Apple Podcasts | Android | Spotify | Email | RSS | YouTube

How do schools navigate the complexities of inclusion, polarization, and freedom of expression while fostering a vibrant learning environment? 

Today, John Austin, Head of School at Deerfield Academy, joins Heterodox Out Loud to explore these questions and share insights from the groundbreaking report: Thriving in a World of Pluralistic Contention: A Framework for Schools.

John reflects on his unique journey from aspiring surfer to educational leader, shaping student experiences across continents, including his tenure at King’s Academy in Jordan. Drawing from decades of experience, John delves into the challenges and opportunities presented by diversity in schools, discussing how institutions can promote dialogue, trust, and intellectual growth through structured initiatives like randomized community meals and robust expressive frameworks. John also sheds light on the collaborative process behind the report and its three foundational pillars: disciplined nonpartisanship, expressive freedom, and intellectual diversity.

In This Episode:

• Independent schools as laboratories for educational innovation

• Balancing inclusivity with robust academic inquiry

• The significance of Robert Putnam’s social capital theory

• Strategies for fostering meaningful dialogue across differences

• The transformative potential of conscientious, courageous, and tolerant expression

About John:

Dr. John Austin became Deerfield Academy’s 56th Head of School in July of 2019. Prior to Deerfield, Dr. Austin served as Headmaster at King’s Academy in Madaba, Jordan, and before that as Academic Dean at St. Andrew’s School in Middletown, Delaware, where he joined the faculty in 1987. A graduate of Williams College, he holds a Master of Arts, Master of Philosophy, and Doctoral degrees in English and Comparative Literature from Columbia University, along with a Master’s degree from the Bread Loaf School of English at Middlebury College. Last year, with funding from an E.E. Ford Foundation grant, Dr. Austin convened a group of renowned independent school leaders from across the United States to develop a framework for enhancing the expressive freedom of students, fostering in them habits of curiosity and critical analysis, and preparing them to thrive in a world of pluralistic contention. The resulting work, authored by Dr. Austin, Thriving in a World of Pluralistic Contention: A Framework for Schools, was published in May of 2024.

Episode Transcript

John Tomasi: John Austin, welcome to Heterodox Out Loud.

John Austin: I'm glad to be here. Thanks for having me, John.

John Tomasi: It's really a pleasure, finally, to get you into our studios. I've been reading your work and following your work at Deerfield for years. One of the things I admire about you is a report that you were involved in producing just this year, spring 2024, thriving in a world of pluralist contention, a framework for schools. You're the head of school at Deerfield. We're going to talk about that report. I'd just like to begin by asking you, tell us about how you came to be the head of Deerfield. What's your position? When you were born, did they give you a rattle that said Deerfield on it, and you thought to yourself, and therefore I will be head of the school someday? Was this always your ambition? Can you just tell us about how you got to where you are?

John Austin: No, my ambition when I was growing up on the Outer Banks of North Carolina was to be a professional surfer.

John Tomasi: Nice.

John Austin: That hasn't come to be.

John Tomasi: Now you're in Western Massachusetts.

John Austin: And now I'm in Western Massachusetts. But no, I think if you had spoken to me when I was in high school or college and told me that I would be the head of a school, that would have been an unlikely outcome for me. I grew up on the Outer Banks of North Carolina. I went to public school. Public school all the way through high school. No, so I went through eighth grade, and then my mother and my father thought I needed a little bit more. I wasn't doing much in school at that point. And so I landed at St. Andrew's School in Delaware, which was a boarding school. And that kind of changed the trajectory of my life. I was not a particularly studious kid at that point.

John Tomasi: And you didn't eventually teach me?

John Austin: And I went back and taught after college.

John Tomasi: Oh, years later.

John Austin: And I had just a group of amazing teachers in high school. And they completely just changed the trajectory of my life and got me excited about learning, which is why I went back after Williams and taught there, then went to graduate school.

John Tomasi: So you went to Williams for undergrad?

John Austin: I went to Williams for undergrad.

John Tomasi: And what did you study?

John Austin: I studied English.

John Tomasi: English.

John Austin: And a little political economy.

John Tomasi: And then what?

John Austin: Then, I mean, this is my 38th year in school. So I've spent my entire life teaching. My wife and I went to graduate school at Columbia, where I got my PhD. We were in residence for four years. And then we actually went back to St. Andrew's and taught for some more. And then at that point, I ended up taking a head-of-school job at King's Academy in Jordan.

John Tomasi: That's right. And how long were you there?

John Austin: I was there for nine years, from 2010, just in time for the Arab Spring.

John Tomasi: Interesting.

John Austin: Until 2019.

John Tomasi: So you lived in the Middle East for nine years.

John Austin: For nine years.

John Tomasi: We'll return to that at the end of this conversation, perhaps, to talk about some of your views about the Middle East conflict and how they're playing out on our campus. Anything more you wanted to say about your path to Deerfield, then?

John Austin: No. It's just...

John Tomasi: What was the step before Deerfield? Where were you before that?

John Austin: So I went to St. Andrew's. My wife, Monica, and I were there for 17 years, King's Academy in Jordan for nine, and then Deerfield.

John Tomasi: Because there's a connection between King's Academy and Deerfield.

John Austin: There is. It was founded by a Deerfield graduate, King Abdullah of Jordan, who graduated from Deerfield in 1980. And so, when I was at King's, I developed a kind of relationship with Deerfield.

John Tomasi: Nice.

John Austin: I became more familiar with it.

John Tomasi: Right. Did you know Eric Widmer?

John Austin: I knew Eric very well, yeah.

John Tomasi: Oh, he was a friend and colleague, a senior colleague of mine at Brown.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: Years and years ago when I was first starting there.

John Austin: Yeah. He preceded me at King's.

John Tomasi: That's right.

John Austin: He was the founding head. He was there for three years, and then I came in for nine.

John Tomasi: He did the opposite direction of you, as I remember. Wasn't he at Deerfield?

John Austin: Yeah, he did Deerfield-King's. I did King's-Deerfield.

John Tomasi: Interesting. I've never thought of it that way. That's perfect. That's perfectly put. So, I want to start. I'd like to talk with you about the report, which is the main reason why I brought you on the show. At HXA, as you know, we're interested in reforming our universities, bringing them forward to a better future where they're fully inclusive. But they're also now, while being inclusive, also really good at learning from each other and searching for truth, unapologetically, openly, but communally and with humility. That's our space, the higher ed space. You've written a report about independent schools and about these same kind of issues in independent schools. I wonder if you could just say, before we go to the report, can you just say a few things about independent schools in America, what they are, why they're important? I mean, some people think they're just for the elite. Who cares?

John Austin: Yeah. Can you say something about independent schools? Yeah. I think that's a bit of a myth in terms of them being just simply for the elite. But I think my perspective on American independent schools was expanded when I went abroad for nine years, and I got to learn a great deal about schools, and particularly secondary schools, really across the world, in Europe, in the Middle East, in Asia, and elsewhere. And one of the remarkable things about independent schools in this country is, A, their incredible diversity of mission. You know, they're independent, and that's really, really unusual. They have the ability to chart their own direction in ways that's not typical of a lot of other university systems that might be key to one kind of curriculum or exam system or another. And so there's a tremendous diversity and heterogeneity of independent schools, and that creates for a lot of creative thought and a lot of creative thinking.

John Tomasi: So people describe the independent schools in the U.S. sometimes as being laboratories.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: What do you think of that characterization?

John Austin: I think that's accurate in the sense that faculty have a tremendous amount of autonomy, and the schools themselves have a tremendous amount of freedom to be creative and innovative. And, you know, they're very, very different from one another. And I think that's unusual. And I think the other thing that became apparent when I went abroad is that American independent schools, as you hinted at earlier, they value inclusion and they invest in inclusion. You know, Deerfield, for example, just to give you, you know, one example, is a remarkably diverse school. It's a boarding school, so it's able to recruit young people from across the world. You know, we have kids from 35 different countries, 35 different states, and almost 40% of our students are on need-based financial aid.

John Tomasi: Let me pause you on that.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: So you said there's geographical diversity, clearly. And I was going to ask about demographic or economic diversity. And what was the last stat you said, that what percentage are- That 40% of our students receive need-based financial aid. Fascinating. So there's a great deal of diversity on these campuses. And let me ask you about that. So maybe, do you know, was there a period in U.S. history where there was an explosion of creation of private high schools?

John Austin: Yeah, that's a great question. And I don't know of a truly great history of the American independent school. But I do know, if you look at New England and the Mid-Atlantic, there was an early burst of the early academies. Deerfield was an academy. It was founded in 1797. It was founded by the Massachusetts State Legislature. Andover and Exeter, you know, I think there were quite literally dozens, if not hundreds, of these academies founded during the end of the 18th century, at the moment of the country's founding. There were a great number of schools that were founded in the 80s and the 90s, during the so-called Gilded Age, you know, when they built out schools.

John Tomasi: The 1880s.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: That's when there was an explosion of building of colleges across the U.S. Interesting. In the late 1800s. There's one anecdote that you might enjoy in 19, I'll get this year, not quite right, but in roughly 1885, there were, in England, there were four universities, and that was thought to be quite enough. In the state of Ohio, in that same year, there were 44 colleges.

John Austin: That's fascinating.

John Tomasi: It seemed like a very American thing, this idea of creating something new, trying a different angle.

John Austin: What was the date of that?

John Tomasi: This is 1880s.

John Austin: 1880s.

John Tomasi: I don't know the exact thing.

John Austin: Fascinating.

John Tomasi: But 44 in Ohio alone.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: Ohio was not unique in that sense. It was just one I just picked because of the fours.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: But there's something about that. There's something about an American spirit, I think, about creating these things.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: And you can look at it different ways. You could say, well, it's a hierarchical society, and there are going to be these elite schools and other schools, too. But there are people creating schools for all different kinds of reasons.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: All different kinds of reasons. And I think that's true, I gather, in the private high school space as well as at the college space. I want to talk to you about the challenges you see at Deerfield, but also across the broader landscape as you move now towards the report. On the university campuses, where we do most of our work at Heterodox Academy, we're sort of seeing two things, I suppose. On the upside, we see ourselves as being involved in a process over the past 30, 40, 50 years of attempting inclusion, a project of inclusion, on a scale that no other university system has ever attempted. Inclusion across gender, across race, across religious differences, a whole variety of, there's been some narrowings, ideological narrowing in some ways on faculties, for example. But generally, the big story of the last 40 or 50 years at colleges is this drive towards inclusion. At the same time, and more recently especially, most vividly last year, we see intensification of balkanization on campuses, of self-censoring, of administrations, often in the name of inclusion, of developing policies, which often are having the effect of keeping people more separate from one another.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: Do you see a similar phenomenon at the high school level? What would you say about that?

John Austin: Yeah. I'm in private school. Yeah. I mean, I think some of those tendencies are at play at American private schools. But I think when I think about Deerfield, for example, we, in a lot of ways, we have a different way of doing inclusion. And the framework is one way to think about how we do that on the academic and the kind of programmatic side of this.

John Tomasi: The framework and the report.

John Austin: Yeah, the framework and the report. But I mentioned earlier, you know, the tremendous diversity that American independent schools have now. And for me, the great question facing schools is, you know, what do you do with that diversity once you have it on campus? And I tend to think this through, in some ways, through the lens of Robert Putnam's work on social capital. And he talks about the difference between bonding and bridging social capital. And I think the real...

John Tomasi: Sam, tell us about those. What do those words mean?

John Austin: So bonding social capital is when you have strong relationships with your group or your family, right? And really, really important. As he points out, those are the folks that are going to take care of you when you get old and when you get sick and when you're in real trouble. But he also suggests that bridging social capital and the development of bridging social capital is really important for communities, for countries, and I think for schools. Because what he's talking about there is connections across difference, strangers coming together. And so schools have to create ways for dialogue and connection across difference. And the report or the framework is an attempt to put in place certain principles that facilitate that and create opportunities for kids to come together and connect across all of the differences that, you know, that characterize a diverse student body like ours. We have other kinds of practices at the school that do that. Simple things like how we eat together. Deerfield does sit-down meals seven times a week where a faculty member sits with a randomly assigned group of kids from grades nine through 12. And in that way, kids get to know one another that they wouldn't otherwise connect with. It's very different from a cafeteria meal where you go in and find your friends. You know, at our meals on campus, our kids are getting to know one another in a randomized way that's really important, and it builds connection. It builds trust, and it builds community. And that can also translate into a certain kind of academic experience. Because when you have high levels of trust, you can have conversations that you can't otherwise have on campus. People are less wary, they're less suspicious of one another. And so we're trying to, you know, to create, you know, a strong sense of connection and community and bridging social capital and high levels of trust. Because that, in some ways, is the foundation for learning. Without that, you know, kids are going to be suspicious and wary of one another, if not hostile, which is what you saw last spring. I mean, what was interesting for me about last spring was that it was students pitted against students.

John Tomasi: Yes.

John Austin: It wasn't 1968 where they were, it was students and faculty pitted against, you know, the administration or the United States government. It was kids against kids.

John Tomasi: I'm interested in that point, and we're going to return to that. Let me just ask you about something that you just said. I'd like to hear what you think about this characterization. Sometimes I think when people talk about inclusion and the fact that universities and high schools, private schools, have become more diverse, that they see diversity as a challenge to be overcome.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: Because there's a danger that with diversity, bad things will happen. Another way to think about diversity, and I think it's what I heard you just saying, is that we want diversity because it opens up this opportunity that's unavailable without diversity, to have something like adventurous intellectual engagement. So it's not just that the objective is not just one of the posturing of an administration, perhaps. And I've let you know what you think should not just be one of defensively worrying about how to prevent a bad news cycle day and bad things for people.

John Austin: Though we do that.

John Tomasi: Though you do that, too.

John Austin: Of course.

John Tomasi: Psychologists, too. But it should be directed towards something like this kind of remarkable opportunity that Deerfield's never seen. I mean, Deerfield became co-ed how recently?

John Austin: Relatively recently, 40-some years ago, 1989. It was one of the later elite schools.

John Tomasi: Yeah. But, you know, Deerfield being a much more diverse place than it was, say, 50 years ago, does it open up the opportunities? Is that how you see it?

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: Or how do you, as a head of school, how do you look at that as a challenge or as an opportunity, both at the same time?

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: How do you weigh those things?

John Austin: Yeah. I think it's an opportunity, and it's something to be leveraged. I mean, you know, why do you have this incredibly diverse student body? Well, because you want those kids to be able to bring their diverse experiences to the classroom and to learn from one another. I mean, I think you could say the same thing about diversity, or you could say the same thing about polarization as what you just said about diversity. Polarization is not necessarily, in and of itself, a bad thing if you can get the people on the various sides of the polls to talk to one another, right, and to engage with one another.

John Tomasi: So by polarization, you mean something like strongly divergent worldviews?

John Austin: Exactly.

John Tomasi: That's only that, though. It doesn't mean inability to listen yet.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: That's balkanization, maybe.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: That's a little technical, but...

John Austin: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

John Tomasi: You said it in English. I'm going to do whatever they were.

John Austin: Yeah, no, that's a fair and good distinction, but I think, yeah, and the distinction you're making between diversity as an opportunity versus diversity as a problem is a really important one. I mean, you know, I think schools need to figure out how to leverage diversity on their campuses and encourage kids to cross difference and not remain isolated from one another.

John Tomasi: At a school like Deerfield, unlike at a university like Columbia up the street, where you spend time as a student, and I spend time pretty regularly now since I'm in New York a lot, at a school like Deerfield, it's a younger population.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: I'm looking at some differences now between universities and universities. It's a younger population. There also seems to be, I think, sort of a thickening of community, thickening of communal bonds at an academy like Deerfield and, for example, at a large undergraduate university like Iowa State or Columbia, for example. Are those the main differences that you would describe, the sort of on-the-ground differences? Because we're going to move now to the report and the challenges for free expression, but what's the context? Can you say anything more about the specialized context of private schools?

John Austin: Yeah. Well, they're smaller, as you just said. They're less organizationally complex, and so, therefore, there's more opportunities to bring kids into community and connection with one another. I think that's a significant one. And secondly, and this speaks to the report and the framework, there's an age difference and a developmental difference between a ninth grader and a tenth grader and a college student. And one of the things that we tried to think through in the framework and the report was, you know, what do longstanding commitments to academic freedom look like at the high school level, distinct from the college level? Because our kids are less intellectually mature. I mean, the thing I love about high school, and the reason I've never had a moment regret spending my life working with high school-age kids is that high schools are— You've never had a moment of regret? I've never had a moment of regret.

John Tomasi: Come on. You want to say that?

John Austin: No. Not a one. Never. I love working with that age group.

John Tomasi: I'm just testing you.

John Austin: No. I really haven't. I mean, there's other things I could imagine myself doing, but I love working with that age group. And part of the reason is that you get to see this extraordinary transformation in kids between the ages of 12, between the ages of, you know, 13 and 18. Like, it's a moment of formation. In ways I think that college is not—that's not to say that college is a wonderful extension of the learning and the growth that happens in high school. But high school is a kind of crucible where a young person's habits and dispositions and intellect is formed and shaped. And it's exciting to watch that happen, and it's really rewarding when you see these kids develop into these remarkable kids. So—and that's different from college. In college, you're in some ways, you know, less so, I guess, with younger college students. But in many cases, you're dealing with adults. You know, they're of age. They're still maturing and growing, of course, and developing. But there's a difference there. And so we tried to think of the framework through that, that specific lens.

John Tomasi: So let me ask you about the report. So the report came out, was it May?

John Austin: It came out in May, May 1st.

John Tomasi: Yeah, I think someone sent it to me in late May, a friend, a Deerfield grad. And I read it with just great interest. The report's entitled, Thriving in a World of Pluralistic Contention, a Framework for Schools. Can you tell us first just what your role was in this report, how it came to be, who was involved, how were they chosen? Tell us about the background before we get into the details.

John Austin: Yeah. So I've been thinking about, this is my fifth year at Deerfield. And throughout those first couple or three years as we made our way through COVID and all of the political and social turmoil that came with that. I've been thinking about these questions and these issues throughout that time. And I've written and spoken about them a number of times to our community and to our parents.

John Tomasi: There's a convocation address, or maybe it was an address you gave at Parents Weekend, I think three, two years.

John Austin: Yeah, 2021, I think.

John Tomasi: Oh, you know the one I'm thinking about?

John Austin: Yeah, fall of 2021.

John Tomasi: Because when I joined Heterodox Academy in January, two years ago, the same Deerfield alum sent me your book, which is the first piece of yours that I read.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: And I was just electrified by it.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: I don't mean to.

John Austin: Well, thank you.

John Tomasi: Forgive me for saying this. So obviously, but the historical references and your understanding of these issues, I thought was really, really striking.

John Austin: Thank you.

John Tomasi: I'm sorry, I didn't mean to go out and diverge into a fan moment, but it's sincere. But again, back on the report, so whose idea was it?

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: Can I ask who funded it? Who got involved?

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: Why?

John Austin: So it came to the attention of John Gulla, who's the executive director of the Edward E. Ford Foundation, which is one of the foundations that serves independent schools. And I had a series of conversations with him, and the idea emerged of Deerfield applying for a grant, which we eventually received, to put together a group of educators from throughout the United States, everywhere from Hawaii, to Florida, to Pennsylvania, to Washington, Lakeside School, and Punahou School, and Albuquerque Academy, and Germantown Friends, and Woodberry Forest. I mean, a really great group of schools, St. Andrews School. I've forgotten a couple. I apologize.

John Tomasi: And in choosing that set, were you choosing this set?

John Austin: I did it through, we took nominations from different people, and we wanted a diverse group of schools. We wanted day schools. We wanted boarding schools. We wanted urban schools. We wanted some boarding, you know, some schools that were less urban.

John Tomasi: What was the question, or what was the impetus that wanted you to convene this report, this committee to make this report?

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: What stimulated it?

John Austin: Well, I think, you know, schools, you know, from COVID on, you know, it was a moment in schools of high conflict. I mean, schools were being kind of, in the same way that colleges and universities, they were really, it was a moment of great intensity and polarization and conflict and politicization of schools. A lot of heads of school and a lot of boards were struggling to make sense of that and to chart a way through that in a way that served kids. And so the goal was to try to get down on paper and articulate some principles that schools could use to promote student learning, promote exploration, and in a lot of ways kind of depoliticize the schools so that kids could learn in highly impactful ways.

John Tomasi: Can you see what depoliticize means in that context? You said a moment ago that you're not opposed to polarization, understood in the technically correct, precise way. What do you mean by depoliticization?

John Austin: Well, the way we talk about it in the report is as a commitment to what we call disciplined nonpartisanship. So in one way, we're trying to stay within our legal status as a nonprofit. And as a nonprofit, you know, we're not permitted to advocate on behalf of candidates. But I think we also, for high school kids, and this was an important point of discussion among the group, is we wanted to think carefully about how, as classroom teachers and as leaders, we position ourselves in regards to social and political issues of the moment.

John Tomasi: Do you mean how the administration positions itself or how the student positions itself?

John Austin: I mean how the school leadership, the administration positions itself, and also how individual faculty members position themselves. And so when we talk about disciplined nonpartisanship, we're talking about that both as an institutional ethos, partly inspired by, you know, the Kalven Report. And I've read your incredible statement on stance-taking, which makes tremendous sense and overlaps with a lot of the things that we're saying.

John Tomasi: But also— And just for our listeners, two things. So we're now talking about disciplined nonpartisanship, which is one of the three pillars of this report that John was involved in convening and I believe was lead writer for. The other two principles of the three pillars are disciplined nonpartisanship, expressive freedom, and intellectual diversity. And now we're talking about disciplined nonpartisanship. And John just referred to the Kalven Report, which our listeners, our regular listeners will know, is the famous 1968 University of Chicago report, talking about the idea that the University of Chicago, at least, should be the, quote, home and sponsor of critics, rather than being the critic itself. Do you want to say more about that pillar?

John Austin: Yeah, so I think we—you know, I was going through a moment as head of school where I was often asked to speak on issues that were, like, well beyond my expertise or to position— Political issues?

John Tomasi: Political issues, whether, you know, you know— That Deerfield should take a stand on issues.

John Austin: Yeah, you know, we need to take strong—and a lot of this, I think, had to do with the 2016 election of President Trump, where a lot of faculty members and even some parents felt like there were values that were under threat, and schools needed to—and teachers needed to kind of step forward and defend certain kinds of principles. And that often became very, very complicated for school leaders, and so we avoided, when we were thinking about this, the Kalven term of neutrality, because we weren't saying—we weren't saying that schools are value-neutral. They're not, and the report, the framework is really a strong argument for certain kinds of values that can shape a school's community and culture. So, we moved away from that to a position of nonpartisanship.

John Tomasi: And the phrase you used, the report uses, is disciplined nonpartisanship.

John Austin: Yes, that is— Can you say more about that? Yeah.

John Tomasi: I'm also interested to—I'm sure our listeners want to know, too, about what you mean by rejecting or at least not using the term neutrality. You may know that there was a Harvard report that came out a few months after HXA released our HXA model, and it followed many of our recommendations. But they explicitly say in that report, the writers of the Harvard report, they adopted statement neutrality, which HXA approves of. But they say we're not endorsing neutrality. We're actually taking a substantive view about the purpose of the university being truth-seeking above all else. Is that what you mean?

John Austin: Being— Being truth-seeking above all else. Yeah.

John Tomasi: Is that why—is your rationale similar to what they were thinking?

John Austin: Yeah, I think that's fair. You know, the idea is that the more the institutions speaks on issues of social and political concern, the less potential space there might be for kids to be able to form and express their own views. And so that position of disciplined nonpartisanship, is actually a way to empower the voices of kids.

John Tomasi: And when you say—so in a Deerfield context, you mean the students and you mean the faculty as well? So that's an interesting question. Like, what are the professional responsibilities of faculty when exploring issues of public contention? And the way—the place where we came out on this, which is—it's a little bit different than the college and the universities, where academic freedom protects the, you know, the rights of faculty to speak freely and openly. We—we adopt an approach that Diana Hess, who was the dean of education at the Graduate School of Education at the University of Wisconsin, argues for, which is called a pedagogical tools approach. And it recognizes, on the one hand, at the high school level, that a teacher that's too assertive in terms of their own particular beliefs and views about a contested social issue might have the impact of chilling discussion within the classroom. But at the same time, we want teachers to have the freedom to exercise their own judgment when they share those views with others. And the rule of thumb is not that teachers can or cannot share their views in the classroom. The rule of thumb is that they need to make a judgment. And as long as it supports the intellectual autonomy of the kids and is in the service of creating robust conversation in classroom, they can come to that determination on their own. And so it—it—it—it weaves space and room for faculty to exercise their own judgment. And—and I'm just interested now of the report. Is your hope that—private schools across the country will read the report— Yeah, and consider adopting each of the three pillars?

John Austin: Yeah. So we—we're pretty explicit about that in it. We—A, I do hope people read it. I hope they read it, too. Yeah, I hope they—I hope they read it and think about it. And many schools are. I mean, I've heard from—from dozens of—of heads of school and trustees and professional organizations who are very curious and interested in it. And I know some have assigned it for—for summer reading. So we—we do hope schools will engage with it. But we don't intend it to be something like the, you know, the Chicago Statement, for example, a document to which schools should sign on to, as it were. We intend it as a—as more as a provocation, as a series of possibilities and—and arguments that can help schools position themselves on these important issues of expressive freedom, of non-partisanship, and—and intellectual diversity. And so, you know, we want—we want to get—we want to—we want to excite conversation. And— Let me—yeah.

John Tomasi: I'm sorry, I didn't interrupt, but let me—let me ask you about the—another pillar. And you just mentioned that—expressive freedom.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: What does that mean? Does it mean different things in different contexts at the high school level? What would you say about that?

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: So— How about that? Just as— Again, this is one of the three pillars.

John Austin: Just as we avoided, the—the term neutrality because it was confusing to people. Like, how—how can schools that are advancing certain kinds of academic values consider themselves neutral? In the same way that we—we—we moved off that term, we embraced the term expressive freedom, in distinction to, you know, what's called free speech, right? Free speech just gets sloganized too much. And—and what we wanted to do was consider the question of how do you create on campus the conditions for robust conversation and dialogue across all kinds of differences? And so we—we—we broke that down into kind of three dimensions and three norms.

John Tomasi: you talk about conscious—conscientiousness, courage, and tolerance.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: Are those the three norms you have in mind?

John Austin: Those are—those are the three. So, toleration of expression is—is—is helping young—young people develop the capacity to listen to ideas that, they might—may find challenging, off-putting, or even offensive, but to be able to—to listen and—and—and—and—and take those in.

John Tomasi: — May I pause on that for a moment?

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: So, we talk about this, that—at HXA, that's one of our three fundamental values we call a constructive disagreement. Yes. And—and something that we talk about, and I'd love to get your reaction to this, is that that ideal of, active listening, constructive listening, constructive disagreement, it's an idea that's easy to state and to assume that everyone should immediately follow once they've been directed to its intention. They've had their attention directed to its importance, and yet the reality is that human beings evolved—our brains evolved—with all different kinds of purposes. Open-mindedness is not one of the things that were most natural to us. Yeah. In fact, tribalism were built into our brains for a whole bunch of different reasons. We sometimes say that open-mindedness is an unnatural practice. Yes. And at HXA, on the college campuses, and we try to encourage that, we're self-consciously running against some pretty deep features of the human brain. We sort information through all these cognitive biases. We confirm things we want to believe. Do you see it that way?

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: You mentioned before that you're working with younger people, shaping young minds. Is it an unnatural practice that you're teaching them, or what's your experience?

John Austin: Yeah, I think you're right. I think it is an unnatural practice. And that's why we have schools, because schools exist to deepen and foster that capacity. I mean, a lot of it has to do with— Capacities that they wouldn't otherwise have. That they wouldn't otherwise have.

John Tomasi: Can I riff on that for a moment?

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: We have school. You said, that's why we have schools, you just said. Is this what it means? Are schools civilizing in the sense that they aim to make us less purely human in an evolutionary sense, and maybe somewhat more human in a self-conscious idealistic sense? I didn't say that very well.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: But you said, that's why you have schools. What did you mean by that? Yeah. Is it to change the way we are?

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: What is it?

John Austin: Well, I mean, I think, you know, is scholarly investigation and disciplined inquiry a natural capacity that we have?

John Tomasi: Aristotle thought so.

John Austin: Well, yeah.

John Tomasi: He also thought women had fewer molars than males. He's not a flawless authority.

John Austin: I mean, maybe we have—I mean, I'm certain we do have a capacity for that, but it has to be cultivated, and it has to be fostered. And that's what I mean when I say that's why schools exist. And one of the fundamental assumptions of the framework is that schools exist to initiate young people into the norms of inquiry, right? And one of those important norms is how to use language and how to express oneself. And the reason we broke it down into three separate norms is that they're all interdependent, and you have to have each of them to have a healthy, expressive culture on campus. You can't have just courageous expression. You also need conscientious expression. Kids need to learn, and they need to have the capacity to imagine how their words might land on their audience. I mean, that's what rhetoric and persuasion is. And so helping kids develop these capacities—and they do need to be developed—to listen to challenging ideas, to read challenging ideas, to express themselves with thoughtfulness and care with an appropriate sensitivity to how their words land with audiences. And also the ability, the courage to raise their hand and ask the question they're dying to ask, but they may not be willing to because they're worried that it might be met with disapproval or peer censure. You know, all three of those things are essential, and it's my belief that if you can do all three of those, not just one, but all of them, you're going to create an incredibly vibrant learning environment for kids.

John Tomasi: And those three things, again, are conscientiousness, courage, and tolerance.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: And let me—so that you said that the three big pillars, expressive freedom, disciplined nonpartisanship, and intellectual diversity all work together.

John Austin: To have expressive freedom, can you say something about the connection between expressive freedom and intellectual diversity? Yeah.

John Tomasi: What does intellectual diversity mean? Why is it valuable?

John Austin: Well, as I've listened to some of your questions, clearly the capacity to tolerate challenging ideas has to do with our ability to just engage with new ideas and different ideas. So, I think those two are connected. And one of the ways that we talk about intellectual diversity and the framework is that disciplines are themselves conversations. You know, they're contestations. And we want to be aware of that as we shape curriculum and give kids the opportunity to engage with challenging ideas. I mean, you must know this in your own work. You know, you want to give kids a broad range of ideas so that they can approach the world with historical context and philosophical depth and an understanding that people think differently about important questions.

John Tomasi: Let me be sure I understand that. So, one dimension of diversity, of intellectual diversity, is what we might call disciplinary diversity.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: So, for example, we're examining a person buying an apple at a cart in your public library around the corner from us right now. An economist could use the tools of economics to describe that event, that human interaction.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: In ways that would be illuminating, it would be illuminated by the tools of economics.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: A poet who's watching the same interaction might describe this thing in a whole other way. It's the same event. It's a person buying an apple or an apple cart, let's say. And yet, and we could do it differently. Yes. We could do it biochemically. We could do it in a bunch of different ways.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: That's one dimension. It's a way of saying that any phenomenon that we might put in front of us or want to talk about with another human being, we have available to us, because of our civilization, these disciplinary tools that we might possibly bring to bear on the expectations of what we see. And different tools used by different people might yield different evaluations.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: The economist might say, well, it's really exploitative that that person had to spend so much money, they're going to starve now because they had to pay that much for the apple. The poet might say, what a moment in that person's life they sacrificed for their child. And now the child has the apple. Yeah. And they'll never forget their mother. We can do this in different ways, right?

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: So that's one dimension. But usually when people talk about viewpoint diversity or intellectual diversity, you're using your phrase from the report, they often talk about ideological diversity, not disciplinary diversity. There's other forms of diversity, too. Can you say something about ideological diversity? Is that an important concept for you? What do you think of that?

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: And I'm asking in the context of the report.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: Do you want to speak to that?

John Austin: Well, your earlier comment about the different ways in which you can approach the apple seller and the purchase of that apple.

John Tomasi: Take it the way you like.

John Austin: I mean, that's – I think what you just described is one of the rationales for a liberal arts education, right? Because one of the things a liberal arts education does is it seeks to impart different disciplinary modes of understanding so that you can see the world as a historian or you can see the world – you can see the history of apple selling, right? Or you can approach it through an economic lens or an aesthetic lens, right? And so built into the liberal arts is this idea that there are plural ways of thinking about the world and attacking problems. And I think that's really important, and I think we have to remind ourselves of that. I mean, that's one of the beauties of a liberal arts education, which is not an educational track that every country or every educational system embraces. So we have, for better and for worse, and it's a way of thinking diversely about the world, right? It recognizes that there are many different ways of understanding a single phenomenon, and that's why we have different kinds of disciplines. You just said for better and for worse. Did you mean to say for worse, or is that just a throwaway line? Is there something worrying about liberal arts education? Well, now that you ask, yeah, I think there can be, right, if it gets excessively fragmented. At the high school level, we have to be focused, I think, in terms of what disciplinary lenses do we value, what disciplinary lenses are essential, what are absolutely important for us to impart so that young people can go on to college and career and life and have the intellectual toolkit that they need. But there's always a danger that it becomes too diffuse. Oh, I see. I see. Let me see if I'm following you correctly. I'm thinking of cultural literacy. Yes. The idea that there may be a kind of a core of things that people need to learn to be part of a similar, part of a common civilization. Yes. And that there's some tension between that idea that there is something like civilization. Yeah. And we can do it in great book style, like the great books, the canon, and so on. Yeah. And there's a tension, perhaps, between that ideal that we're bringing everyone into this common, we know it's the best tradition, our tradition, as opposed to the diffusion and the challenge of diversity always on the edges pulling people away from any one mode of thinking. Yeah. Is that the right way to say that, or is that not right? Yeah, no, that's a way of thinking about it. I was thinking of it more from the secondary school level of what are the most essential disciplinary lenses that you want to impart to young people so that they can make meaning in the world. Not so much, you know, what are the most essential bodies of knowledge we need to impart in order to ensure a coherent community or even nation, though I understand that and I'm sympathetic to that argument.

John Tomasi: That's fascinating. I want to move, again, I want to just to our listeners, just recommend this report. I just found it a fascinating read. It's fascinating in terms of illuminating questions about open inquiry in private schools, but it also, for me, throws lights on some of the challenges we face at the university level, too. I want to ask you about a couple of things from your own history as an administrator, and that's a controversy you were involved in. Not a major controversy by local standards, no longer a major controversy at all, but it was a controversy that I read about that happened when you were in Jordan. You were head of school there, I think. Yes, I was.

John Austin: And so, what I heard from an article, what I understood from an article in a student paper there, when you were head of school, there was a controversy about some students designing, putting designs on senior jackets.

John Tomasi: And do you want to say something about what the controversy was? Let me give the color quotation. You were quoted in the student paper as saying, so apparently, as I understand, some of the jacket designs were rejected by the administration, which is a euphemism for saying, you. And you were quoted in the paper when you were criticized by some students for saying, hey, let us design the jackets the way we want. You were quoted as saying, quote, freedom of speech is overrated. Do you want to say anything about that in your own defense?

John Austin: Yeah, sure. What was the controversy about? Yeah. So, the senior class when I was at King's would always, during the spring of the senior year, they would be given a school, like, it almost looks like a varsity jacket with the sleeves and the kind of felt front.

John Tomasi: Sounds very Western.

John Austin: It is.

John Tomasi: 1950s.

John Austin: It's a Jordanian tradition across different schools.

John Tomasi: Oh, interesting.

John Austin: A lot of the schools do it. Not all, but a lot of them do it.

John Tomasi: That's an American influence, not an Oxford influence.

John Austin: That would appear to be so. I don't know what the origins of it is. And the kids customize their jackets. It's a school jacket in the school colors with the school, you know, emblazoned with the school logo and letters. But they, they personalize them in all kinds of ways. And they often, they would do it in English and they would do it in Arabic. And of course, I don't read Arabic. So, I would rely on other members of my team to, the kids would submit their jacket designs and they would get approved by one of the class deans.

John Tomasi: I can just, I'm sorry, I can just imagine them if I were them trying to get away with something.

John Austin: Absolutely. Absolutely. So, there's this wonderful game where they're, you know, where they're, they're trying to get things on their jacket that have meanings that escape, you know, the class deans.

John Tomasi: And I think there were, you said you wanted courage. So, here you go.

John Austin: Yeah. And, and I, I, I appreciate that. You know, I, I appreciate that inclination on the part of the kids. And, and in this case, I think there were a couple of jackets where the kids had, had put some things on their jackets in Arabic that might've had a double entendre that was slightly out of keeping with the spirit of the jacket. And so, the class deans said, no, you need, you need to change that. Hence the, the, the controversy. And, and of course, the kids didn't appreciate that. and I spoke to them at a, at a, at a class meeting. And, and I think when I, when I, when I referenced, when I said free speech is overrated, I think they, they, they, they missed the bigger point of the, of the quotation. I may have even quoted Stanley Fish at that point and said, there's no such thing as, as free speech. There are always limits on, on what we, what, what is permissible discourse and what, and what isn't. And I was trying to encourage the kids. And this gets back to the expressive freedom piece of the, of the framework that, of course you have, you have this incredible, opportunity to, to say and express what you want on your jackets. But you also want to be, you also want to be thoughtful and, and, and sensitive to how that might be received by, you know, other people who are reading your jacket.

John Tomasi: let me, let me, let me read another quotation. And as an aside, I need to just mention that I'm, I'm observing that you are one of the few people I know who like me uses quotation as a noun and quote as a verb. And I don't want to tell you, I really appreciate that. It's a dying distinction, but I'm trying to keep it alive. And you're, and you're, and you're supporting me, but let me, let me quote you again from the student paper.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: And it aligns with what you're saying, right?

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: Let me, let me just read what I think are your words. Quote, I want young people to not only be able to express themselves freely, but also to be able to express themselves in a way that is civic minded and sensitive to the standards and norms of a community. Close quote. Can you say a little bit about that? So there's this Stanley Fish, you mentioned a minute ago, we had, he, he spoke at the HXA conference, this year, in, in, in Chicago, and he spoke about some of this, his critiques of free speech, but maybe we'll leave Stanley out of it for a minute. Unless you want to bring him in.

John Austin: No, no, no.

John Tomasi: But tell us what you, what, what, what do you think of this is, is free speech something that you value at Deerfield? Which is that, what would you, what do you say about that?

John Austin: Yeah, absolutely.

John Tomasi: but I'm sorry, you value absolute free speech?

John Austin: Not, we don't, we don't, we absolutely value free speech, but probably not in an, in an absolutist libertarian way in the sense that I think, and this goes to the whole question of, of trying to create an expressive culture on your campus, you, you, you want kids to use their voice and to exercise their freedom to express themselves. And at the same time, you want to help them do that effectively. And sometimes, effectively means, learning to do that in a way that's sensitive to standards and norms. I mean, that's what a scholar does. I mean, a scholar is not absolutely free to, shape their arguments in any way that they want. They, they, they write and they, think within the norms of their, of their discipline. So again, I think it, it's, I think what I was trying to help communicate to the kids in that particular moment were the importance of each of the three expressive pillars, right? Just as expressive freedom is important and courageous expression is important. So too is, is conscientious expression.

John Tomasi: May I push back a little?

John Austin: Yeah, please.

John Tomasi: So, so again, you're, you're quoted as saying that, expression should be civic minded and sensitive to the standards and norms of a community. And I'm remembering what you just said a few minutes ago about people, if they're good communicators, skillful communicators, the kind of communicators that I think we want our students to be, and we want ourselves to be on, on campuses. They should be mindful about the way their words land on the ears of the listeners, not because of woke reasons. Yeah. But rather because of rhetorical reasons of being aware of what that means to be a communicator. And yet, here's the, here's the pushback. Yeah. You say that, you're quoted as saying, sensitive, sensitive to the standards and norms of the community, but the standards and norms of a community can be very narrow.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: It can be very thick.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: I would, I would suggest that instead what you, I think what you're, what you're looking for is something like the speech should be sensitive to the goals of the community.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: And the goals of the community on an academic campus, whether it's at Deerfield or at Columbia up the street.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: It's something like searching for knowledge together.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: It's not to maintain a view that we have.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: So does that, that's not a friendly amendment. I'm not sure if you, so it's not so much the standards and norms of the community, unless maybe you're going to say those are standards and norms of the community are searching for truth.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: But I think it's the goals that we have to be looking toward.

John Austin: Yeah. I wouldn't disagree with that, that formulation. I mean, that makes a great deal of sense to me.

John Tomasi: So then free speech, we talk about this at HXA a lot, that it's not that we think that we're interested in culture.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: That's our angle. Fire does the free speech side more rigorously than some ways than we do. We do the cultural side in some ways more rigorously than they do. We're interested in what speech is for on a campus.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: It's not any old which way thing and people are shooting off their mouths about anything that comes to mind.

John Austin: Yeah. Yeah, of course. We don't want more of that.

John Tomasi: Yeah, absolutely. What we want is a more thoughtful, engagement.

John Austin: Yes. Yeah. Yes.

John Tomasi: Let me, we're moving towards the end of our time. I want to come back to this really important question. Maybe we can take a few minutes to pause on it and to talk about it together a little bit. You spent, you know, one of the big conflicts on the campuses over the past year, regards to conflict in the Middle East, the events of October 7th and following. You lived in the Middle East and in Jordan for nine years. Anti-Semitism is a major issue on college campuses now. Do you see, what's your experience at Deerfield?

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: About Deerfield, but also across, you know, I know you have a national perspective on these things. What do you see at the K through 12 space about the Middle East conflict, about anti-Semitism? What are your observations?

John Austin: Yeah. I think it's, I think it's landed differently at different schools. I think that's, I think that's pretty accurate.

John Tomasi: Parochial schools, elite, what kind of differentiation is there?

John Austin: Is there a pattern you want to run? I don't know that, I don't know that there is a pattern.

John Tomasi: schools where there are more Jewish students, for example.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: Elite schools in New York. What do you, what do you have in mind?

John Austin: That could, both of those hypotheses are, are, are, are possible. you know, at Deerfield, we have, you know, we have, we have a very mixed group of students. We have, you know, we have, Arab students and students who are deeply sympathetic to the, to the, the, the hopes of, of, of, of Palestinians. And we also have, we have Jewish students. and both of those groups are understandably, you know, upset, you know, distressed by everything that's been happening in, in, in, in the Middle East.

John Tomasi: Were there protests on the Deerfield campus? Were there encampments?

John Austin: No, there were no, there were no protests. There were no encampments. There was discussion. there was,

John Tomasi: Discussion meaning reasoned discourse?

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: Or was there other things too?

John Austin: No, there was absolutely reasoned discourse. I mean, kids getting together to talk about it, articles published in the student newspaper. And so in that way, I think there was a healthy, exchange of, of views, but we didn't see on the campus of Deerfield what you've seen at some colleges and universities for, for example. and again, I guess as the head of school, you know, one of the things we're trying to do is, is, is, you know, on the most important level, care for kids who, who, who might be upset and distressed and, and, you know, sometimes quietly suffering in, in the midst of these events. And, and, and at the same time, try to create the conditions for kids to get together and, and as you said earlier, think together about complicated issues. and there's no more, there's no more complicated issue than, than the, the regional politics of the, of the Middle East.

John Tomasi: let me ask you not so much about the Middle East conflict, but about what that, what, what those conflicts as they're interpreted, I'm sorry, how those conflicts are interpreted on campuses today. And I'm thinking of, I'm thinking of a movement, from the 1980s, I think it began on college campuses. And I think in high schools, maybe even a little bit sooner about privilege. And there was, you probably know a programming. I know of some programming from my experience at Brown, where there was a push to, as part of the inclusion, as part of the inclusion, wave to make students more aware of their privilege. There was a movement called, unpack your privilege backpack that I remember in the 80s, perhaps.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: And, when I was in college and, people would be asked to say, well, take out the various things that are from your backpack that you don't even realize are giving you these advantages. Do you remember that privilege? And I was just wondering whether that, that, that privileging and that concern for privilege, there was a sense there that privilege.

John Austin: And they would do privilege walks as well.

John Tomasi: That's right.

John Austin: You would take a step forward.

John Tomasi: That's right.

John Austin: If you were.

John Tomasi: That's right.

John Austin: And then you take another step forward.

John Tomasi: And, and there was a, there was a, a, a, a subtext and sometimes it wasn't even very sub. It was a text that there's something bad about privilege.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: And I wonder if you want to say anything about connecting that to antisemitism. Cause here we have, here's one story about the situation with Jewish Americans. Let's say just to narrow the scope a little bit, a group that's been persecuted in all kinds of ways.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: And it has also achieved outside success in all kinds of ways. Yeah. And that seems to complicate the narrative of privilege. There's some, there could be a sense in which privilege is always by its very definition. in that context I was describing, undeserved. Yeah. Suspect. And yet the Jew, the Jewish experience in America seems to have both of these elements of oppression.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: Exclusion from schools, for example.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: And, but then also this remarkable success, it's almost like a standing objection to the privilege movements premises.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: Is that too strong? Does that sound familiar to you? Do you have any comments about that?

John Austin: Yeah. I'm just, I mean, you, you might say that everyone is privileged in different ways and everyone is lacking in privilege in certain ways. and I'm not always certain that an emphasis on, on privilege and, sometimes the, the hierarchies that emerge from that, you know, and that's literally what happens during a, you know, during a so-called privilege walk where you take a step forward and you take another step forward and, and you create this, you create this visible hierarchy of privilege and a lack of privilege. I'm not sure that's the best way to encourage kids to connect with one another across difference.

John Tomasi: It sounds to me. And I, and from my observation of versions of variations of that, it's a recipe for dividing them.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: Because the subtext, and again, it's not very sub is the more privileged that you are, the less you should be talking and the more you should be listening.

John Austin: Yes.

John Tomasi: Something like that.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: And which is again, pushing against that. We're thinking about how do we do inclusion, right? Well, inclusion, right. Would mean something like let's have different viewpoints and different kinds of privilege, let's say, and use that and front that or reveal that, make that manifest in ways that lead to us using that together to learn more all together as a group.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: And that's a challenge. That's a challenging step to take.

John Austin: Yeah. Yeah.

John Tomasi: The privilege walk, I've heard it called the shame, the walk of shame.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: Do you, do you, it was, was, is anti-Semitism, have you had anti-Semitic incidents at your field?

John Austin: Not during my time there, which is.

John Tomasi: Nothing that blew into the press, for example, that one would know.

John Austin: No. Which is, which is not to say that there, there might not be Jewish or Arab students at the school who have had things said to them that has upset them or, or were been, you know, mean-spirited, I don't know. I don't, I haven't heard of that, but we haven't had any, we haven't had any incidents like that.

John Tomasi: I've heard, I've heard people say that part of the explanation for the explosion on campuses in the last year is that it's simply a fact that there being more Muslim students on the campuses to represent viewpoints that otherwise wouldn't have been represented. But yeah, I think that's, that's a very sympathetic way of understanding the, the, the conflict.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: But I think there's an element of truth in that. I wonder if you have any thoughts about that. And in the context of Deerfield, I know with the deep connection to the Jordanian royal family.

John Austin: Yeah.

John Tomasi: How many students are Arab? Was it a recent thing that Arab students arrived to Deerfield? A number that changed the, the, the, the boundaries of the conversation. Do you have any thoughts about that?

John Austin: Yeah. you know, obviously there were Arab students there in the late seventies and the, and the eighties. His Majesty King Abdullah graduated in 1980. So there's always been Arab students on, on, on campus, a small number, you know, not a huge number. and there's always, there's always been, you know, at least as far as I know from the, from the fifties, if not before, you know, Jewish students on campus. So, there's always been that kind of diversity and, and, you know, maybe that, maybe that has something to do with, with the climate on campus and it's not quite as, as fraught as it is at, at, at, at other, at other schools and colleges.

John Tomasi: Thank you. I want to just close by, again, just reminding listeners that the name of the report is thriving in a world of pluralistic contention, a framework for schools. it's, it's a great read, as I've said, are there any last thoughts you want to have, you'd like to share with the audience, our listeners about where you see, private education going in the United States or anything happening at Deerfield that we should know about?

John Austin: Yeah. I, I do hope, you know, as I said earlier, I hope schools will read the report and, and, and think about it, you know, there's a, there's a, there's a great, a great diversity of schools out there, but I do think the report is relevant to schools who are thinking through the coming school year, and all the challenges that that's going to pose. and, as I said, at the very, very beginning of the, of the conversation, you know, I, I, I think American independent schools are just a great resource for this country. And it's, it's been, it's been one of the great joys of my life to be a part of them and, and to serve them. So, and thank you. Thank you for having me today. It was a lot of fun.

John Tomasi: We, we, part of our aim is to platform people who are, are thought leaders in the area of freedom of expression. I'm going to describe you as a thought leader, even, even though you've been quoted as saying freedom of speech is overrated. And the Jordanian student paper, John Austin, it's been a real pleasure having me here.

John Austin: Thank you, John.

John Tomasi: Thank you.

John Austin: It's been a pleasure. I enjoyed it.