Difficult dialogues can occur in any classroom, in any discipline, at any moment, and as students, we feel it is essential that we and our instructors are equipped to proactively navigate them. Some course content might, for example, provoke unexpected reactions or comments, which may be disruptive to other students in the room and work against the sense of community in the course. Each student and instructor has their own intersectional social identities, including their race, gender identity, and socioeconomic background, which impact our daily experiences, our sense of self, how we interpret information, and how we communicate. Although the instructor leads the course, all participants can share responsibility for maintaining critical awareness of these factors and cultivating a thoughtful classroom community that allows difficult dialogues to occur. It is our intention through this resource to provide specific strategies for dealing with difficult dialogues, whether beforehand, in the moment, or later, that lead to empowered, inclusive, and engaged learning.

Establishing Community Guidelines

Community guidelines can be tailored to any specific course and establish a foundation for mutual respect, work ethic, and collaboration in the classroom. This strategy creates clear and concise ways for students to act and speak respectfully with instructors and their fellow peers, while remaining mindful of both the instructor’s and students’ identities and experiences. Instructors can choose a process for creating guidelines tailored to students’ needs. Inviting students to co-create guidelines with the instructor can establish a pathway to shared responsibility and mutual understanding of what is expected of everyone within the course/classroom.

• Example of a community guideline: 
  “Actively listen to what others are sharing and contributing. Try your best to wait until they are finished and take a pause to fully understand.”

Providing Content Warnings

Providing written or verbal warnings prepares students for potentially disturbing course content, allowing students the agency to engage with their own well-being in mind. Students with trauma can then choose the best way for them to proceed while interacting with potentially triggering content. This validates students’ varying needs and past experiences, while promoting an environment that helps them learn more effectively. Instructors should avoid requiring a student to break anonymity to inform the instructor of the student’s needs; instructors can include warnings on their syllabus, verbally in class, or offer an anonymous survey which asks students to list topics they prefer warnings for (Centre for Teaching Excellence, University of Waterloo, 2024).  

• Example of preliminary statement (adapted from Inclusive Teaching, University of Michigan, n.d.): “Read: Your Blues Ain’t Like Mine, chapters 5-9 
  Tags: racism, racist slurs, racial violence (graphic scenes pgs. 82-96)”
• Examples of common topics which may warrant content warnings (adapted from Inclusive Teaching, University of Michigan, n.d.): 
  Hateful and/or derogatory language directed at any demographic or group; sexual assault; abuse; violence; death; self-harm and suicide; animal cruelty; body image; racism; sexism/misogyny; classism; transphobia; homophobia. 

Importantly, this is not a comprehensive list of topics that may warrant content warnings, as each student may be affected by content differently; new topics should be added as needed. 

Modeling through Calling In vs Out

Through modeling, an instructor demonstrates how they want conversation to be formatted, especially when discussing difficult content. When asking questions to their class, for example, they can provide their own answer that replicates the format they want students to take when giving their own answers. Modeling can also be practiced through a concept known as “calling in.” Calling in respectfully holds a participant accountable when they have said something problematic, especially if the harm they have caused was unintentional. This conversational tool rejects the public humiliation often associated with “calling out” and invites participants to express their concerns without attacking (Ross, 2019). This practice can be student or instructor-led and does not excuse the behavior. It is handled graciously, through considering the participant’s perspective and unknown biases, locating the root of their original thought pattern, and helping them to learn and do better moving forward.  

• Examples of calling in statements:  
  “Can you tell me more of what you mean by ____?” 
  “What I’m hearing is ____. Is that right?” If the person persists, add: “I wonder if we can talk about why that is (harmful, problematic, offensive, etc.).”

Debriefing on the Dialogue to Move Forward

At the end of a difficult dialogue, or particularly challenging class session, students and instructors can benefit from debriefing (OPRE, 2022). Debriefing serves as a final component of scaffolding, which breaks down complex tasks into smaller components to empower the learner to achieve a larger goal (Center for Teaching, University of Iowa, 2023). In a debriefing discussion, the instructor and students can collaboratively summarize what occurred, share what they learned, and reflect on their feelings. It allows all participants to consider how their unique identities and experiences have informed their reactions and offers a chance for them to decompress and acknowledge the impact on the classroom community.  

• Examples of debriefing prompts: 
  “Just a moment ago, we discussed ____. What thoughts or questions do you have?” 
  “I want to talk about what we learned from this conversation. What resonated with you?”  

Debriefing can also be exercised through an instructor-led and timed free-writing activity, followed by voluntary sharing, or by using anonymous exit tickets.

Conclusion

In any situation that raises a difficult dialogue, instructors should consider their own identity and role, as well as the variety of experiences students in their class are having. These conversations are difficult for all classroom participants, and not knowing what to do in the moment is a common experience for everyone involved. As students, we value an instructor’s commitment and purposeful intentionality to address the situation with care.  

References 

Center for Teaching, University of Iowa. (2023, October 17). Scaffolding. Exploring and Applying Universal Design for Learning. https://pressbooks.uiowa.edu/udl/chapter/scaffolding/. 

Centre for Teaching Excellence, University of Waterloo. (2024, February 13). Content warnings. https://uwaterloo.ca/centre-for-teaching-excellence/catalogs/tip-sheets/content-warnings#:~:text=Proponents%20of%20content%20warnings%20contend,trauma%20in%20an%20academic%20context. 

Inclusive Teaching, University of Michigan. An Introduction to Content Warnings and Trigger Warnings. (n.d.). https://sites.lsa.umich.edu/inclusive-teaching-sandbox/wp-content/uploads/sites/853/2021/02/An-Introduction-to-Content-Warnings-and-Trigger-Warnings-Draft.pdf. 

OPRE. (2022). Tip Sheet Strategies for Debriefing in the Classroom. In Strategies for Debriefing in the Classroom. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/opre/Debriefing-Tip-Sheet.pdf. 

Ross, L. J. (2019). Speaking up without tearing down. Teaching Tolerance, 61, 19-22.