BU Today: Can you talk about why it was decided at the outset last spring that the two working groups would operate independently of each other? Some might say, isn’t the point of a campus to work to bring opposing viewpoints together so they can hear each other?

Zaman: I think there are two things here to consider. The first is what you mentioned, about learning from each other and working together. That is absolutely critical. At the same time, there is also a need to have forums, platforms, and venues where people can share their anxieties, concerns, and experiences candidly, to build trust without the fear of judgment, with colleagues who have had similar lived experiences and who understand the context and who they know and trust.

Harrowitz: Trust-building was an essential component of the groups’ ability to discuss sensitive topics, especially considering there was a wide variety of perspectives on the conflict and on how to understand the instances of prejudice that students and faculty were experiencing. It was a valuable learning experience, sometimes tense, for members of my group as we discussed our differing views. I believe that both groups had a lot to work out among themselves and the timing was not yet right for the groups to come together.

BU Today: You both have so much knowledge and expertise in your respective areas; can you share one thing you learned during this process that surprised you, that you did not know?

Harrowitz: It was hard but necessary for us to hear what was happening on this campus: the harassment, the exclusions, the poor understanding of the issues from so many individuals. Working group members were concerned about Islamophobia as well as anti-Israeli bias and antisemitism and demonstrated an understanding of how prejudice, any prejudice, can affect members of other groups. What was surprising to me was that other minorities were being triggered by the bias directed to our groups. It demonstrates the ways in which minorities have a lot in common: bigotry affects us all, no matter who its target.

Zaman: It was a very valuable experience to learn from students, staff, and faculty colleagues all across both the Charles River Campus and the Medical Campus. I think one thing that really stood out for me was the concern about equity. Colleagues that I spoke to wanted to be treated fairly, without bias, in and outside the classroom, and wanted the same set of rules to apply to everyone. In my personal interactions, I also learned that many colleagues had really awful experiences and were really disturbed and felt that somehow their experiences (from bias to doxxing to harassment or general disregard of their grief) were not considered a priority. The issue of equity came up again and again.

BU Today: What are the plans for the two groups moving forward after submitting their reports and recommendations, and will they at some point begin to work more closely?

Zaman: The groups were set up with a specific goal—to make recommendations for a healthier, equitable, safer, and inclusive campus. Those recommendations have been made, and we hope that in the implementation phase we will get a chance to learn from each other and make sure that the campus environment is truly inclusive for all our community members.

Harrowitz: I’m going to echo what Muhammad has said. The implementation phase is crucial, especially antibias training and understanding of stereotypes. How can we stop antisemitism, islamophobia, anti-Israeli and anti-Arab discrimination if we do not understand what motivates us to act out in that way to begin with?

BU Today: As each of you approached your working group, what were the main objectives you hoped would come out of your reports?

Harrowitz: My hope is that implementation of our recommendations, if done on a campus-wide level, would create greater understanding among us all as well as help us develop empathy for the struggles and losses of different groups. Empathy is key in reducing tensions on campus and in learning to live together harmoniously. The anniversary of the terrible massacre in Israel October 7 is an opportunity for us to acknowledge and mourn lives lost in the conflict with compassion.

Zaman: In terms of the mission, creating a campus that is inclusive, safe, and ensures the dignity of all our community members. The reports have several recommendations that are similar (tackling bias, creating robust reporting mechanisms, ensuring equity) and specific recommendations (hiring of an imam, prayer space, etc.).

BU Today: Can you talk about areas of strength, where you think Boston University has done well to foster a civil dialogue on campus among its community members?

Zaman: I think compared to many (perhaps most) of our peers, BU did very well and credit goes to the University leadership for that. I am sure they can describe in detail what made our campus different from many others, but in my opinion creating channels of communication, creating avenues for colleagues to share their anxieties, fears, and experiences (including creating the working groups) helped quite a bit.

Harrowitz: The upper administration made a serious and continual effort to meet with student leaders, not only to hear their perspectives, but to ensure that the students felt that their concerns were being heard. This is essential in peacekeeping. I believe the formation of the working groups helped as well in this endeavor.

BU Today: Can you also talk about where you think the University fell short and should focus on improving?

Harrowitz: The inclusion of Jewish, Israeli, Muslim, and Arab members of our community in DEI was not apparent last year and there was a notable lack of an easily accessible Title VI office to help deal with instances of doxxing and bigotry. The student conduct code was not always enforced. It has already been revised to be more specific and clear, which is great. Last year student complaints were not followed up on consistently, if at all. Many students felt that they could not report instances, for fear of grade retaliation. This should be remedied by a new robust reporting system that both groups recommended.
[Editor’s note: BU now has in place an Incident Report Form, a mechanism by which community members can provide information regarding an instance of discrimination or harassment, and the University is building a more robust means of responding to those reports.]

Zaman: Our report describes some of the challenges and ways in which the University can do better. There are several areas where the University can do better, including more inclusive and empathetic communication, increasing course offerings (and faculty lines) that cover a broad range of perspectives, and ensuring that there are adequate physical spaces for community members to practice their faith.

BU Today: In your conversations with students, was there one common theme you heard over and over?

Zaman: I think there were several areas, as we describe in our report. But I would highlight three main ones here—one was concern about bias in treatment due to religious, ethnic, or national origin, and lack of robust reporting mechanisms. Second was the need for more inclusive and empathetic communication from the University leadership that ensured the dignity of every person, irrespective of their religion, national origin, ethnicity, or any other factor. The third was having the opportunity to learn and ensure that there were a variety of courses and learning opportunities that included voices from Palestinian, Muslim, and Arab scholars.

Harrowitz: The reporting, or lack thereof, was the biggest concern I heard (besides, of course, the actual incidences). Students felt that even if they did report to the Dean of Students office, that sufficient action was not taken. That office was given some extreme challenges for which they were not prepared or trained.

BU Today: BU has a new president for the first time in nearly two decades, which is an eternity for a college campus. I am not asking for criticism of the past administration or praise of the new one, but rather, for you to talk about why this is an important moment for BU, perhaps an opportunity for fundamental change, and what you believe needs to happen for that to occur?

Harrowitz: This is a tremendous opportunity to change our campus in many important ways, including antibias training and how to have civil discourse and difficult conversations. The discussions we have had with President Gilliam and Senior Vice President Ken Olliff have been inspirational, as their energy and commitment to improving the atmosphere on campus is clear: not only in short-term ways, but rather a longer term changing of the culture that will allow us all to see cultural differences not as a threat, but as an opportunity to learn from each other. And that understanding and knowledge goes beyond our lives on campus.

Zaman: This is a particularly exciting time for BU as there is an opportunity to bring new ideas and enact new policies. I have had a series of wonderful meetings with President Gilliam and the senior leadership and am excited about how the recommendations would be enacted. There are also fresh ideas about creating opportunities to learn, having difficult conversations with civility, and ensuring inclusivity in both communication and action. I think keeping the lines of communication open is very important, even when we disagree (or rather, especially when we disagree).

I also think that we must think at a much broader level. The issue of bias or hate is not just an issue in the Middle East. This is an issue in all parts of the world—including in the United States, and some of the rhetoric during the election cycle is deeply disturbing. These issues affect many, many members of our community and will continue to do so. So I think we need to think both in this current moment, but also ensure that our structures to combat hate are there to tackle challenges that will continue to emerge due to events in all parts of the world.