Running head: DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOGUES

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOGUES

Loyola University Chicago
Soumya Mathew & Antoaneta Topalova

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOUGES

Research Question: How does identity, if at all, impact social justice educators in the way they
prepare for intergroup dialogues and how they are perceived during facilitation?
This research is being conducted by Soumya Mathew and Antoaneta Topalova. Soumya
identifies as a temporarily able-bodied, Christian, heterosexual woman of color. Antoaneta
identifies as a temporarily able-bodied, Christian, heterosexual, White woman. In order for
social justice educators to facilitate meaningful and impactful intergroup dialogues, it is
imperative for them to understand the implications if their own identities. These implications
impact the way a social justice educator prepares for dialogues and it impacts the way they are
perceived during facilitations. Zuniga (2003) defined intergroup dialogue, as a "face-to-face
facilitated conversation between members of two or more social identity groups that strives to
create new levels of understanding, relating, and actions" (p. 9). This quote highlights the
magnitude of how identity exploration is a necessary foundation before being able to create a
space of new understandings around oppression, power and privilege. This understanding can
lead to praxis for positive change. To further support our understanding of the importance of
recognizing our identities as future social justice educators, an interview was conducted with
Sadika Sulaiman Hara, director of Student Diversity and Multicultural Affairs (SDMA) at
Loyola University Chicago (LUC). Sadika, who identifies as a heterosexual, woman of color,
was able to frame her experience to support our understanding of being a social justice educator
and our own identity exploration.
What is a Dialogue?
The concept of having a dialogue developed centuries ago. Socrates was one of the first
philosophers to talk about the value of dialogue and why it should exist (Ackerman, 1989).
Socrates connected the idea dialogue to self-discovery and morality. In his article, Ackerman

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOUGES

(1989) described how other peoples beliefs and morals impact our own beliefs and morals.
Sadika supported Socrates thoughts and agreed that social justice dialogues started much earlier
than in a classroom setting. Sadika explained her belief in Colleges and Universities
understanding the importance of these dialogues and thus bringing it into the classroom. She also
pointed out how today, institutions conduct research on dialogues around diversity and social
justice (S. Hara, personal communication, 11/08/2013). This research shows the positive impact
on students as well as the negative impact on facilitators of color. As the director of SDMA,
Sadika encourages the development and growth of dialogues inside and outside of the classroom.
History of Facilitating Social Justice Dialogues:
Social justice dialogues were happening throughout history, especially during pivotal
moments such as womens suffrage, the civil rights movement, Jim Crow laws and other social
justice movements. Kelly (2005) noted, Antiracism Education is a relatively new term in higher
education, yet it has roots in the academy as far back as the 1920s (p. 6). People were already
having these conversations and these issues were always being brought up amongst students and
activists. Now, we have space to intentionally talk about these issues and use these issues as a
way to bring knowledge, skills and awareness to the social construction of our society. These
dialogues also allow us with the knowledge to identify our own privileges and identities. Prior to
these dialogues occurring within an educational environment, there was a lot of violence. Kelly
(2005) explained that
The intergroup education movement during the 1940s and 1950s responded to race riots
and violent conflicts that occurred in the nations cities in the early 1940s. In attempt to
alleviate tensions between racial groups, Intergroup Education aimed to reduce prejudice,

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOUGES

to develop interracial understanding, and to foster a shared national American Culture. (p.
6)
As time passed, educators started to become more aware of their roles in fostering
nonviolent interactions within different minority groups. Thus, today higher education has come
to understand that issues are still prevalent and higher education professionals need find ways to
peacefully address these issues. Social justice dialogues are rooted in the desire to bring
awareness to oppressed and marginalized groups by allowing participants to understand their
own privileged and targeted identities.
Sadika explained that diversity education, and departments like SDMA are usually created
because of an incident that took place on campus. Consequently, as an attempt to remedy the
incident, campuses create offices and departments to bring awareness of the issue to their
campus community. Refreshingly, Sadika explained that SDMA was not derived from a
negative incident. Rather, Loyolas intention for creating this office was based off of the Jesuit
values, and the university mission to better serve the underrepresented student populations on
campus (S. Hara, personal communication, 11/08/2013).
While researching the history of social justice dialogues, it is also very important to
investigate who initially facilitated social justice dialogues and who was initially being taught
through these dialogues. Watts (2007) article on the Privileged Identity Exploration model and
facilitation on diversity topics highlighted some of the history pertaining to the lack of minority
professors in higher education. Watts disclosed that as an African American female, she
experienced resistance from students while facilitating a social justice course. In conducting her
own research, Watt (2007) found that it is challenging for students to differentiate between their
own personal views of the professor and the content of the material being presented. This

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOUGES

resulted in students producing lower evaluation scores for professors of color and professors who
identify as gay/lesbian, or female. The author also disclosed her findings on class facilitation for
homogeneous groups belonging to dominant cultures. In their academic past, these students
have not been exposed to a minority professor and therefore, resistance and dissonance occurred.
To expand this notion of resistance, Gayles and Kelly (2010) described in their research that
resistance stemmed from four factors: (1) students who felt uncomfortable in dialog, (2) the
sentiment that too much emphasis is placed on race, (3) students of color put in the role of racial
spokesperson and, (4) the lack of openness in dialogs (p. 79).
Brief Overview of SDMA : Goals and Objectives
Multicultural Affairs started at LUC in the 1980s, and was originally housed under the
assistant dean. In the 1990s, the department was created as a space dedicated to student
diversity and multicultural affairs. Sadika explained that the goals of SDMA are mutli-layered
and that they have changed over time. Generally, the goals have consisted of creating support
systems and access for underrepresented students, particularly students of color, first generation
students, low income students and LGBT students (S. Hara, personal communication,
11/08/2013).
SDMA engages in creating programs and initiatives that will develop a skill-set aimed at
fostering social justice awareness, cultural competency, and ally development (Student
Diversity & Multicultural Affairs). SDMA aims to help students understand and articulate their
own ideas and as well as helping them demonstrate behaviors that compliment team work,
critical thought, and communications skills (S. Hara, personal communication, 11/08/2013) in
order to work with a diverse society. The core values of the department are furthered by our
commitment to the following methodologies: scholarship and critical analysis, fellowship and

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOUGES

teamwork, progressive action toward social justice, accountability, sustainability, self-awareness

and empowerment for others and self (Student Diversity & Multicultural Affairs).
Impact on Context of Issue: Who bore the costs and who benefitted?
Social justice dialogues would not be an impactful experience without the intentional
work of the facilitators. The work of Henry, Roberts, Dorn, Exum, and Keller (2007) provided
sufficient anecdotes on personal stories of faculty who bore the costs of facilitating a dialogue on
diversity/social justice. The case of professor Stephens is one where, the faculty member bore
the costs of teaching a diversity graduate course to a predominantly White class. After
experiencing resistance and conflict from a White male student, Dr. Stephens attempted to
accommodate the student. The issue escalated and involved other professors. Dr. Stephens
negotiated her own policies and practices in hopes to appease this student and make them feel
comfortable. These attempts to accommodate went unnoticed and underappreciated. At the end
of the semester Professor Stephens was accused by the student of harassment and grading him
unfairly. Mr. Peterson, the student in this case, reached out to the Provost's Office and the
President's Office requesting for a campus police officer to be present in class, because he felt
threatened by the environment.
Subsequently, Dr. Stephens left the institution due to the lack of support she received.
Looking at this from a social justice lens, the White male student won by benefitting from the
situation, while the African-American female professor bore the costs by leaving the institution.
Sadika shared her observations on who bore the costs from social justice dialogues. She
disclosed that during her facilitations, students of color are always asked to speak on the behalf
of people from their own group. Sadika also challenged the notion of this and whether it was
appropriate to ask minorities to always share their experiences (S. Hara, personal

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOUGES

communication, 11/08/2013). Gayles and Kelly (2010) found in their research that people of
color often felt that, because they were the only people of color in their classes, they felt
targeted and indicated that during discussions of diversity in class they felt pressured to be the
spokesperson for all minority students of color (pp. 77-78).
Manifestation of costs and benefits of social justice education in higher education today:
Today, many student affairs professionals are dedicated to social justice education, and
many higher education masters programs are preparing future professionals to be multiculturally
competent. Kelly (2005) explained that
Being committed to Antiracism Education is a value held by many educators, particularly
those in student affairs who follow professional guidelines and priorities that include
valuing diversity, supporting the whole student in their learning, acting to benefit others
and creating welcoming and inclusive environments (p. 5).
When talking about diversity education courses, Perry, Moore, Edwards, Acosta and
Freys (2009) research study indicated how according to the American Association of Colleges
and Universities, 63% of institutions have incorporated, or will soon create, a diversity education
course in their curriculum. The Perry et al. (2009) research article also happened to mention how
a disproportionate number of instructors of color are engaged in teaching diversity courses in
higher education (Perry et al., 2009, p. 81). The instructors of color, who participated in Perry
et al.s (2009) study, disclosed experiencing student resistance and credibility questioning, to
name a few, while teaching diversity education courses at a predominantly white college or
university.
As a college professor, Zuniga (2003) encourages students to participate in intergroup
dialogues by sharing their personal experiences related to race, gender, sex, socio economic

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOUGES

status, religious affiliation, etc. The objective of these dialogues is for students to learn from one
another and actively listen to others experiences and engage with them in a meaningful
dialogue. The results of the dialogues build social awareness and teach college students about
identities and groups different from their own. Through engaged participation the students also
develop awareness on discrimination, causes of racial tensions, their critical thinking capacity
increases and most importantly enhancement of comfort dealing with diversity (Zuniga, 2003,
p. 15).
Bell and Griffin (2007) addressed the topic of social justice courses in higher education
specifically through course design. The authors work focused on the preparation, design and
function of a social justice course and the facilitators. The article suggested instructors must be
cognizant of their participants identities and their own identities, especially because they will be
working with student who have both target and agent identities. The instructors of these courses
should keep in mind that some of the participants may have experienced, for example, classism
or sexism, while others remain vaguely familiar with the topics. Taking all of this into account,
as Sadika Sulaiman Hara shared, the instructors of these social justice courses should take an
inclusive and non-assumptive approach to the course facilitation. Educators course goals ought
to increase personal awareness, knowledge expansion and encourage activism (Bell & Griffin,
2007).
How SDMA prepares the department to engage students with social justice topics/issues:
In relation to the growing awareness of the importance of social justice education, SDMA
intentionally prepares their staff, graduate assistants and student staff to engage with students
around social justice topics. This intentionality begins with the hiring process. The interview is
used as a crucial determining factor to whether the person has the skills, knowledge and

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOUGES

awareness to work within the SDMA office. Kelly and Gayles (2010) affirms the importance of
this intentionality by explaining the list of multicultural competencies: awareness, knowledge,
and skills. The articles described awareness as a belief that differences were valuable in
learning about difference is necessary, knowledge as information about how change occurs for
individual values and behaviors, and skills as the ability to identify and openly discuss cultural
differences (p.76).
When looking to hire, SDMA focuses on the experience that applicants have, the skill set
they will be able to bring to the table, and the quality of knowledge and experience the students
will be able to gain from the specialized areas. Sadika also highlighted the importance in
searching for individuals who have done their own work and identity development (S. Hara,
personal communication, 11/08/2013). If employees are expected to work with students and
help administer and facilitate dialogues around power, privilege and oppression, it is imperative
that the individuals hired must have done some of their own work. Sadika explained this lens is
foundational, and critical when bringing someone onto our staff, and then while they are here, it
is very critical for the, to continue in engagement in our growth of knowledge around this area.
The learning must always continue (S.Hara, personal communication, 11/08/2013).

SDMA also prepares their employees by facilitating dialogues themselves as a group and
creating a space for employees to continue in their identity development. Sadika intentionally
provides members with up to date articles and text consisting of recent and relevant social justice
issues. This allows spaces for members to continue to grow in their own identities, triggers and
understanding about social justice dialogues. Griffen (2007) supported this thought by
expressing the goal of a dialogue, encourage the expression of conflicting ideas and help

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOUGES

10

participants practice the skills necessary to successfully sustain honest and respectful dialogues
in ways beneficial to learning for all (p. 96). Sadika expressed the value in dialogue as

Work in the moment that is happening and people are verbalizing that. They are
experiencing the engagement with one another of what is happening in someones mind,
what is happening within someones heart, why are people being triggered, where are
they feeling validated and empowered. (S. Hara, personal communication, 11/08/2013)
Sadikas personal and professional impact.
To add more credibility and practicality to this current higher education issue, Sadika
shared how every time, while facilitating a dialogue on diversity and social justice, she has to
take her own intersecting target and agent identities into perspective. The director of SDMA
spoke to her own doubts and insecurities in terms of how she would be perceived by the students
with whom she is having a dialogue. Sadika also spoke candidly about her own identities taking
over the dialogues she has led in the past. During the interview, she mentioned the importance
of assumption and how that could also play a pivotal role during a dialogue on social justice and
diversity. Mrs. Hara stressed the significance of not assuming anything about the people in the
dialogue due to the negative impact that could have on her facilitation (S. Hara, personal
communication, 11/08/2013).
Antoanetas personal and professional impact:
Social justice facilitation includes multiple layers of isms and identities. As a dialogue
facilitator I must be vigilant of all of my privileged and target identities and how those could
come across during a dialogue. I certainly do not want to lead with only a target or a privileged
identity, because I would not want for this action to serve as a model to the participants involved

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOUGES

11

in the dialogue. I believe this is a skill which needs an ongoing development and practice;
because at times I do feel that I lead with my target identities related to my class and immigrant
status. Those two identities are my most salient identities, because they have a direct impact on
my life and every day decisions. Comprising the dialogue on social justice facilitation was a
challenge for me, because I had to put my salient identities aside. Going into this I had to
assume that not everyones salient identities were their socioeconomic status and ethnic
background. Being an immigrant from Bulgaria and belonging to a lower class socioeconomic
status is all I have known my whole life. Hence, it always poses as a challenge when I have to
analyze a conversation or a problem from a different perspective. Though, I must say, this class
has enabled me to tap into my privileged identities as well.
Prior to entering this multiculturalism course, I was observant of only a few of my
privileged identities. Now, as the course comes to an end, I have consciously unveiled many
more of my privileged identities which I plan on using in my career as a student affairs
professional. I plan on consciously tapping out of a privileged identity while advising students
who do not hold that same privileged identity. Simply because I identify as a heterosexual,
Christian, White, cisgendered woman does not mean the student in front of me holds the same
privileged identities. Considering this concept, the same can be said for the way I facilitated the
dialogue. Perhaps I could have asked different questions, which could have allowed students to
look deeper inside themselves and unpack their own identities further. Executing this dialogue
has taught me just that; it is ok to disconnect from my salient identities at times, so that I can
help other people unveil their salient identities, while at the same time not having an influence
from what I identify as.
Soumyas personal and professional impact:

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOUGES

12

As a future student affairs professional, I am very aware of the importance of social

justice education and the value it brings to a students overall understanding of their own
identities, and the social structures that exist. I am an individual who embodies both target and
agent identities, and must understand my own triggers and how to work through my own
development before fostering and cultivating development of others.
Coming from an Indian cultural background, Indian women are often socialized to be
non-confrontational and passive. I fear there may be a moment as a facilitator that I would have
to name something and not feel comfortable or confident enough to address an issue. I also
worry that as a woman, I may be perceived as too emotional or weak. I resonate with
Griffens and Ouellett (2007) point, Some participants (e.g., women and some ethnic racial
groups) may have experienced penalties for showing emotions in the classroom and criticized as
less rigorous thinkers, less analytical, or unable to be frame an impartial argument (pg. 104).
As a Christian, heterosexual, woman of color I know that my triggers may impact the
way I facilitate and the way I am perceived by students of mixed identities. Griffen and Ouellett
(2007) explained that social justice education is enriched when the facilitator can comfortably
share with participants her own experiences, feelings and struggles with social justice topics.
Disclosing some of our own journey with participants can deepen their understanding of these
complex issues (p. 97). In order for be to comfortably share my own experiences, I truly need
to complete the journey of my own. As social justice dialogues can often times be hostile and
controversial, I need to fully understand my role as someone who will guide this conversation
and bring educational and developmental meaning into the conversation. Some questions I need
to deeply reflect on are, how comfortable am I listening to prejudice comments in class
discussions without being emotionally triggered? (p. 92). Am I able to plan questions that

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOUGES

13

challenge stereotypes? Am I comfortable disclosing [my] own fears, uncertainties and

openness?
I realized when facilitating a social justice, one must not only be completely aware of
their own identities, but they must be aware of how their identities inform the way they facilitate
and how their identities impact the way information is received. As I continue in my journey of
professional development, I hope to continue to explore a variety of functional areas within
student affairs, including: career development, campus ministry, Asian American studies,
academic affairs and residence life. I believe that whether with students in an academic setting
in a classroom to working with students in a casual setting such as in my office or dining hall, it
is very crucial that I continue to work on my own identity development and how it informs my
facilitation style to be best prepared to facilitate social justice dialogues with the students I work
with.

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOUGES

14

References
Ackerman, B. (1989, January 1). Why Dialogue? The Journal of Philosophy, 86(1), 5-22.Bell,
L., & Griffin, P. (2007). Designing Social Justice Education Courses (pp. 67-87).
Griffin, P., & Ouellett, M.L., (2007). Facilitating social justice education courses. In Adams, M.
J., Bell L. A., & Griffin P. Teaching for diversity and social justice (2nd ed.). New York:
Routledge
Hara, S.S (personal communication November 8, 2013)
Henry, W., Cobb-Roberts, D., Dorn, S., Exum, H., Keller, H. & Shircliffe, B. (2007).
When the dialogue becomes too difficult: A case study of resistance and backlash. The
College Student Affairs Journal, 26(2), 160-168.
Higbee, J. L., & Barajas, H. L. (2007, July-August). Building effective places for multicultural
learning. About Campus, 16-22.
Kelly, B.T. & Gaston-Gayles, J. (2011). Resistance to racial/ethnic dialogue in graduate
preparation programs: Implications for multicultural competence. College Student Affairs
Journal, 29(1), 77-87.
Perry, G., Moore, H., Edwards, C., Acosta, K., & Frey, C. (2009). Maintaining credibility and
authority as an instructor of color in diversity-education classrooms: A qualitative
inquiry. Journal of Higher Education, 80, 80-105.
Student Diversity & Multicultural Affairs. (n.d.). Retrieved December 4, 2013, from Loyola
University Chicago website: http://www.luc.edu/diversity/about/
Watt, S. (2007). Difficult dialogues, privilege and social justice: Uses of the privileged
identity exploration (PIE) model in student affairs practice. The College Student Affairs
Journal, 26(2), 114-126

DIALOGUE PAPER: FACILITATING SOCIAL JUSTICE DIALOUGES

Zuniga, X. (2003) Bridging differences through dialogue. About Campus, 7(6), 8.

15