Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 1

Jessica L. Thompson

May 2, 2016

Concordia University Ann Arbor

SPAHE 515

Dr. Pies, Instructor

Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 2

Head and the Heart:

The purpose of this project is to promote the ethics of caring on the University of

Michigan Campus among students, faculty and staff.

The Impetus

When I began my research on ethics of care within Institutions of Higher Education

(IHE), I wanted to understand why the concept of caring seemed to be the least of worries

regarding the experiences of college students, faculty and staff. Why was the word care so taboo

in a world full of terms like microaggressions, triggering, safe spaces, salient identities, diversity,

multiculturalism, social justice, Intersectionality, ableism, ally, collusion, classism, inclusion,

equity and even marginalized communities? In some way we had acknowledged that at least at

the University of Michigan (U of M) we must consider everyones thoughts and feelings to some

degree but care is not the word we choose to use. Nor would we claim that as an action of

importance in the classroom or even campus wide.

After a week full of graduation ceremonies to acknowledge first generation students,

LGBTQ students, Black Students, Arab Students, Native Students, Latin@ Students, and Student

Athletes to name a few, it is hard to understand how IHEs do not see the head and heart as one

in the same. We graduate students of various identities and we recognize that based on those

identities they may choose to celebrate or acknowledge the culmination of their education at

University of Michigan in different ways, and we provide them with the spaces to do so. Why

do you think that is? This is another example of how U of M is a place of care and yet Im sure

they would not classify it as such. What is clear is that diversity, equity and inclusion is of the

utmost importance; however, this is a concept that simply shows up as a university doing what it

is supposed to do. Coincidentally this is another way that a university can show its students,
Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 3

faculty and staff that their feelings of validation and acknowledgment matter and are

conscientiously considered; this is an ethic of care.

My claim is not that the University of Michigan does not care for its students, faculty and

staff; it is not coherently expressed through that lens. What I challenge the U of M to do is

acknowledge the efforts in consideration of feelings and voices of the people who are a part of

the campus as in fact an ethics of care practice. If students and staff felt that administration was

making decisions with their best interests at heart, perhaps when the moments present themselves

that appear as if the university does not care, it might come across as efforts to move the campus

in an ever-progressing manner and does so with all voices being considered regardless of the

final say. More often than not students, faculty and staff feel that they are not being heard and

that their narratives are not welcome at the table of discussion around changes that involve

policies, initiatives, programs and other things that affect students and staff directly. The

inconsistency in this is that the University of Michigan is a place that creates spaces for

conversations around thoughts, feelings and perceptions; what results in this are decisions that

actually fall in the hands of those who sit high within the hierarchy of higher education. Perhaps,

if it felt less like a calculating, reactive, secretive, pomp and circumstance environment the

feelings of distrust and dissatisfaction would in my opinion not be as prevalent. We have to

reconsider our approach when it comes to communication and inclusion. Administration cannot

be inconsistent with its message, which also leads to feelings of discontentment. When

transparency is absolute and the messages around how that transparency works are consistent,

there will be fewer moments spent trying to fix feelings.

Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 4

The First Hand Account

For years I have sat as a fly on the wall of many conversations around how both students

and staff feel like they do not have a voice nor are they considered when big decisions or

changes have been made. With golden cuffs on, I would listen to understand what seems to be

the bigger issue. I myself have felt this way at the University of Michigan, but oftentimes

dismissed my own feelings in hopes that I could continue the work I was hired to do independent

of how I felt inside. The reality of this never made coming to work easy and more than anything

it made it even harder to show up and care for the students, which is something I take pride in

doing. As I have navigated various roles within the University of Michigan two themes seem to

be consistent; administration is extremely reactive as opposed to proactive and we are not as

transparent as we claim to be.

On any given day within higher education you are dealing with the way someone feels

about anything; however, more often than not feelings are not a direct topic of discussion.

How any particular person might feel about any particular thing is not as important as the

processing of whether or not a student is learning and working towards graduation and if an

employee has shown up to work to complete their assigned tasks. Perhaps these are unfair

claims and yet this is what I have observed.

The William Monroe Trotter Multicultural Center where I work has been quite a topic of

discussion for sometime now. Many students, alumni, faculty and staff have felt that its location

on Washtenaw as a part of Fraternity Row is an unfair and unsafe space for such a center. As a

matter of fact, U of Ms Black Student Union engaged in activism around getting a new location

for Trotter. Hashtags followed the letters BBUM (Being Black at U of M) and 7 days/7 demands

were rolled out two years ago at the end of the MLK Symposium Lecture. These movements
Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 5

came together as a result of marginalized students feeling like their safe spaces are always

compromised. Many years ago the Trotter Multicultural Center was known as the Trotter House

or the black house on campus for black students; not exclusively, but certainly with their needs

of support and a place to call home in mind. Several years later the Trotter House is renamed the

W.M. Trotter Multicultural Center. Changing the name to create a more inclusive environment

for all students was met with much hurt and anger. The many voices at that time spoke up

questioning why spaces for students of color have to be changed to inclusive spaces, when every

other space on campus is for the majority population. Fast Forward to this school year when the

U of M Board of Regents voted to relocate a New Trotter to State Street, which happens to be

the main street of campus.

Although our students were granted their wish of a new location for Trotter and their

involvement in making that happen has not been forgotten, many students have complained that

if it was always up to the Regents to decide if, when and where Trotter would be relocated how

in fact were their voices really being considered. A brand new state of the art 10 million dollar

building is nice, but is that truly what the students were asking for? As the dust started to settle

towards the end of the year around the new location being disclosed, the regents made an

announcement regarding a 3 million dollar donation from a member of their board who abstained

from voting about Trotters State Street location; the new hall will now be named in honor of

him and his wife. For days now I have had to listen to hurt and disappointment of both students

and staff around how Trotter was sold and bought by a member of the majority community at

the selling price of 3 million dollars.

Questions around why the history of the Trotter was not considered and how dare the

administration move forward with such a decision to rename the only building on campus named
Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 6

after a person of color. These past few weeks have been stressful to say the least. I represent a

decision I was not a part of and as a result I have been accused of being dishonest and even a sell

out. How did the university miss this? How did they not see that by moving forward without

considering the masses and especially those of us on the ground working with the students that

this decision would result in backlash of some sort? Why did the full process appear to leave out

so many voices? I understand that systems are put in place to make college campuses thrive and

live into their best selves, but what about transparency? Why not manage the expectation around

when and if students and staffs voices are being considered during the larger conversations that

impact so many?

In more recent conversations around the process of donors and development with regard

to Trotter and the lack of consideration around feelings, members within higher-level

administration have admitted to dropping the ball around managing communication and

expectation. The hope in the future is to be more considerate of the impacts of outcomes, and

work towards better ways of handling this; I have been asked to assist with this further!

The Theory and Literature

Introducing an ethic of care is critical more so now than ever before. As Ethical Theorist

Carol Gilligan (2011) defines ethics of Care as an ethic grounded in voice and relationships, in

the importance of everyone having a voice, being listened to carefully (in their own right and on

their own terms) and heard with respect. An ethics of care directs our attention to the need for

responsiveness in relationships (paying attention, listening, responding) and to the costs of losing

connection with oneself or with others. Its logic is inductive, contextual, psychological, rather

than deductive or mathematical.

Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 7

Understanding the concept that people need to feel included and validated, heard and felt

is not a new concept, but is certainly one that may impact college campuses around the world for

the better. Institutions of Higher Education are for and about the people; the business itself would

not exist if people did not exist. In being a part of the process of educating and being the

educated, you gain access to the full person. This assessment applies to students, faculty and

staff. With that being said, the people that exist within college campuses come with the mind

and heart as a packaged deal. In the classroom a professor is not solely engaging the mind of the

student, but the emotion and feelings attached to that experience as well. The same thing can be

said for faculty and staff when participating in their individual sets of work. Our mental

engagement and the ability to feel, process, negotiate or develop emotions are human actions that

do not work independently; nor do we have the ability to remove ourselves from these natural

born characteristics. Advocating for the mind and heart to be seen as inseparable leads to my

avocation for ethics of care practices to be considered both critical and necessary within

Institutions of Higher Education.

Carol Gilligans words inspired me; as well as, validated my desire to introduce ethics of

care practices to Institutions of Higher Education. As Gilligan points out, rather than asking

how do we gain the capacity to care, the questions become how do we come not to care; how do

we lose the capacity for empathy and mutual understanding? These questions caused me to

reflect on two recent conversations I had with a student and an Executive Officer of the

University of Michigan. When I asked the student in light of recent events happening on campus

why it seemed like most college students did not have a genuine concern for one another, she

indicated that as a student she does not have the time to care. That statement broke my heart;

when did caring for one another become a time-consuming action, unworthy of the apparent time
Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 8

required to do so? Also, what type of culture has the university created where there is not

enough time to care? Is this behavior that faculty and staff are exemplifying to students? Do the

rigors of being a college student make caring such a challenge? If so, this is exactly why ethics

of care practices have to be a part of the curriculum or culture of American College Campuses.

While in a staff advisory board meeting an Executive Officer shared with the team that it feels

like the staff are unhappy and do not care for one another or trust the institution, leading to high

turnover rates. Although I was not surprised to hear this, I began reflecting on why it is

important to create opportunities for staffs voices to be heard and their experiences to be

validated.

The conversation had at the advisory board meeting speaks to Carol's claim that "within a

democratic framework, ethics of care is a human ethic, grounded in core democratic values: the

importance of everyone having a voice and being listened to carefully and heard with respect.

The premise of equal voice then allows conflicts to be addressed in relationships. Different

voices then become integral to the vitality of a democratic society." If being heard can be

equated to feeling cared for, it is my strongest recommendation that ethics of care practices also

be created for faculty and staff within Institutions of Higher Education. Perhaps if staff felt like

they had a voice in the workplace, it would translate into retention of employees and might even

encourage staff to be more receptive to the idea of considering each others thoughts and

feelings.

I believe that when people are given a supportive stage to operate from they will give

their absolute best. I also believe that when a culture of care is genuine, humans can thrive in a

more succinct manner. To believe that the heart and mind do not operate in relation to one

another is an irresponsible approach at educating students, contributes to a culture of violence on

Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 9

campus, lends itself to unsuccessful attempts at diversity, equity and inclusion, and will also

create division amongst employees, which can lead to workplace dissatisfaction. The intended

outcome of this independent study is not an attempt to define how someone should care, but that

caring for one another is a concept that everyone should be aware of and conscientiously

practice.

Ethicist Carol Gilligan defines Ethics of Care as an ethic grounded in voice and

relationships, in the importance of everyone having a voice, being listened to carefully (in their

own right and on their own terms) and heard with respect. An ethics of care directs our attention

to the need for responsiveness in relationships (paying attention, listening, responding) and to the

costs of losing connection with oneself or with others. Its logic is inductive, contextual,

psychological, rather than deductive or mathematical. What speaks to me within her definition

of EOC is the importance of everyones voice being heard respectfully, especially in

consideration of EOC practices being necessary within Institutions of Higher Education.

Additionally, feelings of connections with others being so critical to the idea of EOC also speak

volumes when thinking about the way that EOC practices should and could be carried out on

American College Campuses.

The literature on EOC drives home the point of relationships and communication being

critical, and the understanding that within institutions of higher education a person brings their

full self to the campus. Many authors of EOC literature argue the point that the relationship

between a persona student, sayand an institution (the administration, or the college) is

not understood as and does not function as one of equals, especially when the institution is seen

as a not-human mechanism, or thing. That relationship, if acknowledged at all, is usually

defined through rules, traditions, and customs, not by mutual understanding, responsiveness, or
Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 10

empathy. I absolutely agree with this argument and fear that the depersonalization and

dehumanization that happens within institutions of higher education is reason enough to fight for

EOC (practices) on college campuses. This can also explain why communication and

relationships are both challenging concepts on college campuses. If the relationship between a

student and the administration is not a priority how are we allowing room for voices to be heard

and feelings to be considered? This seems like an impossible concept if the relationships

between the two are not seen as necessary or valued.

It is my hope that by reviewing this literature and considering how EOC practices on

campus will give way to a more inclusive environment where community is felt and experienced

benefits not only the students, faculty and staff, but can change the culture on American college

campuses. The classroom is such an individualistic and competitive environment that at times

can be a cesspool of emotional, mental and academic violence. A student informed me when

asked why it appears that students do not seem to genuinely care for each other at the University

of Michigan that they just do not have time to care. Yet, on this campus recent incidences around

Islamaphobia and other microaggressions have been reported. So my question is, if you have

time to use hate, would you not also have time to care? Free speech is an amendment right;

however, using hateful speech should not be tolerated on college campuses. Is it not our job as

institutions of higher education to teach our students how to communicate with one another and

value the narratives of everyone on campus? Shouldnt college campuses be concerned with

whether or not we are graduating students who are prepared for citizenship, civic engagement,

and lively participation in a democracy? The Journal of College and Character believes that the

idea of student success is of the learning and development of a whole, integrated person. An
Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 11

institutional ethic of care supports, and indeed is essential to, the achievement of that idea

(Keeling, 2014).

Definitions

Understanding the Language-commonly used buzz words used (definition: a word or

phrase, often sounding authoritative or technical, that is a vogue term in a particular profession,

field of study, popular culture, etc) within Institutions of Higher Education (specifically U of M),

with a social justice lens (see definition below).

***Words are not in any particular order.

Microaggressions: the everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or

insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative

messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership.

Triggering: when any certain something (a trigger) causes a negative emotional

response.

Safe Spaces: a place where anyone can relax and be able to fully express, without fear of

being made to feel uncomfortable, unwelcome, or unsafe on account of biological sex,

race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, cultural background, religious

affiliation, age, or physical or mental ability.

Salient Identities: the quality of a group identity of which an individual is more

conscious and which plays a larger role in that individual's daytoday life; for example, a man's

awareness of his "maleness" in an elevator with only women.

Diversity: the concept of diversity encompasses acceptance and respect. It means

understanding that each individual is unique, and recognizing our individual differences. These

can be along the dimensions of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socio-economic status,
Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 12

age, physical abilities, religious beliefs, political beliefs, or other ideologies. It is the exploration

of these differences in a safe, positive, and nurturing environment. It is about understanding

each other and moving beyond simple tolerance to embracing and celebrating the rich

dimensions of diversity contained within each individual.

Equity: the quality of being fair and impartial.

Inclusion: the action or state of including or of being included within a group or

structure.

Multiculturalism: the view that the various cultures in a society merit equal respect and

scholarly interest.

Social Justice: justice in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges

within a society.

Intersectionality: the interconnected nature of social categorizations such as race, class,

and gender as they apply to a given individual or group, regarded as creating overlapping and

interdependent systems of discrimination or disadvantage.

Ableism: Prejudiced thoughts and discriminatory actions based on differences in

physical, mental, and/or emotional ability; usually that of ablebodied and/or minded persons

against people with illness, disabilities, or less developed skills or talents.

Ally: a person of one social identity group who stands up in support of members of

another group; typically member of dominant group standing beside member(s) of targeted

group; e.g., a male arguing for equal pay for women.

Collusion: willing participation in the discrimination against and/or oppression of ones

own group (e.g., a woman who enforces dominant body ideals through her comments and
actions).
Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 13

Classism: prejudiced thoughts and discriminatory actions based on difference in socio

economic status, income, class; usually by upper classes against lower.

Marginalized Communities: groups of people excluded, ignored, or relegated to the

outer edge of a group/society/community.

Understanding the words and the various contexts that they are used within IHEs is

helpful in recognizing how an ethic of care can show up, even in the use of language within

certain spaces. A recent event that comes to mind where the use of such terms can create a space

where through the lens of a particular student might create a space of discomfort would be U of

Ms recent Spring Commencement. This past Saturday our keynote speaker for Spring

Commencement was former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg who referred to safe spaces

as, One of the most dangerous places on a college campus, because it creates the false

impression that we can insulate ourselves from those who hold different views. In the global

economy, and in a democratic society, an open mind is the most valuable asset you can possess.

Perhaps the world is full of different views, but in not preparing our students to process and

unpack those views in comparison to there own is a grave disservice to our students. College

students with the mind in consideration solely are inundated with so much information; at what

point are they able to safely come to an understanding of what they are being taught in reference

to further application of said material? It is my hope that we are truly graduating students who

become active citizens of democracy.

Whether we are discussing buzzwords, examples of care ethics within IHEs, or

researching the literature that supports the idea that the head and heart are one starts with

accepting that a model of care is a real and necessary practice. A practice that is being

considered or discussed even when the term care is not used is a step in the right direction
Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 14

towards understanding that individuals within a collective thrive on the belief that their voice

matters and that relationships are key in the development of learning working and thought

process. As I continue to work on this project I will tailor my analyses to focus on the depth and

breadth of why an ethic of care practice for students, faculty and staff is key, how intentionality

and consistency of caring is critical; as well as, how current modes of communication (i.e. social

media, text, email, etc.) are challenging the authenticity of care practices within IHEs.
Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 15

References:

Beck, L. G. (1992). Meeting the challenge of the future: The place of a caring ethic in

educational administration. American

Journal of Education, 100, 454496.

Dickinson, E. (1998). The poems of Emily Dickinson. R.W. Franklin (Ed.). Cambridge,

MA: Belknap Press.

Eisenberg, D., Golbestein, E., & Hunt, J. (2009). Mental health and academic success in

college. The B.E. Journal of Economic

Analysis and Policy, 9(1), 135.

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Held, V. (2005). The ethics of care. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Tronto, J. C. (1987). Beyond gender difference to a theory of care. Signs, 12(4), 644663.

Tronto, J. C. (1994). Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. New

York, NY: Routledge, Chapman, and

Hall.

Carol Gilligan - Ethics of care. (2011). Retrieved April 19, 2016, from

http://ethicsofcare.org/carol-gilligan/

Davis, Robert B., Carolyn Alexander Maher, and Nel Noddings.Constructivist views on

the teaching and learning of mathematicsJournal for research in mathematics education.

Monograph ; no. 4. Reston, Va.: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 1990.

Flinders, D. J. (2001) Nel Noddings in Joy A. Palmer (ed.) Fifty Modern Thinkers on

Education. From Piaget to the present, London: Routledge.

Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 16

Gordon, Suzanne, Patricia E. Benner, and Nel Noddings. Caregiving : readings in

knowledge, practice, ethics, and politics Studies in health, illness, and caregiving. Philadelphia:

University of Pennsylvania Press, 1996.

Katz, Michael S., Nel Noddings, and Kenneth A. Strike. Justice and caring : the search

Noddings, Nel. Caring, a feminine approach to ethics & moral education. Berkeley:

University of California Press, 1984.

Noddings, Nel. Women and evil. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989.

Noddings, Nel (1999) Two concepts of caring, Philosophy of

Education,http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/EPS/PES-yearbook/1999/noddings.asp. Accessed December

6, 2004.

Noddings, Nel. Educating for intelligent belief or unbelief The John Dewey lecture. New

York: Teachers College Press, 1993.

Noddings, Nel. Philosophy of education Dimensions of philosophy series. Boulder,

Colo.: Westview Press, 1995.

Noddings, Nel, and Paul J. Shore. Awakening the inner eye : intuition in education. New

York: Teachers College Columbia University, 1984.

Witherell, Carol, and Nel Noddings. Stories lives tell : narrative and dialogue in

education. New York: Teachers College Press, 1991.

OToole, K. (1998) Noddings: To know what matters to you, observe your

actions, fxStanford Online Report, February 4, 1998. http://news-

service.stanford.edu/news/1998/february4/noddings.html
Head and Heart-Project Chapters & Lit Review 17

Slote, M. (1999) Caring versus the philosophers, Philosophy of

Education, http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/EPS/PES-yearbook/1999/slote.asp. Accessed December 6,

2004.