WASHINGTON — Colleges have historically been held up as pillars of free inquiry, constructive discourse and debate. But in an increasingly polarized era, campuses have become microcosms of the political divisions plaguing the country.
Even previously nonpolitical statements can draw blowback, Marjorie Hass, president of the Council of Independent Colleges, said Thursday.
“Do you accept the SAT? Well, that’s a political issue,” she said during a panel at the American Association of Colleges and Universities′ annual conference. “Do you have a view about what’s being taught in your science department? Well, that’s a political issue. So there is no avoiding it.”
Hass, along with college presidents and other higher education experts, offered advice on how to lead an institution through choppy waters while maintaining an open culture of free speech.
Lori White, president of DePauw University, in Indiana, advised attendees to articulate their institutions’ values and establish what they look like in practice. From there, college leaders can make informed decisions on how to respond to conflict, both on campus and externally.
The more closely an issue is tied to a college’s mission, the more moral authority leaders have to speak on it, Hass said.
Teaching students dialogue skills
Panelists agreed that students are coming to college ill-equipped to handle conflict productively.
The pandemic and the quick pivot to remote learning exacerbated the problem, said Jonathan Alger, president of American University, in Washington, D.C. Students could no longer interact in person with one another at a crucial time in their development. Now, they’re being thrown into the deep end.
“They’re in residence halls with other people, in the classroom with people from different backgrounds,” Alger said. “And they’re not prepared to hear all those different perspectives and points of view.”
The skills behind civil discourse and debate can — and should — be taught, he said. However, state and regulatory agencies often do not require them as part of curricula. Alger added that colleges should work to teach dialogue and active listening skills and partner with K-12 schools to do the same.
Students are hungry to learn skills that can help them engage in civil discourse, such as critical thinking, Hass said
“We spend a lot more time thinking about freedom of speech than we have been thinking about freedom of thought,” she said. “We’ve allowed the conversation on campus to be trumped by just the notion of, ‘Can you say any old damn fool thing that comes into your mind?'”
In tandem with free speech, institutions need to help students understand that productive conversations require more from them than just speaking, Hass said.
Before taking the helm at American in July, Alger served as president of Virginia’s James Madison University for over a decade. He also taught a leadership seminar that included team debate assignments. Students were assigned sides and had to defend arguments with which they didn’t necessarily agree. The random assignments helped them move past seeing the issues as identity pillars, Alger said.
“It liberated the students from taking the arguments personally,” he said. “They just learned how to make the best arguments that they could.”
Leadership at James Madison’s Center for Civic Engagement intentionally sought to involve students and faculty from all types of departments involved — “not just the usual suspects in areas like political science or public policy,” Alger said.
Bridging campus divides
Being in community with others helps lay the foundation for constructive conversations, White said.
“When you’re in a relationship with someone, you can argue about all kinds of things and it’s not an attack on the other person’s humanity,” she said. But isolation and echo chambers make such conversations all the more difficult, she said.
Panelists said that bringing people together is often the first — and most challenging — step.
“I want to find ways in which we can create spaces where folks can disagree,” said Ronald Rochon, president of California State University, Fullerton.
Beginning last fall, American University undertook a new effort to do just that. The private institution experienced extensive student protests in 2024 and sought to “lower the temperature” on campus through civil discourse, Alger said.
One initiative, Unity Meals, sought to bring students and employees together over dinner and conversation. Alger said the program represented a “real risk” for the institution, especially given when the first event was held — Oct. 7, the one-year anniversary of the reignited Israel-Hamas conflict.
The dinner featured Jewish, Muslim and Christian speakers who discussed the conflict through the lens of shared humanity, Alger said, rather than “who’s right and who’s wrong.”
Since then, American has held two more events: One the day after the election and another the day after President Donald Trump’s inauguration.
The efforts have been well-received by the campus community, and attendees have expressed gratitude for the opportunity to engage with one another, he said.
“It’s a lot harder to hate people when you’ve actually sat down at the table and gotten to know them a little bit,” he said.
‘Have each other’s backs’
Alger encouraged all college employees, not just presidents and those in the c-suite, to engage in civil discourse and discuss ways to foster open dialogue with colleagues.
“We are frequently looking to all of you to help us and to be good role models for us,” he said. “Please keep that in mind that we need you. We need your partnership.”
High-level plans to tackle complex issues like polarization require help and buy-in from leadership at every level and from across the campus.
“We could spend all day long writing wonderful statements and espousing these principles, but they’re not going to be self-executing,” Alger said.
It’s also key for leaders from different colleges to work together.
Now and in the near future, college presidents in certain states and locations will have a difficult time speaking up and defending the mission of higher education, Alger said. They may also lack support from their governing boards.
Higher education associations and leaders, especially those in more supportive environments, must collectively stand for the mission of higher education, he said.
“If we have each other’s backs collectively, then at least you won’t feel alone,” he said.
Hass recommended establishing regular check-ins with similarly-situated leaders.
Over bimonthly Zoom calls, Hass and other leaders of higher education associations discuss how they are navigating the current climate.
The group is nonpartisan and doesn’t focus on specific policy issues, she said. Instead, they are able to talk with other leaders and figure out where their line is drawn in the sand on different issues. Members ask questions like “How can we prevent that line from being reached?” and “What resources would I rely on?”
The differing opinions of the group are a feature, not a bug, she said.
“We don’t expect we’ll all have the same line,” Hass said. But having colleagues to bounce ideas off of and past examples to consider is affirming, she said.
