There’s a path away from toxic polarization: shared problem-solving

We live in a frighteningly divided, unstable and increasingly self-destructive world. 

Formidable problems facing our communities, our nation and the world are going unsolved. Such challenges include a widening wealth gap, a climate crisis, mass shootings and political violence, food and housing insecurity, abuse of the vulnerable, social media misinformation and recent threats to our democracy. House Republicans couldn’t even agree on a new Speaker. 

This list of challenges is news to no one. Equally evident is our apparent inability to work together to meet them. The reality of our collective failure is fueling mass anxiety and fear. 

At the root of it all is the rampant polarization that has engulfed our world. In the identity-driven ecosystem in which we live, we habitually define ourselves — and others — by race, religious affiliation, socioeconomic status, gender and political allegiances. In identifying with our “tribes,” as Yale Law Professor Amy Chua has argued, we unite with groups and alliances that can vilify others and advance only their own ideas for resolving problems. 

For example, when many talk about addressing climate change, as Northeastern University professor and science writer and editor Matthew Nisbet has observed, we often retreat to binaries that narrow the conversation before we begin. Join the Green New Deal or face a dystopian future; choose policies that don’t disrupt the current economy or descend into economic ruin. When we’re parked in ideological campsites, we fail to acknowledge our interdependence. In drawing only on “our ideas,” using only “our tools” and “our facts,” we limit both our understanding of the problems we share and our capacity to solve them.  

When we conducted a national study of 12 minority-serving institutions, for three years we observed and documented programs and practices that made a difference in the learning and progress of students. At these institutions, we observed a different approach to undergraduate education and the focus on individual interests that is centered at many predominantly white institutions: collaborative learning. Rather than inviting individual students to compete with other students and sometimes with teachers, all 12 of the MSIs placed primary emphasis on educating students to learn with, from and for one another through shared problem-solving.  

Shared problem-solving is not only a way forward for our colleges and universities, but also for our families, communities, workplaces, democracy, nation-state and beyond. We identified the following core practices at the 12 institutions that can be incorporated into shared problem-solving throughout our lives:  

• Seek out people with diverse perspectives and life experiences to cultivate relationships and networks in which participants embrace their interdependence.  
• Crystallize the “question(s)” to guide their inquiry.  
• Embrace the sifting and winnowing of ideas to develop promising solutions to shared problems.  
• Cultivate a culture of trust that obligates participants to engage in spirited back-and-forth dialogue with one another that is accompanied by genuine respect for, listening to and being open to the perspectives, values and beliefs of others.    
• Encourage group members to pause, self-reflect and question themselves and others throughout their inquiry.   
• Hold participants accountable to one another to maintain a shared commitment to joint problem-solving that contributes to the lives of others outside of their networks.  

Anchoring our identities in “us-versus-them” group alliances reinforces polarization that radically limits our capacity to pursue promising ideas that address real-world problems. Sadly, groups in which participants are “true believers” stand in the way of solving the problems we share. 

To be sure, some collaborations will prove unworkable as individuals enter into interactions bent on achieving only their own ends and taking up methods that damage or exclude those with whom they are addressing problems. It may not be possible, for example, to successfully address the challenge of carbon emissions with a partner who is wholly committed to using fossil fuels until they are gone or a partner who is equally committed to stopping the use of fossil fuels cold turkey. While collaboration will not always be possible, we need to approach problems as opportunities to learn with, from and for others whose worlds are different than ours. Every one of us needs to have the courage to take on the responsibility of engaging in problem-solving with individuals and groups with which we have differences. 

One of our favorite examples of shared problem-solving transpired just over three decades ago in apartheid South Africa, with the country close to civil war. Focused on the country’s survival, newly elected president F.W. de Klerk lifted the longstanding ban on the African National Congress and released political prisoners, including the ANC leader Nelson Mandela. A shared challenge before them, De Klerk and Mandela committed to working together to bring about political reforms that saved the country from a disastrous civil war. The formation of a free and inclusive South Africa remains challenging and frustrating. But the process of reconciliation could not have been started without the willingness of its leaders to address shared problems across profound differences. 

And there are examples closer to home. In November, the Wetlands Water District, west of Fresno, Calif., voted in board members who were ready to work with the state government and environmentalists on new approaches to water use. 

NPR reporter Dan Charles described the change as “a big, new trend in California’s water politics — collaboration.” 

Farmers in the district acknowledge that flourishing means making space for others: “It’s not just going to be agriculture in the future.” 

If anyone is to live well in the district, Charles concluded, “adversaries have to work together to get anything done.”

It is within our grasp to solve the problems facing our nation and world. To get there, we must reject the lure of polarization and dogmatic certainty and instead, seek interdependence and collaboration. The world depends on it.

Clif Conrad is a professor of Higher Education at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and co-author (with Todd Lundberg) of the book “Learning with Others.” Todd Lundberg is an associate director in the Center for Teaching, Learning & Mentoring at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.