Productive Discussion across Political Differences: Understanding Students’ Experiences with Comfort and Discomfort within Structured Discussions of Public Policy Issues

This study investigates the effectiveness of two pedagogical strategies—deliberation and debate—in fostering productive political discussions among high school students, with a focus on overcoming affective polarization. Paying attention to students’ comfort, engagement, and willingness to participate, this study employs a mixed-method approach using data from surveys, observations, and interviews with students participating in a civic immersion program in Washington, DC. Using deliberative theory and the concept of “productive classroom discussion across political differences,” the research explores the extent to how students perceive each strategy as productive, as well as their experiences of comfort and productive and unproductive discomfort. Additional attention was paid to how identity factors such as ideology, gender, race/ethnicity, and social class influence student experiences. Results of the study indicate that deliberations tend to enhance feelings of comfort and mutual respect, while debate garnered more participation and disagreement. We found that negative feelings with debate were often related to productive discomfort. Emphasizing the importance of discussion design in cultivating productive and unproductive discomfort, we provide insight into how teachers can support student engagement in political discourse and offer practical guidance in fostering inclusive learning environments as a means to overcome affective polarization.