UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — “If we were united as people, what would we prioritize to solve?” Penn State students, faculty, staff and community members had the opportunity to engage with this question and others during the second annual “Day of Dialogue,” held recently in Thomas Building on the University Park campus. Presented by World in Conversation: a Center for Public Diplomacy, the event once again offered participants the chance to engage a variety of people, ideas and experiences through facilitated dialogue.
The event also expanded participation to include virtual sessions with two Penn State Commonwealth Campus locations — Penn State Altoona and Penn State Erie — as well as two universities in Iraq: Mosul University, and Knowledge University (Erbil). This year’s event added more dialogues, and invited back alumni of Penn State and World in Conversation as facilitators and volunteers.
Every conversation offered the chance for the participants to have beneficial exchanges with people who they might never encounter in their everyday lives, said Laurie Mulvey, executive director of World in Conversation. Facilitated dialogue can help participants navigate difficult conversations.
This year’s event built on last year's success, with 73 sessions accommodating 668 people, according to Michelle Frisby, World in Conversation’s operations manager, who was in charge of the on-site operations team of 21 students, staff and alumni, including 71 facilitators.
Diverse views — and common experiences
Penn State graduate and World in Conversation facilitator Naso Chronis, who facilitated three sessions, was one of several alumni who were invited back to take part in the Day of Dialogue.
The day’s sessions followed a set structure: Facilitators started by asking a warm-up question, encouraging the participants to share the things that they worried about, said Chronis. The facilitators then followed up with more specific questions to learn more about how the respondents’ personal environments and interactions have helped shaped their views and opinions.
“The answers we got were as diverse as the groups we facilitated,” said Chronis. “You could really see how coming from different parts of life had an impact on the answers the participants were giving us.”
For example, said Chronis, common answers for the younger participants included grades, student loans, finding a fulfilling career and future financial stability; older participants’ answers included health, the current political climate, financial security, and stability for their and their families' futures.
The focus then shifted to the larger question: “If we were united as people, what would we prioritize to solve?”
“Once again, there were a lot of different answers based on everyone's sociological background and personal beliefs,” said Chronis. “One of the most popular answers that we got had to do with climate change, and how important it is for all of us to come together and take action on this issue that collectively affects us. Other answers that we got had to do with universal healthcare, ending wars and world hunger.”
Some groups delved into the definition of “united” and what it what it would really mean to be united as a people. One thing was clear: While no two dialogues were the same, the experience enabled the members to talk about issues important to themselves in a respectful, supportive environment.
A space to share perspectives, and more
Alumnus Dhruv Shejpaul, who is now pursuing a graduate degree in narrative medicine at Columbia University, New York, facilitated two sessions and, in addition, participated in the virtual conversation that included the Iraqi universities. Cultural differences quickly gave way to the sharing of similar human experiences, concerns and hopes.
“We discussed a lot of real things, including the shared importance of family life,” said Sheipaul. “We talked about the similarities, but also the risks associated with just being alive in each respective country. We also talked about how there’s anxiety everywhere, and how that manifests in different ways in different countries.”
This work, he said, allows participants to meet in a place where all perspectives are respected — the goal is not to come to agreement, or to change people’s minds, but to share openly and honestly in a safe, guided space. This is where the facilitator’s training comes in — and also what makes the experience valuable in the real world.
“As facilitators, we are taught the importance of listening even if we don't agree with what we hear,” Chronis explained. “We are taught conflict management and transformation skills that can be used from an official business meeting, to your family's Thanksgiving dinner, two very different situations whose outcomes vary, depending on the communication skills of the participants. In World in Conversation, we understand how important it is to be able to have the conversations that people usually are trying to avoid.”
Philadelphia-born Kaiana Oquendo, a Penn State sophomore majoring in veterinary and biomedical sciences, initially participated in a World in Conversation dialogue as a first-year student, and was immediately engaged.
“I really enjoy these kinds of programs because I get to see the expressions that people make when they discover something new, something they’ve never heard before,” said Oquendo, who joined the program as a facilitator last summer.
She added that her experience with World in Conversation increased her personal confidence, her communication skills, and helped her to learn how “to actually have a conversation, instead of just glancing over the surface. It has helped me actually advocate for myself, and speak out on things that I have seen happen in the communities that I put myself in.”
Conflict: Not a dirty word
Chronis stressed that a key takeaway from these conversations, not just for facilitators but for all participants, is the importance of conflict. Many people tend to see conflict as a negative, to be avoided. Oftentimes though, he said, it is an opportunity for constructive dialogue.
He offered an example of a dialogue he facilitated that day, in which two participants argued about the effect of modern technology and social media in our lives. The discussion had become a matter of the two simply repeating their points to each other. Chronis said he and his fellow facilitator knew exactly what to do.
“In order to help the conversation progress, instead of asking them to tell us why they thought they were right or wrong, we asked them questions that helped us figure out why they disagreed and where each of them was coming from,” said Chronis. “As others weighed in, you could see how the disagreement shifted to constructive conflict, in which each side got a chance to express their opinion and hear the other side, with the main purpose being to listen to them rather than change their minds.
“In that way, everybody was able to once again step out of their comfort zones, face a disagreement, and pass on the other side of it, learning more about the topic in discussion, but also about each other.”
What in the world is World in Conversation?
Since its beginnings in 2002 as the Race Relations Project, World in Conversation has evolved into today’s student-driven center dedicated to helping participants, through facilitated dialogue, examine issues on the basis of their different experiences and points of view.
The center offers domestic, international and global dialogue programs, with participants from nearly all of Penn State’s colleges and campuses, as well as from universities and local organizations around the world. Since its inception the center has facilitated nearly 32,000 dialogues, trained nearly 1,700 facilitators and conducted 36 semesters of research and development.
“The goal is to bring people into a process that allows them to ‘think together’ across their divides because that is the very place where creative solutions truly occur. In short, we are building a dialogue method that is a structure and a process to support the collaborative and creative act that is solving problems in the midst of our divides, not in spite of them,” said Mulvey. “We will only solve problems within our conflicts, not outside of them.”