Alternative Settings for Liberal-Conservative Exchange: Examining an Undergraduate Dialogue Course JACOB Z. HESS 1 * , DANIELLE RYNCZAK 1 , JOSEPH D. MINARIK 2 and JOYCELYN LANDRUM-BROWN 2 1 Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; 603 East Daniel Street, Champaign, IL 61820, USA 2 Program on Intergroup Relations, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; 601 E. John Street, Champaign, IL 61820, USA ABSTRACT Given the polarization of the early 21st century political atmosphere in the U.S., intergroup dialogue has emerged as a unique alternative setting, with intentions of facilitating a more productive and thoughtful citizen engagement. Although cross-partisan dialogue efforts are underway in community contexts, they have been slower to reach academic settings. This paper is an exploratory study of our own liberal-conservative dialogue course at the University of Illinois–the first of its kind, to our knowledge. After describing basic features of the course, we identify themes from student journals and final evaluations suggesting both dialogue benefits and challenges. Finally, we discuss the growing literature around dialogue, questions of its long-term impact, and larger potential barriers to participation in liberal-conservative dialogue, specifically. Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Key words: intergroup dialogue; intergroup dynamics; higher education; social liberalism; social conservatism; political communication In our modern culture, men and women are able to interact with one another in many ways: They can sing, dance or play together with little difficulty, but their ability to talk together about subjects that matter deeply to them seems invariably to lead to dispute, division and often to violence (Bohm, Factor & Garret, 1991, p.1). Whatever inherent challenges exist to citizens talking about issues that ‘matter deeply’, there seems to be little doubt that the prevailing polarized atmosphere dictated by media and governmental elites has exacerbated this difficulty significantly (Seyle & Newman, 2006; Hess & Todd, 2009). Where dominant institutions abuse their power, community psychologists have long championed a subtle, but powerful social change strategy: the ‘creation of alternative settings’ (Cherniss & Deegan, 2000)—broadly defined as ‘any Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 20: 156–166 (2010) Published online 21 January 2010 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/casp.1032 *Correspondence to: Jacob Z. Hess, Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; 603 East Daniel Street, Champaign, IL 61820, USA. E-mail: jzhess@gmail.com Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.