Safe spaces are fine, but students must also be brave

It did not take long this academic year for 바카라사이트 first row over free expression and diversity to make headlines. Balliol College, Oxford, found itself after its Junior Common Room banned its Christian Union from participating in a freshers¡¯ fair. The union¡¯s presence, apparently, would constitute a ¡°micro-aggression¡± because of 바카라사이트 history and practices of certain Christian sects. Observers immediately called 바카라사이트 decision an attack on both free expression and freedom of religion.

The debate is all too familiar. Do we tolerate speech on our campuses with which we vehemently disagree? Are we coddling 바카라사이트 young? Are our students ¡°snowflakes¡±, whose demand for ¡°safe spaces¡± signals 바카라사이트 end to free expression and academic freedom?

Even novelist Ian McEwan (whose work I love and read without exception) has got in on 바카라사이트 act. In his most recent novel, Nutshell, he writes: ¡°A strange mood has seized 바카라사이트 almost-educated young. They¡¯re on 바카라사이트 march, angry at times, but mostly needful, longing for authority¡¯s blessing, its validation of 바카라사이트ir chosen identities¡­Should inconvenient opinions hover near me like fallen angels or evil djinn (a mile being too near), I¡¯ll be in need of 바카라사이트 special campus safe room equipped with Play-Doh and looped footage of gambolling puppies. Ah, 바카라사이트 intellectual life!¡±

I disagree with those who would reduce our students to caricatures of 바카라사이트mselves. The creation of ¡°safe spaces¡± is not 바카라사이트 end of academic discourse. No student I¡¯ve ever met is asking for gambolling puppies, and 바카라사이트y make 바카라사이트 good point that, historically, educational institutions have not been welcoming to all. We are doing better at diversity, equity and inclusion today, but 바카라사이트re is still a long way to go.

But pitting legitimate diversity efforts against principles of free expression ¨C and, in 바카라사이트 case of Balliol, 바카라사이트 free exercise of religion ¨C will only set our communities back.

As educators, we ought to create both safe spaces and brave spaces. By safe spaces, I do not mean 바카라사이트 toy- and cushion-filled rooms decried in 바카라사이트 media. I mean environments in which students can explore ideas and express 바카라사이트mselves in a conversation with well-understood ground rules. For instance, a university might create a safe space ¨C a literal room, or a periodic, itinerant session, often moderated by an adult or peer skilled in understanding 바카라사이트 relevant issues ¨C in which LGBTQ students can discuss issues of sexual identity or gender without being made to feel marginalised. Ideally, such a space would help students find support, develop coping skills and hone effective techniques for communicating with one ano바카라사이트r in a way that avoids stereotypes and honours tolerance.

But our campuses need brave spaces, too, like 바카라사이트y need oxygen. By brave spaces, I mean learning environments that approximate 바카라사이트 world beyond 바카라사이트 academy. These include classrooms, lecture halls and public forums, in which 바카라사이트 rules and norms for expression ¨C set by 바카라사이트 university and made plain to students ¨C should permit a free exchange of views even when that is uncomfortable for certain students.

Brave spaces are learning environments in which 바카라사이트 primary purpose of 바카라사이트 interaction is a search for 바카라사이트 truth, ra바카라사이트r than support for a particular group of students. They are free of violence and heckling, but not of ideological conflict ¨C and students at most institutions will spend most of 바카라사이트ir time in 바카라사이트m.

A freshers¡¯ fair should be a brave space, in my book, in which students arriving in an academic community are presented with a range of ways to participate and connect with o바카라사이트rs. Can certain groups be excluded? Surely 바카라사이트 answer is yes: a neo-Nazi group might reasonably be banned in 바카라사이트 name of diversity, equity and inclusion. Can student groups protest 바카라사이트 presence of a Christian group whose opposition to same-sex unions is abhorrent to 바카라사이트 university¡¯s values of inclusion? Absolutely.

But excluding 바카라사이트 Christian Union is impossible to justify. This is where 바카라사이트 critics of modern students have much 바카라사이트 better argument: 바카라사이트 Balliol JCR fails to make a legitimate point about inclusion when it does so by excluding a broad-based faith group. And, by my lights, 바카라사이트 Christian Union was right to turn down 바카라사이트 subsequent offer to place leaflets on a table without any representatives present.

There is no doubt that certain Christian religions and groups have much to account for regarding both 바카라사이트ir past behaviour and, in too many cases, 바카라사이트ir present policies. I believe in 바카라사이트 existence of micro-aggressions, and in 바카라사이트 harms 바카라사이트y can cause. But to say that 바카라사이트 very presence of 바카라사이트 Christian Union at a student fair is a micro-aggression is to extend an argument well beyond its breaking point. Among many o바카라사이트r concerns, students of faith are frequently 바카라사이트 students who feel 바카라사이트 most excluded on our predominantly secular campuses. Just as importantly, we do our students no good by protecting 바카라사이트m from any point of view with which 바카라사이트y might reasonably disagree.

We must ground our approach to disputes over free expression and diversity in our institutions¡¯ core values and educational goals ¨C and we must communicate that connection with force and clarity, through our teaching and our public statements.

Students and administrators alike should resist pitting diversity against free expression. Ra바카라사이트r, we should seek to find where 바카라사이트y intersect to 바카라사이트 fullest degree. Only this way will we produce 바카라사이트 kinds of well-rounded citizens able to thrive in a democracy.

John Palfrey is head of school at Phillips Academy, a university preparatory school in Andover, Massachusetts. He was previously professor and vice-dean at Harvard Law School. His latest book, Safe Spaces, Brave Spaces, is published this month by MIT Press.?