What does the classroom as a safe space mean to our UCL community?

The Disagreeing Well Campaign recently organised an internal event 'What does the classroom as a safe space mean to our UCL community?' on Wednesday 20 November 2024. Hilary Tang, a third year English student reports on the event and the themes discussed.

The purpose of this event was to open a conversation with the UCL community about the notion of safe spaces and what the purpose of university teaching is, involving a panel of academic experts and students. We recognise that this is a difficult and potentially contentious debate that some may find challenging, so for this reason it was not recorded. Instead, we invited a UCL student to write up the summary.  

Panel of academics and students: 

• Conor Walsh – MPhil Politics Student at the University of Oxford, UCL PPE 2024 and Student Impartial Chair  
• Ozan Koyas, BSc Politics and International Relations Student at UCL  
• Dr Tim Beasley-Murray – Vice-Dean for the Faculty of Arts and Humanities and Director of the BA Creative Arts and Humanities  
• Rawleka Wilson – BSc Psychology Student at UCL, Person of Colour Students' Officer  
• Dr Emily McTernan – Associate Professor in Political Philosophy, School of Public Policy  
• Addeel Khan, Director of Equality, Diversity & Inclusion   
• Helen Knowler – Associate Professor, UCL's Arena Centre for Research Based Education  

What is a 'safe space'? How does this sit with the principle of a 'free flow of ideas?'

The chair, Conor Walsh, began with a Slido poll that saw 69% of attendees strongly agree or agree that ‘I understand what the classroom as safe space means.   

Ozan Koyas suggested that the classroom should be a space where students exchange ideas. Exposure to and challenge of diverse perspectives builds intellectual and emotional intelligence. Disagreeing well prepares students to solve complex problems outside the classroom. In a divisive world, students may feel more afraid to express their opinions for fear of being misunderstood or accidentally hurting another person. To solve this, we can learn to differentiate opinions that handle a topic reductively and curtail discussion, from those that express an alternative perspective which promote conversation, encouraging the latter. 

 

Dr Tim Beasley-Murray began with the premise that the world is a dangerous place, to different degrees according to different characteristics (e.g. race and gender). The university should address this and be a space where students are safe from discrimination. The classroom, however, should be a space where it is safe to take risks. Students should be safe to act, with positive freedoms to undertake risk, to experiment with dangerous chemicals, texts, and ideas, for example the study of Nazi political philosophy. Equally, students should be safe from the inequalities and discrimination they may otherwise face in the world. While it is a legitimate concern to be safe from harm or offence, Tim emphasised that we should embrace discomfort as natural to education. Discomfort facilitates growth beyond our comfort zones. Next, a second Slido poll revealed that 89% of attendees agreed or strongly agreed that discomfort is a vital part of learning at university.

Ozan remarked that while discomfort is inherent to learning, students should be allowed to absent themselves from conversations where they feel uncomfortable. 

Tim commented that in designing syllabi, where professors can choose to omit texts on difficult topics (e.g. on sexual violence), a willingness to discuss challenging texts constitutes proper pedagogy.  

Rawleka Wilson emphasised that safe spaces mean an ability to express oneself freely and to challenge others’ opinions, especially those of academics. Being seen as ‘playing the race card, victimizing herself’, or being consigned to her identity as a woman neglects her intersectional identities and complex contextual background. Despite UCL’s nominal support for the cause of marginalised groups, racism still exists, including in microaggressions.

Safe spaces should encourage students to engage critically with the institution. She reported an impression that some professors prioritise their research, not interested in answering questions after lectures. She suggested facilitating events where more personal relationships between students and lecturers are developed. A respect for diverse perspectives and for the process of learning should be cultivated, more so than efforts around ‘tokenism’ or mere gestures to decolonise the curriculum. Once, in speaking to a lecturer who she felt had homogenized Caribbean culture in her talk, Rawleka was met with the response that the researcher’s partner was black. 

Expressing the irrelevance of this remark to her feedback, Rawleka emphasised the importance of cultural sensitivity. 

Dr Emily McTernan began by reframing the term ‘classroom’. A university is a community of scholars, where a sense of equality among undergraduates and academics facilitates scholarly disagreement. Lectures are a place where the academic is an expert, delivering a view on the topic. Seminars are where academics and students act as equals to facilitate debate and discussion. But neither are ‘classrooms’. Next, she emphasised the importance of trust, to trust in each other not to use discriminatory language. A safe space is where students trust professors to express views in good faith and to be open to challenges, and professors trust students to be tolerant of nuances in perspective. Emily stated the damaging effect of technology, especially recordings, on interpersonal trust.  

Tim added that a community of scholars should allow space for mistakes, which necessitates trust, good faith, capacity for forgiveness, and promise of behaving according to shared values.  

A third Slido poll saw that 95% of attendees agreed or strongly agreed that ‘I have been in a group situation where I have experienced discomfort.’

Addeel Khan expressed that classrooms are social as well as intellectual spaces, which can evoke exclusion, discomfort, or harm to those whose experiences are overlooked or invalidated. “Safe spaces” should not avoid controversial topics, but foster a culture where all students feel respected and supported. From an EDI lens, this means recognizing the effect of systemic bariers, unconscious bias, and societal marginalization on their experience. Acknowledging the ‘duty of care’ UCL holds towards its staff and students, Addeel suggested the term ‘accountable spaces’ where behaviour and speech can be constructively challenged and taken responsibility for. The privilege and power dynamic between less-diverse staff and highly diverse student community should be considered. The aim is to balance robust debate with dignity, respect, and equity. 

 

Professor Helen Knowler’s comments were reported in absentia: a safe classroom is not a comfortable classroom. Discomfort can be intentionally introduced as it aligns with learning outcomes. However, everyone should be supported in a safe and inclusive learning environment. Expectations can be communicated beforehand through social contracts or teaching philosophy statements issued on Moodle. An anticipatory mindset, by collaborating with students to ask ‘what if’ during syllabi planning stages, could prevent the experience of worry, anxiety, or risk in the classroom. 

To learn more, UCL students and staff are encouraged to explore the Disagreeing Well skills video series. Staff interested in teaching and learning resources from UCL’s Eugenics Legacy Education Project (ELEP) can access more information here. 

---