Providing Deliberative Space

Providing Deliberative Space

On Sunday, Nicholas Kristof published a column in the New York Times condemning college campuses for being liberal “bubbles” and echo-chambers. The one example of such a college he offered was Oberlin, a small residential liberal arts school like my own. Elizabeth Lehfeldt has written a beautiful rebuttal to Kristof, pointing out that SLACs hardly characterize the vast majority of American college campuses. But I’d like to rebut Kristof on a different score: by pointing out that his characterization of SLACs themselves is egregiously out of touch.

The students at my college are not homogenous. 42% of last year’s entering class were students of color; 14% were international students. More than 50% of our students are TRIO-eligible, usually on the basis of income. Many struggle financially and take jobs to support not only their own progress through college but their families back home. Our first-generation students often strive to explain to family and friends what it means to be at a SLAC, and why it is worthwhile to study the liberal arts. They weather tremendous societal pressure to conform to a stereotype of a “typical” student – the kind of student at the heart of Kristof’s piece – that often leaves them feeling like they don’t belong in college at all.

These student are not sheltered or protected in their person or in their intellectual pursuits. They must daily negotiate demands on their sense of self as they figure out their community and their path beyond college. White, wealthy, straight, cisgendered men are not sheltered from this process either – education requires a global effort from each of us to examine where we come from and where we’re headed, and how we interact with others along the way.

Teaching in CFA
Teaching in the Center for Fine Arts

One of the things I teach is Dialogue – a structured method of communication, rooted in the excellent work of the Program of Intergroup Relations at the University of Michigan, that brings people together across a range of contentious issues and teaches them to approach and move through conflict together. My work in Dialogue suggests to me that our students have a wide variety of disagreements about issues of race, class, sexuality, gender, religion, and disability, all of which are colored by the spot they inhabit on the political spectrum. Equally, my work in Dialogue emphasizes that students are capable of profound and deeply important conversations about these issues, negotiating lasting differences and reaching an understanding of one another that is the basis of allyship and activism. Dialogue changes people, not because it is the first time someone has heard an opinion different to their own, but because they must explore all opinions with an open mind and heart. This is the atmosphere we seek to foster on our campus.

I would argue that what we provide is not a bubble, but a deliberative space where students can learn the skills to deftly and competently talk to others both on- and off-campus about their ideas. Kristof speaks of a bubble as if students are unable to hear the roar of political debate when they get to campus. This is so far from the truth as to be laughable. The internet does not end when it reaches our school – indeed, it’s here that our students are taught how to discern trustworthy news sites from propaganda anywhere on the political spectrum. They also cannot shut out the way in which society treats them on the basis of their social identities – if they are trans, or gay, or working-class, or female, or a person of color they must at best deal with daily micro-aggressions that seek to reduce their personhood. At worst, the news brings daily evidence of the fact that there are people in our country who would like to see them violated; who might even genuinely wish that they would die.

If there is such a thing as a bubble on our campus, it’s a bubble put in place by individuals who are trying to survive. It’s not that on the outside of the bubble are people who disagree with them – those are found in every classroom and every lunch table, within our sororities and fraternities, in every club and society on campus. It’s that people on the outside of that bubble wish to do them harm. There is no standard by which it is reasonable to expect any of us to interact with those who wish us injury or worse.

One thought on “Providing Deliberative Space

  1. A brilliant response to his poorly-considered (considered at all?) essay that highlights the real work that goes on in your classrooms. Thank you!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

css.php