Argue with your peers

Photo courtesy of Laura Trujillo-Jenks from FacultyFocus

College classrooms seem to be quieter than they used to be. The same few students participate in discussions, and there’s an obvious lack of open discourse. The cause of this phenomenon is a looming specter: the fear of judgment. The classroom environment should be treated differently than a social environment; debating different opinions, whether widely accepted or not, is a key feature of education that has been lost in the sea of prudence.

Many students claim they are fearful of voicing their honest opinions for fear of being targeted or labeled, which they believe may lead to ostracization outside of an educational environment. Professors encourage students to participate and engage in debates, but they seem to forget that the classroom is linked to our social lives.

In a poll conducted by the New York Times, participants were asked, “Over the past year, have you held your tongue because you were concerned about retaliation or harsh criticism?” Of participants, 55% answered yes. Out of the hundred 18 to 34-year-olds asked, 61 answered yes. So, individuals of college age are more likely to hold back out of concern for themselves. 

This is not a problem that is specific to a select demographic. Fifty-two of the 100 Democrats polled by the NYT answered yes to the question, as well as 58 out of 100 Republicans. Since more than half of the people answered yes, it is evident that there is a serious problem at hand.

Hofstra’s Faculty Policy Series #12 states, “The university, which wishes to set an example of open-minded inquiry in its classrooms will defeat its purpose if it denies the same right of inquiry to its students outside the classroom. The university should protect the student from, and resist itself, any pressures from within or without that would prevent or thwart freedom of inquiry.”

Professors are encouraged to promote free thinking and “are obliged to protect [the] rights to free expression.” Yet students don’t have the same level of responsibility placed on them. It is a given that any form of hate speech or that which incites violence should be prohibited on campus, and the community ought to actively work to prevent such an occurrence. However, professors and students should be working much harder to encourage open debate, even on subjects that are not widely accepted.

If a controversial topic like the abolition of the police arises, there is usually one commonly held belief that is stated, discussed for a while and then neatly wrapped up. But Hofstra students aren’t in college to be praised for echoing what they’ve been told. 

Students are here to become individuals who will effectively work in the real world, and to do so they have to be able to hear ideas that they don’t agree with. Hearing an opinion that contradicts one’s commonly held beliefs is extremely beneficial to problem-solving and allows one to develop the skills required for productive workplace conversations.

The term “devil’s advocate” gets tossed around when discussing open debate in classrooms. It seems to be a cop-out used to freely speak one’s mind without the fear of being judged for an opinion. If Hofstra’s faculty prides themselves on freedom of expression, they should be encouraging us to confidently state our opinions without saying, “I’m just playing devil’s advocate.”

A professor of mine, who strongly encourages debates, was reminiscing about his time spent in Europe, where he observed college students having heated debates in class and the same students who were yelling at each other walking out together, smiling and discussing weekend plans. There’s a line that shouldn’t be crossed, like making personal attacks or using hateful language that makes other students uncomfortable. 

Everyone deserves to feel at ease in their classrooms, and this can still happen without censoring opinions that one might not agree with.

Debating and troubleshooting arguments are what strengthens them. Hearing counterpoints that teach one to strengthen their argument, or potentially change their mind, is a vital life skill that can be easily obtained if Hofstra allows it. Then, once a student leaves the classroom, there shouldn’t be any animosity between themselves and their peers based on what was discussed in the allotted class time.