Herbert Family University Lecture Series—The Importance of Difficult Conversations SEPT 2024

00:49:06
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgzDfp99ZFE

摘要

TLDRThe Herbert Family University lecture series event, hosted by Dr. Rich Reich, features discussions geared towards encouraging dialogue and discourse among students and faculty on relevant social and educational issues. Keynote speaker, Professor David Rabin, discussed legal decisions concerning free speech within university campuses, highlighting historical and recent cases. Dr. Talia Stroud explored the complexities of difficult conversations on social media, noting that such platforms often create echo chambers that hinder healthy dialogue. She emphasized the need for intellectual humility and listening for differences as crucial to productive discourse. Dr. Chetto Vora Gupta shared insights from her teaching of a course on difficult dialogues, highlighting self-reflection, emotional acknowledgment, and active listening as key elements for effective conversations. Together, these speeches underscored the essential role of respectful and informed dialogue in educational environments and broader democratic societies.

心得

  • 🎓 The Herbert Family lecture series encourages discourse on free speech and civil dialogue.
  • 📚 Students retain free speech rights at school but with certain limitations, as discussed by Professor Rabin.
  • 🗣️ Dr. Stroud highlighted that social media often exacerbates partisanship and isn't suited for constructive dialogue.
  • 🔍 Intellectual humility is critical in understanding different viewpoints, enabling effective dialogue.
  • 👂 Active listening and understanding diverse perspectives are vital for engaging difficult conversations.
  • 🤝 Difficult dialogues in education promote empathy and better human understanding.
  • ⚖️ Legal cases show schools have limited authority to regulate off-campus speech.
  • 🧑‍🎓 College is a place to explore and challenge personal beliefs through exposure to differing opinions.
  • 🔗 Democracy relies on open, difficult conversations to allow a clash and compromise of ideas.
  • 🌐 Social media firms can alter algorithms to curb echo chambers, fostering healthier discourse.

时间轴

  • 00:00:00 - 00:05:00

    The lecture series at Herbert Family University kicks off with Dr. Rich Reic introducing the event, acknowledging donors and explaining his academic background, notably in African and African diaspora studies. The event will feature multiple speakers with focus on engaging discussions beyond mere debates.

  • 00:05:00 - 00:10:00

    Professor David Rabin begins his talk focusing on legal precedents regarding student free speech on university campuses, referencing significant cases like the one in 1969 that recognized students' rights but also set boundaries based on the campus environment.

  • 00:10:00 - 00:15:00

    The discussion continues on student speech rights with focus on a recent 2021 Supreme Court case regarding off-campus speech, highlighting the narrow circumstances under which schools can regulate such speech like serious bullying or threats, while underscoring protections for political or religious speech.

  • 00:15:00 - 00:20:00

    Professor Rabin discusses further legal landmarks such as cases dealing with student organization's access to campus facilities, emphasizing that schools cannot restrict group speech based on disagreeing with their philosophy and must justify severe restrictions on speech.

  • 00:20:00 - 00:25:00

    He distinguishes between classroom speech and campus speech, highlighting that classrooms can have significant regulation due to academic standards, but emphasizes that student speech within academic discourse should not be restricted by disagreement with professors.

  • 00:25:00 - 00:30:00

    Professor Talia Stroud addresses the importance of difficult conversations in understanding differing viewpoints, drawing from her experiences in Montana and college interactions. She argues that such discussions are essential for democracy and personal growth.

  • 00:30:00 - 00:35:00

    Stroud critiques social media's role in shaping public discourse, highlighting how algorithms promote divisive content. She references a study altering social media feeds to prioritize chronological posts, which showed reduced engagement, illustrating the challenges social media presents to meaningful conversations.

  • 00:35:00 - 00:40:00

    She emphasizes developing skills for listening to diverse viewpoints, advocating for intellectual humility in conversations, which can improve collaborative efforts and increase perceived competence even when admitting gaps in knowledge.

  • 00:40:00 - 00:49:06

    Dr. Chetto Vora Gupta discusses her course on difficult dialogue, informed by racial tensions on campus. She emphasizes self-reflection, understanding different perspectives, and engaging in civil discourse to foster empathy and problem-solving skills, arguing that empathy is the highest form of knowledge.

显示更多

思维导图

Mind Map

常见问题

  • What is the purpose of the Herbert Family University lecture series?

    The lecture series aims to encourage discussions on important topics such as free speech and the importance of difficult dialogues.

  • Who is sponsoring the lecture series event?

    The event is sponsored by Helen and Jeff Herbert through their generous gift.

  • What was Professor David Rabin's focus in his lecture?

    Professor Rabin discussed legal decisions related to student speech on university campuses and the implications of those decisions.

  • How does social media affect difficult conversations, according to Dr. Talia Stroud?

    Dr. Stroud explained that social media often elevates content that is partisan and uncivil, making it a poor model for difficult conversations.

  • What are some of the key elements of engaging in difficult dialogues as taught in Dr. Varo Gupta's course?

    Key elements include self-reflection, acknowledging emotions, active listening, asking meaningful questions, and leaning into safe discomfort.

  • What is meant by 'intellectual humility' in discussions?

    'Intellectual humility' involves admitting the possibility of not knowing everything and being open to other viewpoints in conversations.

  • Why are difficult conversations important for democracy?

    Difficult conversations are essential for democracy because they allow for a marketplace of ideas and the representation of diverse viewpoints.

  • What was one takeaway from Professor David Rabin's discussion on legal cases?

    One takeaway is that there are strict limitations on the ability of schools to regulate off-campus student speech.

  • Who were the other speakers in the lecture series and their topics?

    The other speakers were Dr. Talia Stroud, discussing media’s role and dialogue, and Dr. Chetto Vora Gupta, focusing on structural racism in policies and health equity.

  • How should students approach discussions when unsure about their own views?

    Students should openly engage in discussions to test and explore diverse views, even if they are unsure of their own positions.

查看更多视频摘要

即时访问由人工智能支持的免费 YouTube 视频摘要！
字幕
en
自动滚动:
  • 00:00:04
    [Applause]
  • 00:00:15
    right good evening
  • 00:00:20
    everybody all right that's
  • 00:00:22
    better welcome to the Herbert Family
  • 00:00:25
    University lecture series brought to you
  • 00:00:28
    through a generous gift from Helen and
  • 00:00:30
    Jeff Herbert thank you and your entire
  • 00:00:33
    family for making this event
  • 00:00:35
    possible my name is Dr Rich reic I am
  • 00:00:38
    the senior Vice Provost for curriculum
  • 00:00:40
    enrollment and the dean of the
  • 00:00:41
    undergraduate college at the University
  • 00:00:43
    of Texas at
  • 00:00:44
    Austin I'm also a longtime professor in
  • 00:00:47
    the College of Education in the African
  • 00:00:50
    and African diaspora studies department
  • 00:00:53
    and this semester I'm also teaching a
  • 00:00:54
    sign signature course or as you might
  • 00:00:57
    know them a ugs 303 course in titled
  • 00:01:00
    black Austin
  • 00:01:02
    matters all right my
  • 00:01:06
    people I have personally presented at
  • 00:01:08
    this lecture Series in the past and I
  • 00:01:11
    can tell you it was an incredible
  • 00:01:13
    experience and I'm sincerely excited to
  • 00:01:15
    be here this evening with
  • 00:01:17
    you and speaking of this evening please
  • 00:01:21
    join me in giving a round of applause to
  • 00:01:23
    welcome our speakers for tonight's
  • 00:01:25
    lecture Beyond debate dialogue
  • 00:01:27
    discussion and discourse
  • 00:01:31
    [Applause]
  • 00:01:36
    can I say you're a good sounding
  • 00:01:37
    audience I love that I assure you that
  • 00:01:40
    what they have prepared for you will be
  • 00:01:41
    engaging and
  • 00:01:43
    enlightening I'll introduce each speaker
  • 00:01:45
    before their lecture but first some
  • 00:01:47
    quick housekeeping hopefully you scann
  • 00:01:50
    the QR code that you've seen on the
  • 00:01:52
    screen rotating at this time everybody
  • 00:01:55
    got the QR code sir it's right there all
  • 00:01:59
    right I'll give you a second to get
  • 00:02:03
    that I do want to say some of you are
  • 00:02:06
    super high over aieve types because we
  • 00:02:09
    already have questions already in we'd
  • 00:02:12
    love for you to send in any questions
  • 00:02:15
    you have during the lecture so if you
  • 00:02:17
    hear something that's interesting or
  • 00:02:18
    something you want to know more about
  • 00:02:20
    send us a question on the using the QR
  • 00:02:23
    code once our third speaker has finished
  • 00:02:26
    we ask that you remain seated for 5 to
  • 00:02:27
    10 minutes for a question and answer
  • 00:02:30
    period and it'll conclude our evening
  • 00:02:33
    please do not get up out of your seats
  • 00:02:34
    until the Q&A is
  • 00:02:39
    finished all
  • 00:02:43
    right okay is this the
  • 00:02:46
    right
  • 00:02:48
    okay and so our first Speaker tonight is
  • 00:02:52
    Professor David Rabin Professor Rin
  • 00:02:55
    joined UT Texas law faculty in 1983 at
  • 00:02:59
    after serving as Council for the
  • 00:03:01
    American Association of University
  • 00:03:04
    professors he has since become a leading
  • 00:03:06
    expert on free speech and academic
  • 00:03:08
    freedom with his teaching and research
  • 00:03:11
    also focusing on higher education and
  • 00:03:13
    the law and American legal history he is
  • 00:03:16
    AD Dar Jam Randall ha jam and Robert Lee
  • 00:03:20
    Jam Region's chair in a university
  • 00:03:23
    distinguished teaching
  • 00:03:25
    Professor again it is my pleasure to
  • 00:03:28
    welcome you to this event at this time
  • 00:03:31
    I'll turn it over to my esteemed
  • 00:03:32
    colleague Professor David M
  • 00:03:39
    reban
  • 00:03:41
    there uh good evening everybody uh I'm
  • 00:03:45
    going to focus my comments on legal
  • 00:03:48
    decisions that deal with the extent and
  • 00:03:51
    limitations of student speech on
  • 00:03:53
    University
  • 00:03:54
    campuses and the first important case
  • 00:03:58
    I'm going to discuss Ates way back from
  • 00:04:02
    1969 it was really the first case that
  • 00:04:05
    recognized that students have free
  • 00:04:07
    speech rights on campus in a very famous
  • 00:04:12
    expression that's often been quoted
  • 00:04:14
    since the Supreme Court said that
  • 00:04:17
    students do not shed their
  • 00:04:20
    constitutional rights at the schoolhouse
  • 00:04:23
    gate but the court also said that the
  • 00:04:26
    constitutional rights of students
  • 00:04:30
    must be interpreted in light of the
  • 00:04:33
    special circumstances of the school
  • 00:04:37
    environment the court emphasized that
  • 00:04:40
    mere undifferentiated fear or
  • 00:04:44
    apprehension of disruption is not enough
  • 00:04:47
    to justify restrictions on student
  • 00:04:51
    speech for a school to limit student
  • 00:04:55
    speech it must prove must have evidence
  • 00:05:00
    that there's a material and substantial
  • 00:05:03
    threat of disruption to the work or
  • 00:05:07
    discipline of the
  • 00:05:09
    school and in this case the this was
  • 00:05:11
    during the Vietnam War era uh junior
  • 00:05:14
    high school and high school students
  • 00:05:16
    wore black armbands to protest the war
  • 00:05:18
    in Vietnam and they were suspended for
  • 00:05:20
    not taking them off and the Supreme
  • 00:05:23
    Court said there's not enough evidence
  • 00:05:26
    of a threat of material and substantial
  • 00:05:29
    disruption
  • 00:05:30
    the students are
  • 00:05:33
    protective and another phrase that has
  • 00:05:36
    become famous the Supreme Court said
  • 00:05:40
    that schools cannot become enclaves of
  • 00:05:45
    totalitarianism so that was the first
  • 00:05:47
    major case dealing with free speech
  • 00:05:50
    rights of
  • 00:05:53
    students there's a recent 2021 case you
  • 00:05:58
    may have heard of have you of this
  • 00:06:02
    uh girl who didn't make the cheerleading
  • 00:06:05
    team at her High School have you heard
  • 00:06:08
    of I'm seeing some nodding here right
  • 00:06:11
    and uh she and a friend posted a photo
  • 00:06:16
    on
  • 00:06:17
    snapshot with their middle fingers
  • 00:06:20
    raised okay and of course Sometimes some
  • 00:06:23
    nasty language is necessary to talk
  • 00:06:25
    about
  • 00:06:26
    speech here's what they said in the
  • 00:06:28
    caption
  • 00:06:31
    school
  • 00:06:33
    softball
  • 00:06:35
    cheer everything okay so that's
  • 00:06:39
    what they
  • 00:06:44
    you you want you want to get suspended
  • 00:06:46
    for that okay so they were
  • 00:06:51
    suspended for that off-campus expression
  • 00:06:56
    right this was off-campus
  • 00:06:58
    so the low Court deciding this case said
  • 00:07:03
    the school has no authority to regulate
  • 00:07:06
    off-campus speech of students period end
  • 00:07:09
    of
  • 00:07:10
    case the Supreme Court
  • 00:07:14
    disagreed and said in some very narrow
  • 00:07:18
    circumstances off-campus student speech
  • 00:07:21
    can be regulated for example if it
  • 00:07:24
    involves serious bullying if it involves
  • 00:07:28
    threats to directed at particular
  • 00:07:30
    students if it involves harassment
  • 00:07:34
    that's not protected even if it's off
  • 00:07:38
    campus but the Supreme Court said
  • 00:07:40
    there's a lot less authority of the
  • 00:07:43
    school to regulate off-campus speech
  • 00:07:45
    than oncampus speech in this case the
  • 00:07:49
    Supreme Court
  • 00:07:51
    found some
  • 00:07:53
    disruption of the school based on this
  • 00:07:56
    photo and caption
  • 00:07:59
    it hurt the morale of the sports
  • 00:08:02
    teams also there was a discussion of
  • 00:08:04
    this in uh incident in algebra class an
  • 00:08:07
    algebra class is not about discussing
  • 00:08:10
    cheerleading so there was some mild
  • 00:08:16
    disruption but the Supreme Court said
  • 00:08:19
    not enough disruption to justify
  • 00:08:22
    suspension of the students and the court
  • 00:08:26
    emphasized that the students did not
  • 00:08:28
    identify the school or Target particular
  • 00:08:33
    individuals in the photo and caption
  • 00:08:36
    that they posted another thing the court
  • 00:08:39
    said that's extremely important is that
  • 00:08:42
    if the speech of the students had
  • 00:08:44
    involved politics or religion there
  • 00:08:47
    would have been even more protection for
  • 00:08:49
    the speech than talking about
  • 00:08:53
    cheerleading the court said and this is
  • 00:08:55
    a very important principle in American
  • 00:08:58
    law that that the First Amendment and I
  • 00:09:00
    want to quote from the court decision
  • 00:09:02
    here protects even hurtful speech on
  • 00:09:05
    public issues to ensure that we do not
  • 00:09:08
    stifle public debate that's a key theme
  • 00:09:12
    in First Amendment
  • 00:09:15
    law okay I now want to talk about a
  • 00:09:18
    couple of cases dealing with student
  • 00:09:20
    access to school
  • 00:09:24
    facilities uh one case this is back in
  • 00:09:26
    the Vietnam War era 2 anybody here ever
  • 00:09:29
    he the SDS students for a Democratic
  • 00:09:32
    Society I'm seeing some nodding as long
  • 00:09:34
    ago 50 years ago uh so there was a local
  • 00:09:39
    campus organization of this radical
  • 00:09:42
    student group that met in a coffee shop
  • 00:09:45
    in the student center on the campus of a
  • 00:09:48
    public
  • 00:09:49
    university and the president of the
  • 00:09:51
    University said you can't meet here
  • 00:09:54
    anymore as an SDS chapter because the
  • 00:09:57
    SDS is a disruptive influence on
  • 00:10:02
    campus the Supreme Court said no telling
  • 00:10:07
    a student organization you can't meet at
  • 00:10:10
    all just not even getting to what people
  • 00:10:13
    said you can't even meet on campus is a
  • 00:10:16
    particularly severe restriction on
  • 00:10:19
    speech and therefore the university has
  • 00:10:22
    a heavy burden to justify that
  • 00:10:26
    restriction the court decided the
  • 00:10:28
    president did did not meet that heavy
  • 00:10:32
    burden the President also said that he
  • 00:10:36
    found the philosophy of the SDS quote
  • 00:10:39
    unquote abhorent because the SDS
  • 00:10:42
    Justified the use of violence and the
  • 00:10:46
    Supreme Court said you cannot restrict
  • 00:10:50
    speech as a
  • 00:10:52
    school because you disagree even abhor
  • 00:10:58
    the philosophy of a particular group the
  • 00:11:01
    group has a free speech right to express
  • 00:11:04
    its
  • 00:11:07
    philosophy to be
  • 00:11:09
    unprotected it's a high standard and the
  • 00:11:13
    standard is that the speech must be
  • 00:11:17
    directed to inciting or producing
  • 00:11:20
    imminent Lawless action and must be
  • 00:11:24
    likely to cause Lawless
  • 00:11:27
    action and the court found no such
  • 00:11:31
    evidence in the speech of the
  • 00:11:35
    SDS but the court said one other thing
  • 00:11:37
    that's very important which is that a
  • 00:11:39
    school can require a school
  • 00:11:42
    organization to agree to follow
  • 00:11:45
    reasonable school rules in order to get
  • 00:11:49
    access to school
  • 00:11:53
    facilities okay another I think I hope
  • 00:11:55
    you agree interesting case uh dealing
  • 00:11:59
    with
  • 00:11:59
    student speech in University facilities
  • 00:12:03
    had to do with the right of a group of
  • 00:12:06
    student Christian evangelicals to meet
  • 00:12:09
    on campus and the school said if we
  • 00:12:11
    allow them to meet on campus we would be
  • 00:12:14
    endorsing religion and it's
  • 00:12:16
    unconstitutional under the religion
  • 00:12:18
    clause of the First Amendment to endorse
  • 00:12:20
    religion and the Supreme Court said
  • 00:12:25
    no lots of different organizations use
  • 00:12:29
    University facilities by allowing a
  • 00:12:31
    student group to use a facility the
  • 00:12:33
    university is not
  • 00:12:35
    endorsing the group's
  • 00:12:38
    ideology so it's not an establishment of
  • 00:12:41
    religion in fact to deny access to
  • 00:12:44
    meeting rooms of a religious group is
  • 00:12:48
    discrimination based on the content of
  • 00:12:50
    speech and discrimination based on
  • 00:12:52
    content is illegal under the First
  • 00:12:57
    Amendment okay there are many more lower
  • 00:13:01
    court cases than supreme court cases
  • 00:13:04
    dealing with student speech and I just
  • 00:13:07
    want in closing really
  • 00:13:12
    to tell you about one very important
  • 00:13:15
    distinction that's made by the lower
  • 00:13:19
    courts and that's
  • 00:13:22
    between speech in the
  • 00:13:24
    classroom and speech on campus generally
  • 00:13:29
    okay speech in the classroom can be
  • 00:13:33
    subject to significant
  • 00:13:37
    regulation by the professor why because
  • 00:13:41
    the professor has expertise the
  • 00:13:44
    professor can decide whether the student
  • 00:13:46
    speech is relevant to classroom material
  • 00:13:50
    the professor can evaluate and grade
  • 00:13:53
    student speech based on its Merit and
  • 00:13:58
    the Prof Professor can
  • 00:14:00
    require certain degrees of Civility from
  • 00:14:04
    the students in discussing ideas in
  • 00:14:06
    class so those are limitations on
  • 00:14:10
    student
  • 00:14:15
    speech but there's some student speech
  • 00:14:18
    in the classroom a professor cannot
  • 00:14:22
    restrict if a student speaks within the
  • 00:14:26
    boundaries of academic discourse
  • 00:14:29
    a professor cannot discipline a students
  • 00:14:32
    a student for disagreeing with the
  • 00:14:34
    professor's position or for discussing
  • 00:14:37
    an idea in the class in a way that might
  • 00:14:41
    be offensive to other
  • 00:14:44
    students that's protected by the First
  • 00:14:48
    Amendment and I want to give you an
  • 00:14:51
    example from a very important
  • 00:14:54
    case a Court held that in in in a class
  • 00:14:59
    called comparative animal behavior any
  • 00:15:02
    of you taking evolutionary psychology or
  • 00:15:05
    biology classes so this so this comes up
  • 00:15:08
    in this course
  • 00:15:10
    apparently uh the notion is it's a
  • 00:15:14
    theory it's not aaz it's not held by
  • 00:15:17
    most people but it's held by some but
  • 00:15:20
    that males of different species
  • 00:15:23
    including
  • 00:15:24
    humans are better than females in C
  • 00:15:29
    certain mental tasks related to spatial
  • 00:15:33
    relationships okay so like this
  • 00:15:37
    Theory very arguably stigmatizes women
  • 00:15:42
    but because it's within the scope of
  • 00:15:45
    like legitimate academic theory in the
  • 00:15:46
    field it's protected by the First
  • 00:15:51
    Amendment now many fewer restrictions
  • 00:15:54
    can be imposed on speech on campus
  • 00:15:57
    generally
  • 00:16:01
    but and I'll end with
  • 00:16:03
    this they're what are called in law it's
  • 00:16:06
    a term of art called time place and
  • 00:16:09
    manner restrictions on speech with a
  • 00:16:13
    which a university can imposed not based
  • 00:16:16
    on the content but on when the speech is
  • 00:16:20
    made a university can say you can't
  • 00:16:21
    speak at night a university can say you
  • 00:16:24
    can't be too noisy when you speak and a
  • 00:16:28
    university
  • 00:16:30
    uh can exclude certain people from
  • 00:16:33
    campus who are not students even if
  • 00:16:36
    students want to hear
  • 00:16:40
    them but a
  • 00:16:42
    university cannot prohibit discussion of
  • 00:16:48
    ideas now I've talked about the law
  • 00:16:51
    there are a lot of very important issues
  • 00:16:53
    related to speech outside the law I want
  • 00:16:57
    to highlight
  • 00:17:01
    two one
  • 00:17:05
    is a university does not have
  • 00:17:09
    to enforce its right to restrict speech
  • 00:17:12
    it could decide to allow speech even
  • 00:17:15
    though it doesn't have
  • 00:17:17
    to and another thing that's important to
  • 00:17:21
    remember is though while a university
  • 00:17:25
    can't restrict offensive even harmful
  • 00:17:28
    spe spe related to the discussion of
  • 00:17:31
    ideas that meet academic standards it
  • 00:17:34
    can counsel professors about how to
  • 00:17:36
    teach that material it can counsel
  • 00:17:39
    students who are offended even harmed by
  • 00:17:41
    that
  • 00:17:42
    material and I'll stop now and look
  • 00:17:45
    forward to hearing my colleagues here
  • 00:17:47
    who will talk about many other non-legal
  • 00:17:50
    ways in which the university uh
  • 00:17:53
    interacts with free speech and other
  • 00:17:55
    issues so thanks for your attention I
  • 00:17:57
    look forward to your questions later
  • 00:18:05
    thanks thank you Professor
  • 00:18:09
    ran our second speaker is Dr Talia
  • 00:18:12
    Stroud she is a professor in the
  • 00:18:15
    department of communication studies in
  • 00:18:17
    the school of Journalism as well as the
  • 00:18:19
    founding and current director of the
  • 00:18:21
    center for media engagement in the Moody
  • 00:18:23
    College of
  • 00:18:24
    communication her work examining media's
  • 00:18:27
    role in shaping people's political
  • 00:18:28
    attitudes and behaviors has been
  • 00:18:30
    nationally internationally rewarded
  • 00:18:33
    awarded while her teaching has twice
  • 00:18:35
    earned her the outstanding faculty
  • 00:18:37
    member
  • 00:18:38
    award thank you for being here tonight
  • 00:18:40
    Dr
  • 00:18:44
    stoud thank
  • 00:18:47
    you thank you so much and welcome to the
  • 00:18:50
    University of Texas at Austin I will
  • 00:18:53
    join so many other people in saying that
  • 00:18:55
    we are so excited about everything that
  • 00:18:57
    you're going to learn and accomplish
  • 00:18:59
    in your time here now the theme for
  • 00:19:02
    tonight's discussion is the importance
  • 00:19:04
    of difficult
  • 00:19:06
    conversations and when I we talk about
  • 00:19:08
    difficult conversations we mean those
  • 00:19:10
    where you're speaking with someone with
  • 00:19:12
    whom you hold a very different attitude
  • 00:19:14
    where you don't agree where it may
  • 00:19:16
    actually be uncomfortable because you
  • 00:19:18
    feel so passionately about your point of
  • 00:19:20
    view that it's really hard to Envision
  • 00:19:23
    that someone might have a view that's
  • 00:19:24
    different from yours and the outcome of
  • 00:19:27
    these difficult conversations
  • 00:19:29
    doesn't have to be that you change your
  • 00:19:31
    mind or that you persuade someone else
  • 00:19:33
    although these are both possible but the
  • 00:19:36
    real outcome of a difficult conversation
  • 00:19:38
    is an appreciation that someone has a
  • 00:19:40
    very different background that led them
  • 00:19:42
    to a very different conclusion than
  • 00:19:45
    yours now I come from Helena Montana and
  • 00:19:48
    Helena Montana is about a third the size
  • 00:19:51
    of the UT stadium and I'm sure there are
  • 00:19:54
    people here who come from hometowns that
  • 00:19:55
    are even smaller than my own and when I
  • 00:19:58
    finished high school I wanted to do
  • 00:20:00
    something different so I went to
  • 00:20:01
    California for college and let me tell
  • 00:20:04
    you that California is really different
  • 00:20:07
    from
  • 00:20:08
    Montana and I remember having
  • 00:20:10
    conversations in my college dorm room
  • 00:20:11
    where we talked about things like
  • 00:20:13
    religion and race and politics and I
  • 00:20:16
    came to appreciate that what most people
  • 00:20:18
    thought in Helena Montana wasn't
  • 00:20:21
    actually what most people thought in
  • 00:20:23
    other places and that's what college is
  • 00:20:26
    really all about it's about learning and
  • 00:20:28
    understanding that people have different
  • 00:20:30
    points of view and really importantly
  • 00:20:32
    it's about figuring out how to navigate
  • 00:20:35
    those contexts where people come to the
  • 00:20:37
    table with really different perspectives
  • 00:20:40
    no matter what you do when you leave the
  • 00:20:41
    University of Texas at Austin this is a
  • 00:20:44
    skill set you will absolutely want to
  • 00:20:46
    have and it's more than just what's
  • 00:20:49
    going to benefit you personally because
  • 00:20:51
    difficult conversations are actually the
  • 00:20:53
    substance of democracy democracy in fact
  • 00:20:56
    requires these difficult
  • 00:20:59
    conversations it can't be the case that
  • 00:21:01
    Republicans just talk to Republicans and
  • 00:21:03
    Democrats just talk to Democrats and
  • 00:21:05
    they never talk to one another we have
  • 00:21:07
    to have this system where there's a
  • 00:21:08
    clash of ideas where there's a
  • 00:21:10
    Marketplace of ideas this is how it
  • 00:21:12
    happens when one idea rises above
  • 00:21:15
    another when people start to compromise
  • 00:21:18
    or even when people represent you that's
  • 00:21:20
    why we have elected leaders so that they
  • 00:21:22
    can represent people with diverse
  • 00:21:25
    constituencies and that they've actually
  • 00:21:27
    taken the time to have difficult
  • 00:21:29
    conversations and understand how people
  • 00:21:31
    have different
  • 00:21:32
    views so when it comes to thinking about
  • 00:21:35
    this I have four points for you the
  • 00:21:38
    first one I've already made democracy
  • 00:21:40
    requires difficult conversations in our
  • 00:21:42
    time together tonight I'd like to talk
  • 00:21:43
    to you a little bit about social media a
  • 00:21:45
    little bit about listening and then
  • 00:21:47
    finally a little bit about humility so
  • 00:21:50
    first let's take a step back and think
  • 00:21:51
    about where is it that you first
  • 00:21:54
    experience difficult conversations where
  • 00:21:56
    you understand that people have
  • 00:21:57
    different points of view and for some of
  • 00:21:59
    us it's going to be from our family
  • 00:22:01
    maybe our parents have different
  • 00:22:02
    political beliefs or different religious
  • 00:22:04
    affiliations or maybe it's that ant or
  • 00:22:06
    Uncle at Thanksgiving that you think oh
  • 00:22:08
    wow we we come from the same family but
  • 00:22:10
    we're quite different uh for others of
  • 00:22:12
    us it might be something that you
  • 00:22:13
    learned in school you might have
  • 00:22:15
    participated in a debate class where you
  • 00:22:17
    had to advocate for a point of view that
  • 00:22:18
    might have even been different from your
  • 00:22:20
    own and defend it against
  • 00:22:22
    Counterattack uh but there are all sorts
  • 00:22:24
    of situations in which we counter
  • 00:22:26
    conflict but in the day-to-day the place
  • 00:22:28
    place where we most often encounter
  • 00:22:29
    conflict is actually in the media and
  • 00:22:32
    this is my area of academic expertise is
  • 00:22:34
    really trying to understand what the
  • 00:22:35
    media's role is and it turns out that a
  • 00:22:38
    place we see lots of conflict is in
  • 00:22:40
    social media now this is going to be the
  • 00:22:42
    understatement of the evening to say
  • 00:22:44
    that social media is not really a good
  • 00:22:47
    model for figuring out how to have
  • 00:22:49
    difficult conversations and I want to
  • 00:22:51
    take a step back and unpack why that is
  • 00:22:53
    the case so I'm going to give you a
  • 00:22:54
    little quiz don't worry it's not graded
  • 00:22:57
    but little quiz for you and the first is
  • 00:23:00
    we spend a ton of time on social media
  • 00:23:02
    so Gallup did surveying of teens from
  • 00:23:04
    ages of 13 to 19 figure out how much
  • 00:23:07
    time they're actually spending on social
  • 00:23:09
    media so my first question for you is
  • 00:23:11
    how much time on average are us teens
  • 00:23:13
    spending on social media per day and the
  • 00:23:17
    answer is 4.8 hours per day so social
  • 00:23:22
    media takes up a ton of our time on any
  • 00:23:24
    given day and what circulates there can
  • 00:23:29
    influence quite a bit what it is that we
  • 00:23:31
    think about the world around
  • 00:23:33
    us next question for you true or false
  • 00:23:36
    people tend to see more content from
  • 00:23:38
    politically likeminded sources than from
  • 00:23:41
    those with different views on social
  • 00:23:43
    media and this one is true it is the
  • 00:23:45
    case that on social media you tend to
  • 00:23:47
    encounter and befriend and follow others
  • 00:23:49
    who are similar to you and not those who
  • 00:23:52
    are different from you now this isn't to
  • 00:23:54
    say that we don't sometimes encounter
  • 00:23:56
    difference we absolutely do we'll have
  • 00:23:57
    people who follow who have a different
  • 00:23:59
    view or maybe someone who actually
  • 00:24:01
    shares our view will share some sort of
  • 00:24:03
    a meme that paints the other side in a
  • 00:24:05
    negative light but in general we tend to
  • 00:24:08
    see content from like-minded others and
  • 00:24:09
    this certainly isn't a building block
  • 00:24:11
    for having difficult
  • 00:24:13
    conversations okay next question for you
  • 00:24:16
    now most people don't have their feeds
  • 00:24:18
    filled with political content but most
  • 00:24:20
    people see political content on social
  • 00:24:21
    media from time to time and when you do
  • 00:24:24
    see it I want you to think about what
  • 00:24:26
    type of political content gets the most
  • 00:24:28
    Eng engagement and you see your choices
  • 00:24:30
    here and if you selected D you are
  • 00:24:34
    correct the type of political content
  • 00:24:36
    that elicits the most engagement is
  • 00:24:38
    content that is uncivil content that is
  • 00:24:40
    partisan and content that expresses
  • 00:24:43
    moral outrage hardly the substance of
  • 00:24:46
    having productive difficult
  • 00:24:48
    conversations and what's really
  • 00:24:49
    interesting about social media platforms
  • 00:24:52
    is that the algorithms that undergird
  • 00:24:54
    them they tend to reward engagement so
  • 00:24:56
    if you're engaging with content that's
  • 00:24:58
    partisan and uncivil and expresses moral
  • 00:25:00
    outrage the algorithm will then give you
  • 00:25:02
    more of that content and it'll say oh
  • 00:25:04
    other people like you also should get
  • 00:25:06
    more of this content so this creates an
  • 00:25:09
    engagement sort of mechanism whereby
  • 00:25:12
    this type of difficult conversation is
  • 00:25:15
    elevated so we did a study uh this was
  • 00:25:18
    an incredible privilege I co- a study
  • 00:25:20
    with academics across the United States
  • 00:25:21
    it was a first of his kind study to
  • 00:25:23
    partner with a social media company to
  • 00:25:25
    find out what happens if we actually
  • 00:25:27
    alter that algorithm them so what if we
  • 00:25:29
    changed it what if it wasn't
  • 00:25:31
    prioritizing this problematic content so
  • 00:25:34
    we had around 40,000 people who agreed
  • 00:25:36
    to allow us to mess with their social
  • 00:25:38
    media feeds on Instagram and Facebook
  • 00:25:40
    and so during the last presidential
  • 00:25:42
    election for a random subset of them we
  • 00:25:44
    actually turned off the engagement based
  • 00:25:45
    algorithm we instead had content show up
  • 00:25:48
    temporally so whoever posted last was
  • 00:25:51
    the one you saw first in your feed so it
  • 00:25:53
    was a chronological order no engagement
  • 00:25:55
    algorithm and when we did this what
  • 00:25:57
    happened well when we switched Instagram
  • 00:26:00
    and Facebook ranking algorithms to a
  • 00:26:01
    chronological feed people spent less
  • 00:26:06
    time so they really were craving this
  • 00:26:09
    sort of Engagement and when they didn't
  • 00:26:11
    get it they spent less time on the
  • 00:26:13
    platform overall and in fact for a
  • 00:26:15
    subset of them we tracked what they did
  • 00:26:17
    and they started to spend more time on
  • 00:26:20
    other platforms so when they didn't get
  • 00:26:22
    this sort of Engagement based ranking
  • 00:26:24
    algorithm they said ah forget that I'm
  • 00:26:26
    just going to go somewhere else where I
  • 00:26:28
    can get it so for all of these reasons I
  • 00:26:31
    submit to you that social media is in
  • 00:26:33
    fact not the best way to have difficult
  • 00:26:35
    conversations it elevates content that
  • 00:26:37
    inflames difference it leads us to
  • 00:26:39
    follow people who are similar to us uh
  • 00:26:42
    and it elevates content that is
  • 00:26:44
    problematic okay next point for you I
  • 00:26:47
    want you to think of the last time that
  • 00:26:49
    you met someone new so probably
  • 00:26:50
    something recently and I want you to
  • 00:26:52
    think what you did when you met someone
  • 00:26:54
    new probably what you did is try to
  • 00:26:56
    figure out what you have in common so
  • 00:26:58
    you realize like oh we both came from
  • 00:27:00
    the suburbs of Dallas or oh we both
  • 00:27:01
    played tennis in high school and this is
  • 00:27:04
    a great thing establishing common ground
  • 00:27:06
    is a wonderful way to start having a
  • 00:27:08
    difficult conversation because you have
  • 00:27:10
    something in common first but
  • 00:27:12
    establishing Common Ground can come up
  • 00:27:14
    with all of these problematic inferences
  • 00:27:16
    because you start to think oh that
  • 00:27:18
    person must share my opinion on all
  • 00:27:20
    sorts of things when in fact we don't
  • 00:27:22
    often share opinions on lots of things
  • 00:27:25
    so I want you to try a thought
  • 00:27:26
    experiment for me the next time you meet
  • 00:27:28
    someone new or the next time you're
  • 00:27:29
    chatting with a new acquaintance I want
  • 00:27:31
    you to think not about common ground but
  • 00:27:34
    I want you to say here's what we have in
  • 00:27:36
    common and here's how we're different
  • 00:27:39
    because when we appreciate the
  • 00:27:40
    differences that we have that's when we
  • 00:27:42
    can really learn and this is what
  • 00:27:44
    democratic theorists say is absolutely
  • 00:27:47
    critical for the practice of democracy
  • 00:27:49
    is listening for difference
  • 00:27:52
    understanding how we might be different
  • 00:27:54
    from one another and using that to
  • 00:27:56
    inform the way that we look at others
  • 00:27:58
    and the way we Orient toward the world
  • 00:28:00
    so this is my third point for you is
  • 00:28:03
    finding common ground can be good but
  • 00:28:06
    listening for how you're different can
  • 00:28:08
    be even more
  • 00:28:11
    powerful now if you want to create a
  • 00:28:13
    context where you're listening to
  • 00:28:14
    someone that has a different view how
  • 00:28:16
    might you speak to create a productive
  • 00:28:19
    conversation to have a difficult
  • 00:28:21
    conversation but where you come away
  • 00:28:23
    with an appreciation of another point of
  • 00:28:25
    view and uh here's an example
  • 00:28:29
    so this is a point of view that someone
  • 00:28:31
    might have about social media they might
  • 00:28:32
    say social media companies are being
  • 00:28:34
    heavy-handed in removing content from
  • 00:28:36
    the Platforms in a democracy we must
  • 00:28:39
    prioritize the free exchange of ideas
  • 00:28:41
    online no matter what even offensive or
  • 00:28:43
    misleading posts we have to create a
  • 00:28:45
    legal path for people to appeal the
  • 00:28:47
    removal of their posts and hold
  • 00:28:49
    platforms accountable for restricting
  • 00:28:50
    Free Speech there are no downsides to
  • 00:28:52
    this okay so this is one way you could
  • 00:28:55
    articulate a point of view and it's a
  • 00:28:56
    way a lot of people articulate points of
  • 00:28:58
    view online forcefully with confidence
  • 00:29:02
    but it turns out that a lot of us have a
  • 00:29:04
    lot of opinions on a lot of things but
  • 00:29:06
    on a lot of things we actually don't
  • 00:29:08
    have a lot of information about it that
  • 00:29:10
    if you really think about that issue
  • 00:29:11
    there are components of it that you
  • 00:29:13
    actually don't know so instead of
  • 00:29:16
    articulating something so forcefully
  • 00:29:18
    What If instead we included a bit of
  • 00:29:20
    what is called intellectual humility we
  • 00:29:23
    admit that we might not know everything
  • 00:29:25
    and it might not be the right answer so
  • 00:29:27
    here's the exact same point being made
  • 00:29:29
    but with a little addition of
  • 00:29:31
    intellectual humility so this may just
  • 00:29:33
    meet me but I worry that social media
  • 00:29:35
    companies are sometimes being
  • 00:29:37
    heavy-handed I acknowledge that some
  • 00:29:39
    posts may be offensive or misleading one
  • 00:29:41
    idea may be however I recognize there
  • 00:29:44
    may be downsides to this as well and
  • 00:29:47
    this incorporation of intellectual
  • 00:29:49
    humility in our speech has all sorts of
  • 00:29:51
    positive outcomes so with colleagues at
  • 00:29:53
    the center for media engagement a center
  • 00:29:55
    here on campus that hires undergrads too
  • 00:29:57
    from time to time uh we've been really
  • 00:29:59
    studying what's the effect of
  • 00:30:01
    incorporating intellectual humility in
  • 00:30:03
    conversation and it turns out when you
  • 00:30:05
    use intellectual humility when you're
  • 00:30:07
    having difficult conversations not only
  • 00:30:09
    do people feel more warmly toward you
  • 00:30:11
    they're also more likely to want to work
  • 00:30:13
    with you to solve the issue and the
  • 00:30:15
    really amazing thing about intellectual
  • 00:30:17
    humility is note that when you're using
  • 00:30:20
    these sorts of words you're basically
  • 00:30:22
    saying I don't know everything there
  • 00:30:24
    might be something out there that could
  • 00:30:25
    convince me and the wild thing about the
  • 00:30:27
    research on
  • 00:30:28
    is that people who use intellectual
  • 00:30:30
    humility are seen as more competent even
  • 00:30:35
    though they're admitting things that
  • 00:30:36
    they don't know so this is a a type of
  • 00:30:39
    speech that you can consider when you're
  • 00:30:41
    going into a context in which you may
  • 00:30:43
    have a difficult
  • 00:30:44
    conversation okay so in our time
  • 00:30:46
    together we've talked about humility
  • 00:30:48
    here and a little bit can go a long way
  • 00:30:50
    and I want to reiterate my four points
  • 00:30:51
    so that you can take them away with you
  • 00:30:53
    first democracy actually demands of us
  • 00:30:55
    to have these difficult conversations
  • 00:30:58
    that's how democracy Works second social
  • 00:31:01
    media is not a good model for having
  • 00:31:03
    difficult conversations third listening
  • 00:31:06
    is key and fourth and finally a little
  • 00:31:08
    bit of intellectual humility can go a
  • 00:31:10
    long way thank you so
  • 00:31:12
    [Applause]
  • 00:31:19
    much thank you Dr Stroud 4.8 hours okay
  • 00:31:24
    I've got two teenagers at home I got to
  • 00:31:25
    remember that um our final speaker for
  • 00:31:29
    this evening is Dr chetto Vora Gupta
  • 00:31:32
    with a master's and PHD in social work
  • 00:31:35
    Dr VOR Gupta works on identifying and
  • 00:31:38
    analyzing structural racism within
  • 00:31:40
    Health policies as an assistant
  • 00:31:42
    professor in the Steve Hicks School of
  • 00:31:43
    Social Work her current projects include
  • 00:31:46
    examining the cultural determinants of
  • 00:31:48
    health and their impact on Health Equity
  • 00:31:52
    some of you may be currently in her ugs
  • 00:31:54
    303 course the invisible 80% students
  • 00:31:58
    policy and action a difficult dialogue
  • 00:32:00
    signature course she has been teaching
  • 00:32:03
    each fall since
  • 00:32:05
    2018 welcome Dr Vora
  • 00:32:12
    Gupta thank
  • 00:32:14
    you hello how are you
  • 00:32:17
    guys thank you for being here this
  • 00:32:20
    evening um as Dr reic said I teach um
  • 00:32:25
    ugs difficult dialogues course 303 three
  • 00:32:28
    the title is the invisible 80% students
  • 00:32:32
    policy and
  • 00:32:33
    action and actually the impetus behind
  • 00:32:36
    that course were students back in
  • 00:32:40
    2017 there was actually some racial
  • 00:32:42
    tensions going on on campus and I at
  • 00:32:45
    that time worked at a policy
  • 00:32:48
    Institute and students of color had come
  • 00:32:50
    to us and asked about
  • 00:32:53
    policies on campus that had any effect
  • 00:32:57
    on some of the hate incidents is
  • 00:32:59
    happening on
  • 00:33:00
    campus and really at that time while we
  • 00:33:04
    looked through the university policy
  • 00:33:07
    office and so forth there weren't any
  • 00:33:09
    that the students were satisfied with so
  • 00:33:12
    in that interaction with students and
  • 00:33:14
    Leadership a couple of things came to my
  • 00:33:17
    mind one was how do students of color
  • 00:33:20
    and students from other marginalized
  • 00:33:23
    communities come together and have
  • 00:33:25
    dialogue and the second was how do
  • 00:33:28
    students have dialogue with those that
  • 00:33:30
    are in uh with individuals that are in
  • 00:33:32
    positions of
  • 00:33:34
    power and so with those two I kind of
  • 00:33:36
    set in an application to create this
  • 00:33:38
    difficult dialoges course and I have
  • 00:33:41
    loved teaching it ever since it is my
  • 00:33:43
    favorite course to teach now for my
  • 00:33:47
    purpose for tonight is really to talk to
  • 00:33:49
    you about what students over the years
  • 00:33:52
    that have taken this course have taught
  • 00:33:54
    me students that over the years have sat
  • 00:33:57
    in the very same seats that you guys are
  • 00:33:59
    sitting right
  • 00:34:02
    now so one of the things
  • 00:34:06
    about
  • 00:34:07
    dialogue in policy is that we've come to
  • 00:34:12
    an uh a time frame where
  • 00:34:15
    polarization seems to be the norm and it
  • 00:34:18
    wasn't the case before and so engaging
  • 00:34:22
    and difficult dialogues seems to be even
  • 00:34:25
    more of an importance not only in policy
  • 00:34:28
    but outside of policy
  • 00:34:30
    too the underlying framework that
  • 00:34:33
    students over the time have taught me is
  • 00:34:36
    that engaging in these dialogues creates
  • 00:34:38
    a pathway to Greater human understanding
  • 00:34:42
    for those that are different from
  • 00:34:48
    us so as a very astute research scholar
  • 00:34:53
    when I was asked to talk about tonight
  • 00:34:55
    this topic on difficult conversations
  • 00:34:59
    and how to have them I did what all
  • 00:35:01
    researchers do I came up with research
  • 00:35:04
    questions who what when where why and
  • 00:35:07
    how so what what is a difficult dialogue
  • 00:35:11
    my my colleague Dr Strauss kind of
  • 00:35:13
    touched on this too but what are the
  • 00:35:16
    difficult conversations it's a planned
  • 00:35:18
    discussion about an uncomfortable topic
  • 00:35:21
    where the goals
  • 00:35:23
    are to share different perspectives
  • 00:35:27
    build Mutual
  • 00:35:29
    understanding and develop
  • 00:35:32
    respect it's not about winning and it's
  • 00:35:35
    not about changing someone else's
  • 00:35:37
    perspective that's where it's different
  • 00:35:39
    from
  • 00:35:42
    debate why now echoing what again my
  • 00:35:47
    colleague said social media is such a
  • 00:35:50
    big part of your lives 4.8 hours exactly
  • 00:35:53
    a day and so what you see see the
  • 00:35:58
    algorithms are so set that everything
  • 00:36:01
    becomes an echo chamber which only
  • 00:36:03
    confirms your
  • 00:36:05
    bias right so instead of looking at
  • 00:36:07
    facts that might be different from what
  • 00:36:10
    you hold to believe you're only looking
  • 00:36:14
    at things that confirm your bias I have
  • 00:36:17
    my biases I'm guilty of it
  • 00:36:21
    myself and the last point of why now is
  • 00:36:24
    this notion of civil engagement and
  • 00:36:26
    civil dialogue
  • 00:36:28
    the course that I teach revolves around
  • 00:36:31
    policy not just University policy but
  • 00:36:34
    students take up local state and
  • 00:36:37
    National
  • 00:36:38
    policy we talk about reproductive Health
  • 00:36:41
    policy Free
  • 00:36:43
    Speech we talk about education policy
  • 00:36:47
    and such as affirmative
  • 00:36:49
    action we talk about hazing policy we
  • 00:36:53
    talk about immigration policy criminal
  • 00:36:55
    justice policies
  • 00:36:58
    and H to engage in that dialogue in a
  • 00:37:01
    way that critically assesses
  • 00:37:05
    policy it confronts and challenges
  • 00:37:08
    harmful
  • 00:37:11
    norms and teaches how to connect
  • 00:37:14
    meaningfully with Society that's the
  • 00:37:17
    Civil engagement civil discourse part
  • 00:37:20
    that I hope difficult dialogues and
  • 00:37:22
    conversations bring up and that students
  • 00:37:24
    have said that they have greater insight
  • 00:37:26
    to
  • 00:37:29
    how to engage in these difficult
  • 00:37:33
    conversations now all those that you see
  • 00:37:36
    all five of them there are all based in
  • 00:37:39
    research that's not anything new to
  • 00:37:41
    research but it's the top five that I
  • 00:37:44
    have students have echoed to me as
  • 00:37:46
    something that has been meaningful them
  • 00:37:48
    a skill set that they're able to take
  • 00:37:50
    and walk away with even outside of
  • 00:37:54
    University the first is this notion of
  • 00:37:56
    self-re
  • 00:37:58
    ction and actually I think a lot of time
  • 00:38:00
    gets spent here in the beginning of my
  • 00:38:03
    course and what I mean by
  • 00:38:06
    self-reflection is an awareness of each
  • 00:38:08
    of our
  • 00:38:10
    identities see each of us walk into any
  • 00:38:13
    space with our
  • 00:38:16
    positionality and our positionality is
  • 00:38:19
    our
  • 00:38:20
    identities we have more than
  • 00:38:23
    one which society has t has deemed
  • 00:38:27
    has power and privilege or those that
  • 00:38:30
    don't so we each of us hold identities
  • 00:38:33
    that hold power in certain situations
  • 00:38:35
    and each of us have identities that
  • 00:38:37
    don't hold power in certain
  • 00:38:39
    situation so it's the combination of all
  • 00:38:42
    of those
  • 00:38:43
    identities power and privilege afforded
  • 00:38:46
    or not
  • 00:38:47
    afforded plus the emotions that go with
  • 00:38:51
    it the understanding of that for each of
  • 00:38:55
    us is the self-reflection
  • 00:38:58
    and walking into a space knowing what
  • 00:39:00
    our identities are and how they impact
  • 00:39:04
    us is the start to an effective
  • 00:39:07
    difficult
  • 00:39:10
    dialogue I mentioned emotion so each of
  • 00:39:12
    our
  • 00:39:14
    identities has emotions behind it
  • 00:39:17
    depending on the power and privilege
  • 00:39:18
    that it holds and so acknowledging this
  • 00:39:20
    emotions are important so for example
  • 00:39:24
    you and I could be having a conversation
  • 00:39:26
    about immigration policy what should be
  • 00:39:27
    happening at the border or not we could
  • 00:39:30
    be getting to heated discussion and we
  • 00:39:32
    think it's about the actual policy at
  • 00:39:35
    play but it's actually about the
  • 00:39:36
    emotions it's about the identities that
  • 00:39:39
    are triggered in the emotions behind it
  • 00:39:42
    so the knowledge of that is an important
  • 00:39:45
    piece to be able to engage in dialogue
  • 00:39:48
    to where it's productive and it's a
  • 00:39:50
    civil discourse the third is active
  • 00:39:54
    listening active listening is listening
  • 00:39:56
    to understand
  • 00:39:58
    versus listening to
  • 00:40:01
    negate along with that comes asking
  • 00:40:03
    meaningful questions meaningful
  • 00:40:05
    questions that seek to understand the
  • 00:40:07
    other person's side their Viewpoint and
  • 00:40:10
    their lived experience could be
  • 00:40:12
    different from ours but worth knowing
  • 00:40:15
    and understanding just the
  • 00:40:18
    same and finally this point of Leaning
  • 00:40:22
    into safe
  • 00:40:23
    discomfort this is something my students
  • 00:40:25
    have taught me so beginning of each
  • 00:40:28
    semester we come up with ground rules on
  • 00:40:31
    how to create Brave spaces in this
  • 00:40:36
    classroom the students I have 30
  • 00:40:39
    students come from all different
  • 00:40:40
    backgrounds don't know each other so how
  • 00:40:42
    do we start engaging in dialogue that we
  • 00:40:45
    know is going
  • 00:40:47
    to create
  • 00:40:49
    vulnerability and so this leaning into
  • 00:40:51
    safe discomfort is creating those ground
  • 00:40:54
    rules of respect
  • 00:40:57
    of if someone has already spoken twice
  • 00:41:01
    offering the floor to someone that
  • 00:41:02
    hasn't
  • 00:41:03
    spoken it's about asking questions with
  • 00:41:08
    meaning and it entails other aspects of
  • 00:41:12
    safety for that classroom there's also
  • 00:41:17
    accountability so these are the five
  • 00:41:19
    elements that students have said of how
  • 00:41:22
    to engage in difficult dialogues
  • 00:41:28
    now what happens when we
  • 00:41:34
    engage Real World engagement real world
  • 00:41:38
    when we're out of the University when
  • 00:41:40
    we're out at our internships and
  • 00:41:43
    jobs the skill sets learned here can be
  • 00:41:48
    transferred you problem solve with
  • 00:41:50
    innovative
  • 00:41:52
    solutions you know when um one of the
  • 00:41:56
    things that we do in the course is we
  • 00:41:58
    write policy papers each student chooses
  • 00:42:02
    one policy that they want to analyze
  • 00:42:05
    through an equity
  • 00:42:07
    lens and I've had students pick the
  • 00:42:10
    policy of gun policy here on
  • 00:42:13
    campus and analyze through an an equity
  • 00:42:19
    lens there's several tools Frameworks
  • 00:42:21
    which are based in evidence and research
  • 00:42:24
    that they choose and then they present
  • 00:42:26
    it to
  • 00:42:29
    utpd and other administrators that have
  • 00:42:32
    power in these positions to create
  • 00:42:34
    policy change so Solutions are
  • 00:42:37
    Innovative when you engage in difficult
  • 00:42:41
    dialogues expanding our
  • 00:42:45
    perspectives and then finally this piece
  • 00:42:49
    on
  • 00:42:51
    empathy I had a student who wrote uh
  • 00:42:56
    very recently uh a paper on a policy
  • 00:43:00
    that they really wanted
  • 00:43:02
    to analyze and it was from Katie ISD
  • 00:43:06
    Katie Independent School District Katie
  • 00:43:08
    is a small town in case you don't know
  • 00:43:11
    outside of
  • 00:43:12
    Houston and over the last couple of
  • 00:43:14
    years Katie had a policy that said
  • 00:43:16
    students had to choose the pronouns that
  • 00:43:19
    they were born
  • 00:43:20
    with and the goal of that policy was to
  • 00:43:23
    create safe learning environment
  • 00:43:28
    now this student took up this
  • 00:43:32
    policy and we go through different
  • 00:43:34
    phases of analysis and initially the
  • 00:43:37
    student was you know this makes sense
  • 00:43:39
    safe learning environment we got to have
  • 00:43:41
    rules and regulations that make
  • 00:43:44
    sense took the analysis a step further
  • 00:43:47
    went through an equity lens and
  • 00:43:49
    intersectional policy analysis framework
  • 00:43:52
    and at the end when he was
  • 00:43:55
    presenting he said he ended up saying
  • 00:43:58
    that the policy no longer fits the goal
  • 00:44:01
    it does not fit the goal of safe
  • 00:44:03
    learning and so he had these other
  • 00:44:05
    recommendations that he offered to KD
  • 00:44:10
    ISD and so the students in the class
  • 00:44:12
    asked him they're like well what
  • 00:44:13
    happened this whole semester because
  • 00:44:15
    they all talked to each other and we're
  • 00:44:16
    in small groups and so forth throughout
  • 00:44:18
    the semester and so they asked them
  • 00:44:19
    they're like well what changed your mind
  • 00:44:22
    you were all about this policy initially
  • 00:44:25
    and he said and he had identified as
  • 00:44:27
    South Asian and he said because if
  • 00:44:29
    somebody asked me to give up my South
  • 00:44:31
    Asian
  • 00:44:33
    identity it wouldn't feel like a safe
  • 00:44:35
    learning
  • 00:44:38
    environment and so the underlying
  • 00:44:42
    thread engaging in difficult dialogues
  • 00:44:45
    and difficult
  • 00:44:48
    conversations is hope that this notion
  • 00:44:51
    of
  • 00:44:52
    empathy the highest form of knowledge is
  • 00:44:56
    empathy
  • 00:44:58
    and the students have taught me over
  • 00:44:59
    time overdoing this
  • 00:45:01
    course that for them that becomes an end
  • 00:45:06
    result and
  • 00:45:08
    so I end with that with engaging in
  • 00:45:11
    difficult dialogues I encourage you if
  • 00:45:13
    you haven't taken a difficult dialogue
  • 00:45:15
    course to do so if you haven't engaged
  • 00:45:17
    in difficult do so civil engagement and
  • 00:45:21
    civil discourse and difficult
  • 00:45:24
    dialogues highest form of knowledge is
  • 00:45:26
    empathy
  • 00:45:28
    thank
  • 00:45:29
    [Applause]
  • 00:45:37
    you thank you Dr VOR
  • 00:45:40
    Gupta
  • 00:45:44
    okay please stay seated and join me in
  • 00:45:46
    giving a round of applause to thank all
  • 00:45:48
    three of our speakers tonight
  • 00:45:57
    and our ASL
  • 00:46:02
    translators we have just enough time for
  • 00:46:05
    one or two questions and let's get
  • 00:46:07
    started with them so here is a question
  • 00:46:09
    that was very was very popular and this
  • 00:46:12
    is for all of you or any of you to
  • 00:46:14
    answer at what point should someone
  • 00:46:17
    withdraw from a difficult
  • 00:46:22
    conversation I I can start with that one
  • 00:46:25
    um in the the slide that said lean into
  • 00:46:28
    safe
  • 00:46:30
    discomfort um the safe part is what feel
  • 00:46:35
    safe for you
  • 00:46:37
    so I prior to this uh research coming
  • 00:46:42
    out on Brave spaces was the notion of
  • 00:46:45
    safe spaces and so you know as we were
  • 00:46:49
    teaching we like we want to create a
  • 00:46:50
    safe space and realize that safety is
  • 00:46:53
    not the same for everyone what might
  • 00:46:55
    feel safe for me may not feel safe for
  • 00:46:58
    you so the transition then the research
  • 00:47:01
    backed this notion of creating Brave
  • 00:47:04
    spaces and so the brave spaces the
  • 00:47:07
    intention behind that is in the moment
  • 00:47:09
    that you do not feel unsafe or you feel
  • 00:47:12
    like an identity that you
  • 00:47:15
    hold is being
  • 00:47:18
    attacked or is no longer you're able to
  • 00:47:22
    uh engage in a dialogue
  • 00:47:25
    that out of another one feel safe for
  • 00:47:28
    you or without being attacked is to then
  • 00:47:31
    withdraw thanks folks if you could just
  • 00:47:33
    stay seated until 8:00 we're gonna we're
  • 00:47:35
    almost done so we have a little time for
  • 00:47:37
    more questions go ahead else want to
  • 00:47:40
    answer another one
  • 00:47:42
    okay next
  • 00:47:44
    question my phone will
  • 00:47:47
    unlock is it okay to create dialogue
  • 00:47:50
    surrounding tough topics even if you
  • 00:47:52
    aren't aware of your own feelings and
  • 00:47:55
    thoughts about them
  • 00:48:00
    happy to start on that one absolutely
  • 00:48:02
    you should absolutely have those sorts
  • 00:48:04
    of conversations that's the way in which
  • 00:48:06
    you can learn diverse views it's a place
  • 00:48:09
    where you can test out your own ideas
  • 00:48:11
    you can even say things like I'm going
  • 00:48:13
    to make an argument here that I'm not
  • 00:48:14
    sure I totally believe and using those
  • 00:48:16
    sorts of conversational moves can help
  • 00:48:19
    you to have a really productive amazing
  • 00:48:21
    conversation and test it out find out
  • 00:48:24
    whether that that you can sustain that
  • 00:48:26
    argument and you believe it by the end
  • 00:48:28
    and then you can say oh no you know what
  • 00:48:30
    what I said earlier I don't believe that
  • 00:48:31
    anymore which is a wonderful experience
  • 00:48:33
    to have and I would just that that's
  • 00:48:35
    what a university is
  • 00:48:37
    for to have such
  • 00:48:41
    conversations well terrific advice well
  • 00:48:44
    once again I want to thank our our
  • 00:48:46
    panelists for being here tonight I want
  • 00:48:48
    to thank all of you for coming tonight
  • 00:48:49
    to the Herbert Family lecture series uh
  • 00:48:52
    have a great rest of the semester and
  • 00:48:54
    good luck in your ggs courses
  • 00:48:57
    good night
标签
  • University Lecture
  • Free Speech
  • Difficult Conversations
  • Social Media
  • Dialogue
  • Democracy
  • Student Engagement
  • Education Policy
  • Intellectual Humility
  • Racism in Health Policies