Staff-Student Connections - Listening, Caring, Engaging

Dangerous Discussions Initiative,
Clothing the Emperor Series


The TLT Group

Group Interview:  Swarthmore College's "Learning for Life" Program
- July 11, 2006

Participants

  • Diane Anderson, Asst. Prof., Educational Studies;  Steering Committee of L4L
  • Don Bankston,  Supervisor, Environmental Services;  Steering Committee of L4L
  • Liz Dozier, Environmental Services Technician [and poet];  Steering Committee of L4L
  • Ben Oldfield;  undergraduate, co-coordinator of L4L,  Steering Committee of L4L
  • Moderator:  Steven W. Gilbert, President, The TLT Group

Back to Top of Page

Recordings, Transcripts, Notes

Back to Top of Page

Framework for Civil, Constructive Conversations

I.  Anti-inflammatory Description  II.  Polarizing Views or Questions  III.  Worthwhile Results
IV.  Evidence and Priorities  V.  What do YOU care about most? 

I.  Anti-inflammatory Description
Describe the issues in the least inflammatory language.  Identify important pre-requisites, conditions, stakeholders. 

Focus on Boundaries Faculty, Staff, Students, Alumni, Board, .....

  1. What are the ideal “boundaries” that should exist?   How can academics best integrate [or separate] these groups?
     

  2. Outside-the-classroom, off-campus experience, on-campus, .... ?
     

  3. What each INDIVIDUAL’s obligation to reach out to and attempt to establish a genuine personal connection with someone whose role, political, ideological and/or religious views are very clearly different from, and perhaps even objectionable to, his/her own? In fact, what is any individual's obligation within a college or university to establish a genuine personal connection with anyone else?
     

  4. Where are the lines between personal blogging, political blogging, and course-related blogging?  E.g., how, if at all, does “in loco parentis” apply to what a student who lives in a campus dorm writes in a blog that resides on a commercial server?
     

  5. In what ways, if any, is  “harassment” online different from “harassment” on campus or elsewhere?

Why bother? 
Why is it important to deal with this issue?

Under what conditions is it important to deal with this issue? 

Under what conditions should this issue be avoided? 

Under what conditions are the benefits associated with this issue likely to result?  Are there any important pre-requisites that must be in place?

Under what conditions are the risks associated with this issue too likely to occur - so that this issue should not be pursued or implemented?

Who cares?   (Who should be involved in considering this issue? 
Because they will be influenced by it? 
Because they are able to influence how it proceeds?  Other?)

Back to Top of Page
 

II.  Polarizing Views or Questions 
Restate extreme positions and provocative questions in ways most likely to enable stakeholders who are initially committed to apparently opposing views to engage in civil, constructive discussion.

 

TO BE FIXED!

1.  As professionals, faculty members should keep their personal beliefs (religious, ethical, etc.) and political activities entirely private - outside the academy.

2.  Faculty members should encourage and permit students to express personal or political opinions only when directly relevant to specific course assignments made within the institutionally-approved curriculum.

3.  The speech and actions of each member of a learning community should always reflect his/her deepest convictions - personal, political, etc. ["Are there any boundaries?"]

4.  No faculty member can establish a genuine personal connection with every student.  No student can establish a genuine personal connection with every faculty member.  Students and faculty members should not establish genuine personal connections.

 

GAINS:   

RISKS:   


GUIDELINES:   

Back to Top of Page

 III.  Worthwhile Results
List desirable, feasible outcomes of participating in “Dangerous Discussions” activities for this issue. [At the very least, deflate the hype and defuse artificial disagreements – restate the issue and challenge in more realistic and less inflammatory ways.  And then accomplish something that is visibly and demonstrably useful!]

What are some of the desirable outcomes that would be easiest to agree on and accomplish?  [Select one or two, agree on a plan, and get working!]

What are some of the desirable outcomes that are feasible, but would be most difficult to accomplish?  [Agree on a realistic timetable and plan for one or two of the most important of these and defer others.]

What are one or two of the desirable outcomes that are so difficult that we should exclude them from these efforts (perhaps find some other way of proceeding or simply learn to live with the disappointment).

EXAMPLES:

Email vs. F2F for Faculty-Student Contact (Office Hours?)

Students uncomfortable expressing support for war in Iraq in classroom

Christian student organization distributing info via Whitman mailboxes, etc. - info invites participation [proselytization?]

Flashlight Online Survey - designed to enable Whitman College participants to identify easy/difficult outcomes and prepare to set priorities for their work together.

Preliminary Results of Flashlight Online Survey for Whitman College 3-6-2006

1.  ...Actions

2.  ...Policies

Back to Top of Page

IV.  Evidence and Priorities
 Identify the kinds of evidence that can be made accessible and useful to participants.  What other factors matter?  What "trumps" evidence? 
E.g., what priorities might modify the influence of evidence on important decisions about this issue?

1.  ...

Generic Questions

1.  What evidence is already available and likely to help make relevant decisions?

2.  What kinds of additional evidence would be likely to help make relevant decisions?

3.  Why are people unlikely to be influenced by apparently relevant evidence?  What other factors are likely to influence relevant decisions?

4.  What priorities (institutional, personal, ...) might make some kinds of evidence irrelevant?  might influence the impact of evidence?

Back to Top of Page

V.  What do YOU care about most?  Personally, professionally, ...?[See also "Fundamental Questions"]

1. What do you most want to gain? [Regain?]
What do you care about?
For your students? colleagues? institution? yourself?
Whom do you care about?

2. What do you most cherish and want not to lose?

Back to Top of Page

ONLINE RESOURCES  - Examples of Online Tools
Selected because they can be used to support civil, constructive conversations and related activities about Dangerous Discussions Issues - and they are "Low-Threshold" - easy to learn, use;  low incremental cost.

Back to Top of Page
 

ISSUES/QUESTIONS

Why Bother?

Inquiry, Evidence, Argument:  “The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?”
[What is the original source of this line?]

Are different methods of inquiry, different methods of argument, and different definitions of evidence appropriate in different realms?  On campus vs. off campus?  In different academic disciplines? 
What factors  (institutional priorities, personal beliefs, political power...) might make some kinds of evidence irrelevant?  Might influence the impact of evidence?

To what extent can or should a faculty member control the kinds of argument permitted in a classroom discussion?  To what extent can or should anyone control the kinds of argument permitted anywhere?   In an online discussion?

New Technologies, New Boundaries, New Connections
What are the new challenges and opportunities provided by the rapidly emerging computer technology options for "blogging,” “podcasting,” and other new forms of telecommunications, information exchange, and social networking? 
Where are the lines between personal blogging, political blogging, and course-related blogging?

New Definitions of Appropriate Behavior
To what extent must we all simply accept emerging new patterns of speech and behavior on the Internet?   To what extent can and should anyone guide or control these patterns? 

Is  “harassment” online different from “harassment” on campus or elsewhere?

New  Professional/Personal/Political Boundaries
What, then, _are_ the ideal “boundaries” that should exist between ....

To what extent should faculty members’ outside-the-classroom, off-campus experience and beliefs in “relevant” areas be acknowledged or discussed with students?  How/where?

Individual vs. Institutional Rights and Responsibilities
In determining, encouraging, or enforcing new standards of appropriate behavior, what are important differences between individual rights and responsibilities vs. institutional rights and responsibilities?

How, if at all, does “in loco parentis” apply to ...  ?

Back to Top of Page

READINGS, REFERENCES, DEFINITIONS

Back to Top of Page
Your Questions, Suggestions, Comments

If you have any questions or comments about this workshop, please contact Lisa Star at online@tltgroup.org

Please send your questions or suggestions for improving our online workshops - including topics or leader/presenters that you would like us to include.

Send to Steve Gilbert at: 
GILBERT@TLTGROUP.ORG

Back to Top of Page
Joys and Sorrows
  • Good news, bad news from/about leader presenters.
  • Good news, bad news from/about registrants.
  • Good news, bad news from/about TLT Group staff, friends, et al...
  • Photos welcome!  Tasteful!

Back to Top of Page

TLT-SWG Highly Moderated Listserver Since 1994                         Faculty/Professional Development Program