Expanded Guidelines for Addressing the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative

1.a.  Defining an objective for the discussion

Starting class with a clearly articulated objective will shape the nature of the discussion and link it to other course goals.  Examples of general objectives include:

• Connecting the topic with course material, including fundamental concepts and strategies for analysis and thoughtful reflection.
• Increasing awareness about the topic by providing information that is not generally addressed in informal discussions.
• Promoting critical thinking by helping students to understand the complexity of the issues.
• Enhancing skills for dialogue that students can take into other venues.
• Relating classroom discussion to the roles that students, faculty, and staff have as citizens within the university community, and within larger society.

More specific objectives for discussion about social conflicts, especially those involving language of hate or bias, may focus on policies, social conventions, or civic responsibilities, including the following:

• Examining and developing positions on issues of social policy, university policy, or social convention.
• Identifying a core problem underlying social conflicts and exploring possible answers to the problem.
• Analyzing the root causes or reasons for a social conflict (i.e., a past-oriented discussion).
• Exploring possible consequences or implications of a conflict (i.e., a future-oriented discussion).
• Planning effective actions to reduce such incidents and/or to support vulnerable populations.

(This second list is adapted from Ronald Hyman, 1980, In Improving Discussion Leadership.  New York: Columbia University, College Teachers Press.)

1.b.  Strategies for handling tensions

General

An instructor can utilize various techniques to defuse growing tension in the class or between particular students by:

• involving additional discussants who have different perspectives
• dividing the class into small groups for a few minutes to closely examine a specific point
• instructing students to spend some time writing about a specified issue

For additional suggestions, refer to “Managing Hot Moments” by Lee Warren.

Handling Emotional Responses

Even within a well-planned and thoughtful discussion, statements can be made, and tones of voice used, that will cause emotional responses of anger, confusion, hurt, fear, surprise, or embarrassment.  Such moments can be called “triggers.”

Responses to triggers include the following:

• Avoidance -Avoiding future encounters and withdrawing emotionally from people or situations that trigger us.
• Silence -Not responding to the situation although it is upsetting, not saying or doing anything.
• Misinterpreting -Feeling on guard and expecting to be triggered, we misinterpret something said and are triggered by our misinterpretation, not the words.
• Attacking -Responding with the intent to lash back or hurt whoever has triggered us.
• Laughing -Being overcome by awkwardness or tension and bursting out in laughter, which can be misinterpreted.
• Launching asides or side conversations -Being unable to suppress commentary.
• Internalizing -Taking in the trigger, believing it to be true.
• Being confused -Feeling angry, hurt, or offended, but not sure why we feel that way or what to do about it.
• Naming -Identifying what is upsetting us to the triggering person or organization.
• Confronting -Naming what is upsetting us to the triggering person or organization and demanding that the behavior or policy be changed.
• Startling with surprise -Responding to the trigger in an unexpected way, such as reacting with constructive humor that names the trigger and makes people laugh.
• Using discretion -Because of the dynamics of the situation (power imbalances, fear of physical retribution), deciding not to address the trigger at this time.

It can be helpful to identify these responses to triggers for the students, and to identify these as normal responses.

(This section on triggers is adapted from Pat Griffin (1997). "Introductory module for the single issue courses" in Teaching for diversity and social justice: A sourcebook, Maurianne Adams, Lee Ann Bell, and Pat Griffin, eds. New York : Routledge, pp. 78-79.)

For strategies on responding to expressions of bigotry in everyday life, see the "SpeakUp!" web project of the Southern Poverty Law Center: http://tolerance.org/speakup/index.html.

Handling Issues That Involve the Instructor’s Identity

Discussing an issue of social conflict can involve the instructor’s identity in a number of ways.  Students may make assumptions about the expectations an instructor has in leading the class discussion.  Assumptions may be based on the students’ perception of the instructor’s identity, on the way that the instructor has handled other class sessions, and on their personal interactions with the instructor.  Taking the role of facilitator may reduce the extent to which an instructor’s identity is an issue for students.

Students may expect their instructor to express his or her own point of view, or they may ask explicitly for this view.  In deciding how to respond, instructors should consider their comfort in expressing personal views, and also the impact such expressions will have on this and future discussion in class.

In addition, some issues and events may trigger reactive responses in an instructor, and students may say things and speak in ways that trigger emotional reactions.  Instructors need to be aware of the possibility (or even the likelihood) of having an emotional response, even if a discussion is thoughtfully planned.  Recognizing the response and the trigger as such will help an instructor to stay even-tempered in leading the discussion.  To handle statements that trigger emotional responses, instructors will want to draw on techniques that will allow them and the class to step back and gain perspective (e.g., naming the triggering issue, giving oneself time by asking students to do a brief writing exercise, working with the class to reframe or contextualize the triggering statement).  If an instructor needs to let such a moment simply pass by, it is important to find time later to talk through the experience, and to address the triggering issue with others who are outside of the class.

In the event that one or more students try to draw the instructor into an emotional response, the ground rules for discussion can play a vital role, and the instructor can model constructive behavior in demonstrating how to unpack such a heated moment by reviewing what had led up to it, in pointing out differences between baiting, debating, and discussing, and/or steering the discussion into a more useful direction.

2. Keeping students focused on common basis for understanding.

In class, ask students to identify key points of information, stating their source.  (You can ask students to do this individually and then pool the information, or you can simply elicit information from the class as a whole.)  Make a list of these for the whole class.

Use this elicitation as a time to distinguish evaluative, “loaded,” comments from less evaluative statements, and from statements of personal opinion or experience.  Acknowledge how difficult it may be to make these distinctions at times.

In order to identify and situate threads of discussion that are extraneous to the focus, or are very speculative, ask for and identify information that students would like to know to clarify their understanding on these questions or tangents, even if that information is not available.

3.  For more information about ground rules, refer to “Discussion Groundrules” by the Intergroup Relations Center, Arizona State University.

4.  Planning the discussion process in advance.

Focus the discussion on a particular issue or set of issues (e.g., the admissions lawsuits, the value of diversity in higher education, affirmative action in society, alternatives to race-conscious policies).

Prepare a list of questions to guide the discussion. The wording of questions often determines their effectiveness.  Use questions that keep the discussions flowing:

Begin the discussion with clear, open-ended questions.

Avoid “double-barreled questions” which pose two problems simultaneously.

Ask questions that prompt multiple answers.

Prepare specific questions about the discussion process, to use if the class is silent or hesitant about speaking. Some examples include: “What makes this hard to discuss?” and “What needs to be clarified at this point?”

Plan to probe students’ responses, while acknowledging what is said, to ask for more specific information, clarify an idea, elaborate on a point, or provide further explanation.

Be prepared to re-direct the discussion if students go beyond the intended focus. Drawing attention to the readings or reminding the class about the discussion objectives are useful management techniques.  Alternatively, clearly identify new areas of discussion as these arise.

5.  In order to keep a discussion focused and purposeful, be an active facilitator rather than a passive observer. On the other hand, be careful not to over-control. A facilitator intervenes throughout the discussion to reword questions posed by students, correct misinformation, make reference to relevant reading materials or course content, and review the main points.

6.  Encourage broad class participation. Ensure that all students participate, and that talkative or opinionated students learn to value what others say, just as quieter students learn to speak up on civic issues.  Some methods for increasing the number of discussants include:

• The Round: Give each student an opportunity to respond to a guiding question without interruption or comments. Provide students with the option to pass. After the round, discuss the responses.
• Think-Pair-Share: Give students a few minutes to respond to a question individually in writing. Divide the class into pairs or trios. Instruct the students to share their responses with group members. Provide students with explicit directions, such as “Tell each other why you chose the answer you did.” After a specified time period, have the class reconvene in order to debrief.
• Sharing Reflection Memos: Prior to the discussion, have students write a reflection memo in response to a question or set of questions that you pose. As part of the discussion, ask students to read their memos.

With each of these methods, the instructor needs to summarize the various responses and relate them to the discussion objectives.

For information about other techniques that can be used to structure discussions, refer to “Active Learning in the College Classroom” by Jennifer L. Faust& Donald R. Paulson.

7.  Encourage students to examine the issues from a variety of possible viewpoints (http://teaching.berkeley.edu/compendium/sectionlists/sect1.html), and strive for balance in the discussion.

• Students should express viewpoints in a manner that will provide greater insight about affirmative action, rather than provoke defensiveness in classmates.
• Remind students that the learning process involves both articulating different perspectives and actively listening to those with divergent views. Ask students to tolerate opposition.
• Note that reaching a consensus is not the goal of the discussion.

When addressing the practices, impact, implications, and intentions of affirmative action

• strive for a balanced discussion of both historical and contemporary issues
• strive for a balanced discussion of issues for individuals as well as issues for institutions or society

When managing students’ input, strive to identify and balance emotional, explanatory, expressive, and analytical commentary in ways that affirms the contributions of these comments.

Agree to discuss this topic in a way that does not make assumptions about any members of the class (including the instructor). Some individuals have a special and complicated relationship to this issue, some impacted more than others, and somy may be perceived to have special knowledge. Make sure no one is put on the spot, and recognize that students may have strong feelings and perspectives on the topic, and these feelings and perspectives may be unpredictable and complicated.

8.  Affirm the value of classroom dynamics in which students of different backgrounds have honest exchange with one another.  Alert all to listen respectfully in others’ comments for what is personal.  Also alert them to listen for what has important personal and social implications, and to listen for what goes beyond the preconceived notions of others.  Agree to discuss in a way that does not make assumptions about any members of the class (including the instructor). Some individuals have a special and complicated relationship to this issue, some impacted more than others, and some may be perceived to have special knowledge. Make sure no one is put on the spot, and recognize that students may have strong feelings and perspectives on the topic, and these feelings and perspectives may be unpredictable and complicated.

10.  To gather student feedback on a discussion using the “Minute Paper,” take a few minutes right after the end of the discussion (after your summary).  Give the students a few minutes to write answers to the following questions, making sure they know that you want this information from their own perspectives: “What is the most important point you learned today?”; and, "What important question about affirmative action remains unanswered for you?"

Review the student responses before your next meeting with the class. During the next class, briefly summarize the student feedback and thank the students for their participation.

back to top