Some students may not speak their opinions in the classroom due to the fear of verbal or social repercussions from their classmates or even professors. To allow students and faculty to talk about this controversial issue, the Center for Teaching Excellence sponsored a Town Hall discussion Wednesday afternoon that highlighted political, social and religious discourse in the classroom and how these topics lend themselves to constraint or incivility amongst the participants.
The discussion began with a short clip from CNN’s Crossfire, in which Daily Show host Jon Stewart confronted hosts Paul Begala and Tucker Carlson about the lack of serious content in news programming. The debate, which quickly turned into an argument, set the mood for the topic of conversation.
Political Science Professor Dennis Simon, one of the leaders of the discussion, cited other shows that follow this confrontational format, including Hardball and The O’Reilly Factor. “This is telling us what political debate looks like,” he said. “It teaches us that the best sound bite wins.”
According to Simon, these shows serve as models of confrontational debate that are socialized into the public. “Increasingly, discourse is being uncivil and tending to elevate political disagreements to personal disputes,” he said. This problem can follow students into the classroom and keep them from feeling free to express their own opinions due to fear of unpleasant feedback from their peers.
Vanessa Beasley, a corporate communications and public affairs professor as well as a leader of the discussion, sees a problem with this. “The current model says there’s confrontation or there’s love—those are the only two things,” she said.
Beasley proposed an alternate debate model that offers an understanding of different perspectives as its goal rather than using social approval as a form of persuasion. Her model includes manners, taking turns, making eye contact and not interrupting when another person is speaking. This can reduce the feeling of threat or discomfort that someone holding an opposing view might experience when expressing it.
“[It] goes back to the very old concept of civility,” she said. “Reasonable, compassionate, smart people can have different beliefs and they’re not bad people.”
Beasley then raised the issue of the responsibility of faculty and students to promote civil discourse in the classroom. According to Beasley, part of this responsibility includes encouraging minority views and presenting a respectful manner to others’ opinions.
Many student participants in the audience revealed that they did not feel comfortable voicing minority opinions in the classroom due to the disrespectful attitudes of others. Several students proclaimed their liberal views but concurred that they had learned how to be quiet to avoid confrontation.
Students also discussed the intermingling of religious and political values in today’s society. Several students agreed that they feel more tolerant of religious views because of the variety of religions that are practiced by the public. According to those discussing the issue, the existence of only two viable political parties divides people in a stricter sense and leads to conflict when people see the party instead of the issues.
Participating students also agreed that they were afraid to voice opinions that differed from those of the professor because they didn’t want their grades to suffer. Maria Dixon, a corporate communications and public affairs professor leading the discussion, urged students to discuss alternate viewpoints with their professors. “When it comes to an exam, there are certain things we’re looking for,” she said. “But that’s different from ‘I wasn’t able to speak my mind.’”
The Center for Teaching Excellence chooses one controversial topic each semester and holds a Town Hall discussion for both students and faculty.
