At the most recent Conversation at Trinity event, people took sides — literally. On Sept. 16, a crowd of about 45 people gathered in the Fiesta Room to engage in a town hall-style debate about U.S. immigration policy. This event was part of The Conversation at Trinity series, in which students and faculty have the opportunity to discuss various relevant topics, such as immigration and reproductive rights. This debate debuted a new structure for The Conversation in which William Jensen, associate professor of human communication and director of debate, posed a question, and participants went to opposite sides of the room depending on whether they agreed or disagreed. Moderate participants stayed in the middle.
Associate Provost for Student Success Kyle Gillette created The Conversation in 2024. He said that this event in particular was a success.
“More than anything, I was impressed by the students and employees who weighed in. I think people articulated these points of view with nuance, they were responsive to each other,” Gillette said.
According to Gillette, the political divisiveness of immigration policy was a considerable factor in the decision to host this debate, especially in a city such as San Antonio, where many immigrants or relatives of immigrants live. Gillette said that because this issue affects people as deeply as it does, it emphasized the need to have this conversation rather than shy away from it.
“Sometimes when an issue is really intense and urgent, the tendency can be to not want to touch it, to avoid it,” Gillette said. “It was the beginning of Hispanic Heritage Month or Latinx Heritage Month, and I think that underlined the importance of how crucial it is for us to explore what values immigration adds to our communities and how different people are affected and what kinds of questions we should be asking.”
When considering the larger impact these conversations have on Trinity students, Gillette said his position contributed to his vision for The Conversation.
“I think it’s so crucial as an element to people’s professional, academic and personal success,” Gillette said. “How do you live in a world with people with different perspectives, and how do you learn about those perspectives? How do you contribute? Most importantly, how do you learn to add your voice?”
These questions touched on issues such as whether or not nations should encourage immigration, and whether or not immigrants should have to assimilate to their new countries. Jensen then went around and asked volunteers to explain their stance, encouraging participants to share their opinions.
“This is the first time that we did a format like this, but we have been incrementally increasing the amount of audience engagement and making it less and less passive and more and more active,” Jensen said. This format was a success, he said, and will likely be used in future Conversations.
After the debate ended, many participants said they felt it was a positive experience. Samantha Deleon, sophomore history major, said that these kinds of open dialogues are important.
“I think with having this conversation, especially now, it teaches people that we can have an open discourse about it without somebody getting offended or someone getting hurt by something someone else says,” Deleon said.
Deleon was not the only participant who walked away from The Conversation feeling positively about its effects. Aaliyah Jones, senior political science major, said she believed in the necessity of these discussions.
“I’m grateful for this event. I think it was very important to have a safe space where people can talk openly on different sides of the spectrum, and I think it helps build the political morale of this campus,” Jones said.
Ultimately, The Conversation about U.S. immigration policy led to a constructive discussion regarding questions surrounding immigration, according to participants. This event opened the door for similarly productive debates in the future, the organizers said.
