Meeting Higher Education's Moment
In a time when public confidence in higher education is being tested, forward-thinking institutions are strengthening their civic commitment through cultures of constructive dialogue. Our report showcases universities honoring their societal covenant by preparing students students to engage thoughtfully across differences.
While each institution's journey toward constructive dialogue culture is uniquely shaped by its context, our research reveals three common catalysts that drive successful initiatives:
When I look at the problems facing our world right now and the skills required of the responsible leaders we are graduating, I think, 'If not us, then who?' I feel a moral obligation to make sure our students are ready to contribute to deeper understanding and meaningful solutions.
Spotlight
Claremont McKenna College
Claremont, CA | Four-Year Private | 1,388 Undergraduates
A period of significant campus unrest spurred the focus on constructive dialogue at Claremont McKenna College. The initiative started around 2016 after a tumultuous period where students of color felt their voices were not heard, leading to protests and the resignation of the dean of students. There were also concerns about upholding diversity of political viewpoints on campus after a controversial speaker’s event led to protests and suspensions. The president wanted to show how diversity and free expression could coexist positively, rather than capitulating to alarmist narratives. In response to these challenges, the institution developed the Open Academy, built on three interdependent pillars: freedom of expression (which encompasses academic freedom), viewpoint diversity, and constructive dialogue. The institution was intentional and explicit in aligning these pillars with the university’s diversity strategy and core educational mission of preparing students for thoughtful, productive lives and responsible leadership.
Constructive Dialogue Promotes Higher Education's Mission
Our research uncovered four areas where universities are honoring the essential commitments in their pact with society—and constructive dialogue serves as a powerful tool for delivering on each. By creating spaces where diverse perspectives can be explored with intellectual rigor and mutual respect, institutions strengthen academic inquiry, build campus cohesion, prepare students for democratic citizenship, and develop graduates with the collaboration skills employers increasingly demand. The universities making progress in this moment are those recognizing constructive dialogue not as an end itself, but as a versatile tool that strengthens their fundamental missions.
Pillars of a Culture of Constructive Dialogue
For constructive dialogue to flourish on campus, institutions must intentionally build four foundational pillars:
We started this about five years ago, before a lot of initiatives. We studied programs that had been around for twenty to thirty years. We were really impressed, and to some extent intimidated by, the quality of work that was being done. But one of the things we found was that a lot of places did one or two things really well. They did classroom stuff really well or they engaged with alums really well, or they had really good campus programs or community programs, and very few of them did all of the above. We really tried to make our program very holistic, integrated, and comprehensive to get to a scale where the efforts reinforced one another.
Finding Your Starting Point
While there's no singular path to building a vibrant campus speech culture, our research identifies four practical entry points that have proven successful. The approach institutions choose should reflect their institutional context, but all successful initiatives share common elements: they're collaborative processes involving stakeholders across campus, they balance formal structures with informal cultural change, and they're championed by leaders who model the engagement they hope to foster.
Spotlight
University of South Florida
Tampa, FL | Four-Year Public | 38,043 Undergraduates
Caitlyn Bennett, a conservative commentator, drew heated, confrontational crowds during her first speaking event at the University of South Florida during the 2020 election cycle. However, her more recent return became a case study in how clear policies and institutional trust can shape campus dialogue. This time, Bennett proactively contacted campus police, triggering the institution’s Event Support Team protocol. This preemptive engagement allowed staff to coordinate effectively, ensuring the event unfolded without unnecessary friction. Rather than positioning the university as a reactive enforcer, this process showed that free expression policies were predictable, fairly applied, and actively followed by all parties.
Notably, Bennett’s decision to return—and her confidence that her event would proceed—underscored the university’s credibility in upholding its commitments. In an era where speakers on all sides often anticipate hostility, her willingness to engage with campus systems signaled that institutional policies were not only enforced, but also trusted. A well-functioning system ensures smoother interactions with external speakers and normalizes free expression events as a structured, predictable part of campus life rather than an ad hoc challenge to be managed.
Scalability is difficult, but really matters. You can have wonderful programs that the political science students participate in, but if nobody else is participating, it’s not going to make a big difference.
Cultivating a Constructive Dialogue Culture That Endures
The most successful dialogue initiatives move beyond isolated programs to become embedded throughout campus life—from admissions essays to residence halls, from orientation activities to trustee meetings. By weaving the practices represented in this research into institutional DNA universities build resilience that withstands leadership transitions, budget fluctuations, and inevitable campus tensions.
Spotlight
University of Chicago
Chicago, IL | Four-Year Private | 7,470 Undergraduates
At the core of the University of Chicago's Forum is a Student Advisory Board with representatives from every division and college across campus—including multiple board chairs from the undergraduate college and two representatives from the University of Chicago Booth School of Business. The structure creates a multi-tiered leadership network that features undergraduate and graduate students. This intentional mixing of undergraduate and graduate students creates valuable mentorship opportunities, brings diverse perspectives to the table, and raises the level of discourse and professionalism.
“In less than this year, this approach has resulted in varied, deep, and well-attended student-led events,” reflects one Forum leader. The success of this distributed leadership model is particularly effective in a decentralized university environment, where students don't just participate in programming but actively create it, share best practices, and continuously innovate in ways that resonate with their peers.
Explore Other Resources
Find a free resource, register for professional development, or read original research to gain actionable insights for containing election-related campus conflict and transforming discourse.
Explore Our Campus-Wide Offerings
We take a systems change approach to help you transform your campus into a learning environment that supports free expression, inclusion, and belonging.
