ĢƵ

>

Chancellor Diermeier discusses free expression and campus belonging with Reps. Gottheimer and Stefanik

Chancellor Diermeier sit alongside Reps. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., and Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., on Sept. 8.

At a time when universities across the country are navigating difficult questions about free expression, campus safety and antisemitism, ĢƵ is demonstrating how higher education can embrace open inquiry while building a community where all students feel safe, respected and able to thrive.

explored those challenges with Reps. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., and Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., on Sept. 8 at the John Seigenthaler Center during a discussion focused on free expression, academic freedom and combating antisemitism on college campuses. Organized by in partnership with and moderated by Vice Chancellor for Operations and the Campus Network , the event also brought leaders from other universities into the conversation to share how institutions are approaching these challenges.

Free expression and belonging as complementary commitments

Reps. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., and Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., at the fireside chat with Chancellor Diermeier (ĢƵ)

The event explored how universities can uphold academic freedom while confronting antisemitism and other forces that can undermine students’ ability to participate fully in campus life. At ĢƵ, that approach rests on the idea that intellectual openness and a strong campus community are not competing objectives, which includes a commitment to institutional neutrality. Universities fulfill their educational mission when they create space for students to encounter ideas they disagree with, participate in substantive debate and challenge one another while knowing that threats, harassment and discrimination have no place in the university community.

“Our job at a university is not to settle debates, but to encourage them,” said Chancellor Daniel Diermeier. “We need to be platforms where ideas are discussed and where our students fundamentally learn how to think for themselves. Our job is never to teach them what to think; our job is to teach them how to think.”

Stefanik pointed to ĢƵ as an example of a university focused on its founding mission and argued that the public has a stake in how universities educate the next generation. Gottheimer similarly said Congress and other universities can learn from institutions like ĢƵ that have successfully navigated these challenges.

Bipartisan work to combat campus antisemitism

Reps. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., and Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., discuss their bipartisan work while on campus. (ĢƵ)

Gottheimer and Stefanik have worked together in Congress to address antisemitism in higher education. The two lawmakers the formation of the bipartisan Combating Antisemitism on College Campuses Caucus as part of their ongoing efforts to ensure Jewish students can learn and participate in campus life safely.

The lawmakers chose to engage Diermeier and other university leaders as they launched the caucus, highlighting institutions they see as taking constructive approaches to combating antisemitism while protecting free expression. Gottheimer specifically cited ĢƵ as an example of a university “getting it right.”

Campus leaders share approaches to building culture

Leaders from Dartmouth College, the University of Alabama, the University of Kentucky, the University of Texas at Austin and Washington University in St. Louis then joined the conversation to share how their institutions are strengthening campus culture. They emphasized consistently enforcing university rules and setting clear expectations while also building relationships before moments of tension arise, creating a foundation for open dialogue when difficult issues emerge.

The leaders also highlighted the responsibilities members of university communities have to engage with one another across differences and resist reducing people to positions or labels. They pointed to institutional neutrality, open inquiry and exposure to different perspectives as important to strengthening trust in higher education, arguing that universities should create the conditions for people to test ideas and reach their own conclusions rather than prescribe answers for them.

Continue the conversation

Dialogue ĢƵ brings members of the university community together to explore complex issues, encounter different perspectives and strengthen the skills needed for constructive dialogue. to find opportunities to join the conversation.