One significant obstacle in teaching is the current level of political polarization which can make it difficult to build an open and robust in-depth classroom conversation space that at the same time protects the identity and dignity of each participant.
Based on an application of the Jesuit concept of cura personalis, we have designed a pedagogical method tested during three semesters of a seminar cross listed in the Georgetown University government department and law school: “Religion, Morality and Contested Claims for Justice.”
The course takes on hot-button issues that tend to be polarizing, ranging from immigration, the environment and economic justice, to bioethics questions (abortion, euthanasia, contraception), concluding with discussion of definitions of marriage and discrimination. Readings embrace a full range of political, religious and social perspectives, so that the students encounter different intellectual and cultural views both in their preparation for class and in the class discussions. The course is paced so that the most difficult questions are addressed with the buildup of increasing levels of trust.
Through a combination of brief papers, consistent personal feedback, guidance regarding how to dialogue on difficult questions, attention each student in their development of rhetorical skills, empathy and emotional intelligence, as well as efforts to model political and religious difference and disagreement in our team-teaching, we have managed to facilitate an open conversation space across profound difference, in which, as one of our students put it, “we all know that this is not a battleground.”
This presentation will include an explanation of our methods and initial reflections on how they might be applied to others areas of the curriculum; and how the methods might be scaled up beyond a fairly small (15-20 students) seminar format.
