# data[].attributes.body
Give professors a 'brave space' framework to promote more equitable speech practices in their classrooms. This framework will detail the consequences of traditional safe space classroom norms, the benefits of maintaining a brave space, and ways to create/manage a brave space with their students.

A brave space levels the playing field between target and agent groups, holds people accountable for developing their ideas and opinions in places of debate, and challenges people in an academic setting where they can learn and evolve these skills.

In a brave space, community members are tasked with presenting thoughtful discourse, understanding that challenges to their stances are not attacks. In fact, challenging ideas is framed as a method to elevate the classroom to one that meets all students' needs.

Brave spaces teach people to resolve conflict head-on. People adapt to tackling moments of tension together, advocating for their perspectives and others. It is better for people to experience the initial discomfort of conflict resolution in a classroom before they have to face it in the 'real world.'

# data[].attributes.body
'Safe space' language in academia unintentionally silences and limits its community members in the name of 'peace-keeping.'  This framework creates timid approaches to conflict, keeping students and others from learning to resolve moments of tension properly. Additionally, safe spaces most negatively impact targeted, minority groups. Many common safe space rules place power into the hands of the people who speak or get their points across first. Because refuting points goes against safe space rules like 'respecting all opinions' or 'agree to disagree,' targeted students are left without devices to defend themselves or their perspectives.

# data[].attributes.body
I first heard of the brave space framework from this piece by Brian Arao and Kristi Clemens. In short, the piece details specific rules in safe spaces and their negative consequences as well as guiding rules for brave spaces and balanced, diverse speech.

Key points:
- "We argue that authentic learning about social justice often requires the very qualities of risk, difficulty, and controversy that are defined as incompatible with safety." (139)
- Avoid or examine commonly used rules such as agree to disagree; don't take things personally; challenge by choice; respect; and no attacks. "We believe that unexamined, these common ground rules may contribute to the conflation of safety and comfort and restrict participant engagement and learning." (143)

# data[].attributes.body
I pulled this second piece from the Research and Policy Institute under the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA).

Ali references the above Arao & Clemens piece in this work, but also provides more historical and societal context to the terms 'safe spaces' and 'brave spaces.' I included this piece in my research because it explains the need for distinction between safe spaces and brave spaces.

Key points:
- "Safe space programs were initially started with goals similar to those of community-based safe spaces. In addition to providing a physical low-risk space, these programs allow for a chance to better understand the risks faced by certain marginalized identities on campus... and allow for idea-sharing on how to improve overall campus climate for all students." (5)
- "By using the term brave space, faculty are able to distinguish an inclusive classroom discussion from programming on campus that commonly provides respite space for traditionally marginalized communities." (8)
- "Administrators should consult with students engaged in campus activities for marginalized students as well as work with the department of campus activities in order to begin a collaborative dialogue on how to ensure that brave and safe spaces continue to enhance freedom of expression on campus."

This last point is especially key. Campus activities like multicultural, LGBTQIA+, and women's rights organizations, etc. likely have their own guidelines for creating safe spaces for their intended communities. Knowing the difference between utilizing a brave space in a classroom to push discourse and falling back on a community for external support is crucial for balanced student life.

# data[].attributes.body
ADL is a global anti-hate organization. It handles a range of issues including -  but not limited to - delivering anti-bias education. ADL offers plenty of resources for people to combat extremism & hate including articles, newsletters, and databases of information.

It is a famous resource for all discourse anti-hate.

# data[].attributes.body
ADL created this Brave Classroom framework as part of the anti-bias education training. Their framework emphasizes collaborating with students on creating their guidelines, defining/explaining/demonstrating bravery as a group exercise, and a list of possible guidelines to kick off establishing ground rules.

ADL offers other anti-bias education articles that give other angles to creating brave space guidelines. See here and see below.

# data[].attributes.body
I including this checklist as part of my inspiration to encourage professors to consider the greater implications of a brave space framework in their universities.

# data[].attributes.body
Formerly known as Border Crossers, the Center for Racial Justice in Education is another training resource for educators that specifically targets dismantling and disrupting racism in the classroom, community, and home.

CRJE offers training programs, partnerships, and resources to educators looking for this type of work.

# data[].attributes.body
This inspiration differs from the previous ones because it lacks the 'brave space' language. What I like about this document is that it uses less coded language and provides specific questions and responses to the discourse we might see in an academic setting.

This document also provides both short-term and long-term strategies to promoting racial equity in the classroom and at school.

# data[].attributes.body
As stated in my draft pitch, the brave space framework was created for the classroom setting, though it could be extended to any facilitated discussion. I'm choosing to limit my scope to classrooms and departments that most directly deal with free speech and/or diversity, equity, and inclusion communications. For now, I will think about departments at the University of Washington.

Consider the following UW Departments:

- American Ethnic Studies
- Anthropology
- Communication
- Comparative Religion
- Education / Education Policy
- Gender, Women, & Sexuality Studies
- Global Studies
- Human Rights
- International Studies
- Law, Societies, & Justice
- Political Science
- Social Work
- Sociology
- Special Education
- Teaching, Learning, & Curriculum