Community Building And Exposure To Uncomfortable Ideas Are Needed In Higher Ed For Student Growth, Order Of Operations Is Key

Hours after the SCOTUS ruling regarding affirmative action was posted on June 29, 2023, most college and university presidents were directing their staff to absorb the main messages from the 287-page ruling while also dusting off their pre-prepared statements to send to their communities including alums and parents. Like others, I clicked send and waited for the email deluge. And it came—dozens of emails spanning perspectives from the far left to the far right. At 1:08pm, I received “My sincere thanks for your thoughtful message today…” and at 1:35 pm, I received “Hogwash! Take me off your mailing list.” As I diligently read and answered them all, I could not help but think: what would it be like if we could all be in a room together to talk through our differences and understand what in our history brought us to our beliefs.

Pundits in higher education argue that exposure to uncomfortable viewpoints, such as lectures on campus that span the political spectrum, is good for students’ education. I agree. But the order of operations is important. What is first? First is building community around common experiences, shared values, and a sense of belonging. What is second? Second is exposing students to disquieting ideas that make them uncomfortable. If done right, this sequence can lead students to develop greater critical thinking skills, independence, confidence, and a stronger sense of both themselves and their places in community.

Fundamental to intellectual and emotion growth is the combination of steps one and two. Too much emphasis on community and belonging without the challenges that free speech and new ideas provide risks coddling and groupthink, and too much emphasis on disquieting ideas without sufficient sense of connection risks splitting and isolation. We need both to build community around similarities and to challenge each other with difference to enable learning. Furthermore, for the dance of education to go well, some choreography is critical: first, build psychological safety where students feel a sense of belonging on campus, they are confident that if they say something wrong it will not be held against them, and they feel appreciated for their unique backgrounds and skills. Second, introduce challenging, diverse, and controversial ideas. Ideally, the students’ community will be strong enough to remain open to listening, continue dialogue, and, having been primed, they will learn from rather than shut down different perspectives.

Too often on college campuses, and perhaps in the larger American society, we do not do the hard work of creating community—of remembering what we have in common—before we throw challenging ideas at people. (Of course, some groups have the objective of destroying community, creating chaos, and bringing down existing institutions; still, a strong community can identify these actors and can come together to resist them). Without effective governance and leadership at all levels, the threat of new idea—instead of cohering our campus community—splits students into groups, often based on social identity rather than based on their role as a member of the college community. From this place, it is hard to recover. People take sides; they stop listening, and learning ceases. In contrast, if the sense of belonging and shared values is strong, challenging ideas can be engaged, metabolized, and integrated as part of the growth that comes from learning.

The best teachers do this in the classroom—first build community and psychological safety in the classroom and then challenge existing modes of thought, exposing students to all sides of an issue, taking the devil’s advocate role if students themselves do not. In the larger society, the most effective organizations, clubs, and communities do this as well.

If we are frustrated that dialogue is limited and campuses, communities, or the country are no longer listening to opposing views, we might step back and assess whether we are putting adequate time into recognizing our shared values and galvanizing a sense of belonging in our communities at all levels. Paradoxically, investments in understanding our shared values will enable us to flourish in our differences.

I am still responding to emails about the Supreme Court decisions, but rather than viewing these communications as tedious, I am pushing myself to see them through a lens of investment in community building—a precondition of learning from difference.