{"id":2685,"date":"2013-11-26T10:29:00","date_gmt":"2013-11-26T10:29:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/learnhub.aucegypt.edu\/cltnewsletter\/?p=2685"},"modified":"2026-10-18T11:23:34","modified_gmt":"2026-10-18T11:23:34","slug":"conflict-as-a-source-of-learning","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/learnhub.aucegypt.edu\/cltnewsletter\/?p=2685","title":{"rendered":"Conflict as a Source of Learning"},"content":{"rendered":"\n


Originally published on:<\/strong> November 26, 2013<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the start of this semester, a particular issue was on the minds of many faculty members
because of the inevitable (and potentially disruptive) consequence of the country\u2019s political
scene: how would we deal with possible conflicts and disagreements that may arise in the
classroom over differing political viewpoints following the June 30th 2013 uprising?
President Anderson alerted us in her email of August 21st 2013 that \u201cit is important that
we remember that there are as many viewpoints about contemporary issues in Egypt as
there are individuals in our community\u201d and that \u201cwe have a rich tradition of sharing ideas,
expressing opinions and debating positions.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n


As many have argued before me, I contend that conflict and disagreement in the
classroom are important catalysts in preparing our students to become \u201ccritical citizens\u201d
and constructive participants in the democratic process, an important learning outcome
which we have endorsed in several of our recent newsletters (Bali, 2013; Glavanis, 2013).
Last year, Tomorrow\u2019s Professor<\/em>, a Stanford University publication, reprinted a chapter
entitled \u201cConflict as a Constructive Curricular Strategy\u201d from David Donahue\u2019s (2011)
book Democratic Dilemmas of Teaching Service-Learning: Curricular Strategies for Success<\/em>111<\/a><\/sup>. In it, he argues that conflict can
\u2026be framed as an opportunity to engage with others, examine new ideas and
perspectives, and challenge one’s own assumptions, even if that is not always the
approach taken by politicians, organizers, bloggers, and opinion writers, where
winning and shouting louder than others can take precedence over consideration
and open-mindedness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Donahue argues that conflict in the classroom is inevitable and even contends that the
lack of it (intentional or not) may reflect a lack of interaction and, more importantly, of
learning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He actually sees \u201cdisagreement and disequilibrium and contention and conflict in the
classroom\u201d as valuable because they give us a chance to expose our students to the
dynamics of the democratic process and to model how best to deal with it. So, in a nutshell, not only should we not shy away from conflict, we should intentionally introduce it within any academic field, and not restrict it to those that deal with political issues. For example, disagreements may result over the findings of particular experimental studies in scientific or medical research. Opposing interpretations of a historical or current event (conspiracy theories being my favorite) can lead to strong differences of opinion, as would conflicting analyses of social issues or literary pieces.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Using controversial issues as a strategy is nothing new. Most faculty (especially those who
teach first and second year students) know that to get their students to engage in face-to-
face (or online) discussions or debates, they should choose examples that are provocative
or at least that deal with conflicting points of view.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In previous New Chalk Talk articles (2007), I have argued that most students entering
AUC come from a culture where working hard, memorizing information and relying on
\u201cauthority\u201d to guide them through their education is expected to be rewarded with
success. They know the rules of the game and what to expect if they stick to them. They
then come to a place where (if we do it properly) they are suddenly confronted with rules
that have shifted considerably and where the emphasis on thinking \u201ccritically\u201d and
\u201cindependently\u201d may catch them unprepared.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We should therefore not be surprised when these students feel uncomfortable when
confronted with ideas or perspectives that challenge their cherished beliefs and\/or their
sense of identity. When prodded to search for different perspectives, the realization that
several \u201cauthorities\u201d are in conflict adds to the uneasiness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition to developing critical thinking skills and the acquisition of knowledge relevant
to their studies and careers, how can we develop attitudes and values such as tolerance
and respect for diversity, peaceful conflict management, promotion and respect for Human
Rights, gender equality, social justice and inclusiveness?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is a long and challenging list, but if we accept Donahue\u2019s premise that \u201cconflict is
not only inevitable\u201d but \u201ccan be a prime opportunity for learning\u201d, how can we use it as
an opportunity for growth and transformation for our students, and what strategies could
we use that would help? How can we model how to respond to conflict?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kloss (1994), who has found Perry\u2019s scheme of intellectual development very helpful, has
devised pedagogical strategies (which include using conflict and disagreement) to help
university students become critical thinkers. For students who think in dualistic ways, his
recommendations include the following:<\/p>\n\n\n\n