers in primary-document-based discussions. He encouraged political scientists to use this anniversary as an opportunity to organize similar initiatives that build K-12 educators’ confidence in working with historical texts. Evans echoed the need to improve civic literacy, noting that first-attempt pass rates at her institution remain low. To help improve these outcomes, she is developing Civics Reader, an interactive web text that simplifies historical documents through dynamic timelines and plain-language definitions. Montás situated his response within the broader mission of liberal education. As executive director of the Chang Chavkin Center for Liberal Education and Civic Life at Bard College, he promotes an education that equips students for both individual and collective self-governance. This level of preparation, Montás argues, is very much tied to students’ ability to engage more deeply with the principles contained in the founding documents. Vetter shifted the discussion from what is taught about civic education to how it’s taught. She described lecturing as perhaps the least democratic way to teach because it positions students as passive recipients of information rather than active critical thinkers. Her current project therefore examines pedagogical strategies that strengthen informed decision-making and collaboration.
This webinar offered a rich tapestry of perspectives on why the founding documents still matter to American political life, even after 250 years. What, then, should we take away from the discussion?The panelists also recognized obstacles to this work, pointing to the erosion of public spaces and the difficulty of fostering productive conversations around divisive issues. Their remarks suggested that these challenges make civic education that much more necessary.
What Role Should Reflective Patriotism Play in Civic Education Today?
The webinar’s last discussion took up the question of whether reflective patriotism has a place in political science classrooms. Carrese introduced reflective patriotism as Alexis de Tocqueville’s phrase in Democracy in America (1835), describing the distinctive blend of emotional love of country with rational consideration of ideals and arguments he found among Americans.
“I like to believe that every generation inherits a pledge. One nation, indivisible and committed to liberty and justice for all. But a pledge is only as strong as the people willing to understand and fulfill what it demands of them.” Drawing on her experience as a parent, Evans compared civic education to the adult table and the kids’ table at a family meal. Oftentimes, when a child approaches the adult conversation, educators (much like parents) have a choice. Do they slow down, explain the stakes and invite the child’s curiosity into the discussion or do they say: “it’s complicated, don’t come back to the table”? Recalling how someone in her education gave her a place and voice at the table, Evans encourages others to do the same. Montás also leaned on an anecdote, drawing from his American Political Thought seminar. For their final assignment, he tasked students with revisiting their initial judgments about the American Revolution and the Constitution. He noticed that their responses moved from instinctive criticism toward more nuanced interpretations of the American founding while remaining critical. Vetter invoked James Baldwin to frame reflective patriotism: “I love America more than any country in this world, and exactly for this reason I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually.” For her, Baldwin’s coupling of love and criticism shows why patriotism is less about blind loyalty and more of a willingness to confront uncomfortable truths. She connected this interpretation to the Declaration’s phrase “we hold these truths.” To hold a truth, she suggested, does not necessarily mean treating it as beyond criticism. It can also mean holding it as a hypothesis, open to examination and debate. Similarly, Bailey reflected on the relationship between knowledge and love, arguing that students cannot meaningfully love or criticize a country they don’t know. The longer he teaches, the more convinced he becomes that “knowledge is a precondition of love and patriotism.”
Carrese brought these strands together by placing Lincoln’s “Gettysburg Address” and King’s ‘I Have a Dream’ speech alongside the founding documents. Both approach the American project with respect and even love while insisting that the meaning of America remains open to debate.
Conclusion
This webinar offered a rich tapestry of perspectives on why the founding documents still matter to American political life, even after 250 years. What, then, should we take away from the discussion? In a closing lightning round, Carrese invited each panelist to offer a final takeaway.
Vetter acknowledged the many problems today’s generation is inheriting and the immense pressure placed on young people to solve them. Recognizing why students may feel overwhelmed, she asks educators to be mindful of their responsibilities and purposeful in how they teach. Montás urged educators to bring students face to face with the argumentative and philosophical power of primary texts. Although cultivating such engagement takes time, he finds the endeavor ultimately rewarding. Bailey endorsed Montás’s earlier idea of assessing students’ perspectives on the founding documents at the beginning and end of a course, underlining how sustained engagement often changes how students understand their relevance. Evans highlighted concept mapping, a method she proposed during a summer working group to help students map arguments. Carrese provided the concluding remarks, suggesting that efforts to improve civic education at the K-12 level depend upon higher education’s willingness to recommit itself to citizenship education.
I like to believe that every generation inherits a pledge. One nation, indivisible and committed to liberty and justice for all. But a pledge is only as strong as the people willing to understand and fulfill what it demands of them. And as the panelists would argue, the work of realizing that pledge tends to begin in civic education. Our role as educators, then, is to kindle students’ interest in the founding documents while also inviting them into the conversation those documents began.
- Raymundo Lopez is a PhD candidate in political science at Michigan State University studying survey experiments, intersectionality, and elections. He is the creator of Atom Laboratories, a YouTube channel that uses multimedia storytelling to make political science engaging and accessible to wider audiences. Lopez has collaborated with nonprofits like the Women’s Center of Greater Lansing to simplify ballot initiatives and currently leads the Social Science Initiative at FLI SCI, where he helps first-generation and limited-access students explore social science research and build data literacy.
- About the APSA Public Scholarship Program.
- “Making the Founding Documents Relevant in the 21st Century”
Be the first to comment