Recently CLT convened an expert panel on engaging students in discussions on challenging topics. Our panel members were:
- Dr Michael Zekulin, Senior Lecturer in the College of Arts and Social Sciences, expert in terrorism, counterterrorism, extremism and radicalisation
- Associate Professor Sue Thompson, Associate Dean Student Experience, College of Asia and the Pacific, historian and educational leader specialising in Cold War studies in Southeast Asia and wider security history of the 20th Century
- Pascale Taplin, cultural anthropologist and PhD candidate who is currently researching disinformation, cognitive security and the intersection of conspiracy theories and accelerationism
- Larissa Siliezar Mendoza, Head of Inclusive Communities.
We were also joined by:
- Associate Professor Geoff Hinchcliffe, Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning & Teaching)
- Christina Page, Case Manager Psychosocial, ANU People and Culture
Here we share some key take aways from Geoff, Michael, Sue and Pascale that you may wish to consider or to incorporate into your teaching.
“If we don’t teach those skills in universities, where will they be taught?”
In his introduction, Geoff talked about the commitment of ANU to the crucial role universities play in intellectual exploration, tackling difficult subjects, promoting free speech and academic freedom.
In arguing for the importance of this, Pascale focused on polarisation which is seen by many as a threat to our democracy and to our society. Pascale told us that “polarisation occurs when there’s no common understanding of facts or values relevant to the subject of discussion”, and warned, “that as long as we view discourse as a zero-sum quest for a singular truth, the endpoint will be further polarisation”. When we engage in authentic dialogue, however, we mediate polarisation and its associated risks.
Communication, expectation and validation
Michael shared the communication, expectation and validation approach he takes with students.
He starts with communicating to students about what they can expect in the course and making his expectations of them clear. Michael said it is very important that “students know and understand the expectations of the rules of engagement”. Validation involves giving students “permission to understand where [their ideas] come from, and to be comfortable in knowing that they can have a different opinion [from other students]”. As students develop their understanding that having different opinions from each other is valid and expected, an environment where critical discussion can occur becomes more likely.
A technique Michael uses is to give very simple and non-divisive examples. Check out the Lunch Vox recording below to hear Michael explain how he uses objective and subjective considerations of rain as a means of getting students to think about how and why other students might see or understand things differently.
History has an important role to play
According to Sue, history can be a blessing and a curse when engaging in discussions on challenging topics. As a blessing, history can allow us to understand the path that has led from the past to the present, giving us a broader perspective on current events and situations. However, we must also be cognisant that there is not just one history, but instead we need to think about whose history are we using to understand the present.
Our arguments are shaped by evidence and the ideas of others
Sue talked about the benefits of critical analysis for our students’ learning, adding that understanding the difference between objectivity and subjectivity is at the heart of higher education. She argued that we need to develop our students’ skills in developing their own arguments through a process of subjecting evidence and the ideas of others to critical analysis.
We are not looking for students to be our clones
Both Michael and Sue stressed the importance of students in having their own ideas, thoughts and perspectives.
For example, during class Michael tells his students: “you are not going to know what I think, because that’s not my job. I don’t want three hundred acolytes of myself running around”.
Sue also doesn’t want students to try and second guess what she thinks. She said, “I’m not there to convert students’ minds. I’m there to open up students’ minds”.
We need to think about what student wellbeing really is
Pascale challenged us to think about how we define student wellbeing. She suggested that often wellbeing is seen as a way to protect students from “being exposed to ideas or language that may cause them stress, anxiety, or which may make them feel unsafe”, or to keep them “calm”. This specific concept of wellbeing can then become a means of silencing less favourable ideas.
Redefining student wellbeing as “intellectual freedom through an education in critical thinking” means that we can achieve the openness that authentic dialogue requires. The role of the academic then is to support that dialogue with robust and scholarly knowledge.
More support and ideas
Download the full transcript of this event
Learn more about the ANU Learning and Teaching Managing challenging discussions in the classroom resource collection. The collection also includes support resources for students and staff.
Watch the individual Lunch Vox panellist sessions and Q&A below or access these videos through our Vimeo page.
Cait Greenup is a Senior Education Designer (Inclusive Design) at the Centre for Learning and Teaching.
