Building Grit, Not Dependence

To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, you’d need a heart of stone not to scoff at a certain Harvard Crimson headline: “Harvard Professors Cancel Classes as Students Feel Blue After Trump Win.”

Courses like Sociology 1156: Statistics for Social Sciences and Applied Math 22a: Solving and Optimizing, along with general education classes like The Ancient Greek Hero and Popular Culture and Modern China either canceled classes, made attendance optional or extended assignment deadlines in the wake of the election.

An instructor for Intermediate Macroeconomics wrote in an email, “As we recover from the eventful election night and process the implications of Trump’s victory, please know that class will proceed as usual today, except that classroom quizzes will not be for credit … Feel free to take time off if needed.”

Meanwhile, a physics professor offered her office as “a space to process the election,” adding in an email to students and faculty, “Many in our community are sleep-deprived, grieving for glass ceilings that weren’t shattered, fearful for the future or embarrassed to face our international colleagues … I stress-baked several pans of lemon bars to share.”

We need to strengthen students, not shield or coddle them. Empower, don’t enable. Encourage students to rise to challenges, not retreat from them. Faculty are educators, not mental health counselors—and the type of “care” some now offer borders on social work or therapy without a license.

What’s happening in these Harvard classes? Decades after most colleges abandoned in loco parentis and regulations around student behavior, what should we make of this renewed solicitousness toward emerging adults?

This concern partly reflects a societal shift in how we view the transition from adolescence to adulthood, with a stronger emphasis on emotional safety, mental health and the perceived vulnerability of young adults. Elite institutions feel pressured to create environments that offer extensive accommodations for psychological needs, often on the assumption that students may struggle to handle difficult emotions without real-time support.

Delayed achievement of traditional markers of adulthood has contributed to this perspective, casting students as more in need of guidance and protection than in the past. This shift has led to measures like trigger warnings and wellness days, which some critics argue are infantilizing.

Parental expectations add to this trend. Colleges, particularly elite ones, feel compelled to replicate the level of attention helicopter parents once provided. The rise of “safe spaces” and the view that certain ideas might be harmful reflect an evolving cultural sensitivity. This attitude, which often prioritizes emotional safety over resilience, has increasingly shaped university policies, especially at institutions positioning themselves as leaders in progressive values.

Today’s campuses routinely offer content warnings, trauma-informed counseling and flexible academic policies to prevent student distress. In marketing materials, they emphasize a commitment to holistic well-being, presenting themselves as responsive to student needs. While critics view this degree of accommodation as excessive, it mirrors a cultural shift toward prioritizing individual vulnerability with utmost sensitivity.

These policies, however, raise important questions about how best to foster independence, resilience and maturity. They highlight a broader debate about balancing support with developing personal accountability and growth.

If colleges aim to prepare students to navigate life’s complexities with resilience and responsibility, they should frame challenges as opportunities for growth, offering support as scaffolding rather than as a shield. This approach fosters both the mental well-being and personal strength necessary for life beyond campus, aligning with the educational mission of preparing students not just for careers, but for adulthood.

While today’s college support systems aim to help, they often fall short of equipping students with the resilience, independence and self-efficacy needed for adulthood. Services such as wellness days, extended deadlines and safe spaces, though well intentioned, can create an environment where students come to rely heavily on external support rather than developing the skills to handle challenges independently.

One key issue is that these forms of support may inadvertently foster a dependency mindset. When accommodations become expected, students miss crucial opportunities to manage stress, face obstacles and build resilience through personal effort. For example, extending deadlines, while helpful in the short term, may suggest that stress is best managed by delaying or avoiding challenges, undermining students’ sense of self-efficacy—their confidence in handling difficult situations on their own.

Similarly, emotional support practices that emphasize comfort over growth can limit the benefits of facing discomfort and ambiguity. Trigger warnings, while intended to help students prepare for challenging content, can risk framing discomfort as something to avoid entirely. Real growth often happens when students confront uncomfortable ideas or experiences, learning to process emotions and gain perspective. By prioritizing avoidance or minimizing exposure to challenging material, colleges may inadvertently deprive students of the resilience that comes from grappling with complex issues.

In addition, these supports can blur the line between what students may want in the moment and what they truly need to grow. College should be a time for young adults to learn to manage their lives, make difficult choices and confront the consequences of those choices. However, if institutions frequently shield students from academic challenges, conflicting ideas or interpersonal struggles, they risk fostering an unrealistic expectation that adulthood will similarly adapt to personal needs. This can create an expectation that the real world will continually accommodate them, rather than requiring individuals to adapt to and navigate external pressures.

To foster self-reliance, colleges should focus on supports that empower students to face challenges. This could include resilience-building workshops, peer-led discussions on handling academic stress and mentorship programs that encourage students to engage with difficulties rather than avoid them. Instead of lowering demands to accommodate discomfort, institutions can create frameworks that help students cope, adapt and ultimately thrive in the face of adversity.

Effective support should not protect students from every hardship but prepare them for a world that will present both adversity and opportunity. The goal should be to cultivate confident, capable adults who meet life’s demands with high self-efficacy. In refining their support structures, colleges must strike a balance between compassion and the promotion of independence—fostering growth by empowering students to face and overcome challenges rather than shielding them from realities they will inevitably encounter.

---

Any discussion of supporting students emotionally inevitably brings to mind the 2018 bestseller The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, which argues that recent cultural shifts have fostered a generation of students who are more vulnerable, less resilient and increasingly averse to ideas they find challenging or uncomfortable.

Lukianoff, a First Amendment lawyer, and Haidt, a social psychologist, identify what they call the “three Great Untruths” that they believe have influenced this trend:

1. The Untruth of Fragility: The idea that “what doesn’t kill you makes you weaker,” which promotes the notion that individuals are vulnerable and that exposure to potentially distressing ideas can harm them.
2. The Untruth of Emotional Reasoning: The idea that one should “always trust your feelings,” leading students to equate subjective feelings with objective truth.
3. The Untruth of Us vs. Them: The notion that “life is a battle between good people and evil people,” encouraging polarization and demonization rather than dialogue.

This book’s argument have been subject to some tough criticism. Some critics argue that the book underestimates the genuine mental health challenges facing many students today and too readily dismisses these mental health struggles as the result of “overprotection” rather than addressing them as serious health issues that require compassion and support.

Other critics suggest that the book underplays the socioeconomic factors that affect student mental health and behavior, such as student debt, housing insecurity and job market anxieties—rather than attributing their perceived fragility primarily to parenting styles and cultural shifts.

Yet another criticism is that the book does not sufficiently address why students from marginalized backgrounds might seek safe spaces and trigger warnings. For many students, critics insist, safe spaces and trigger warnings are tools to manage trauma or to counteract discrimination, and the book frames all such accommodations as “coddling” rather than as legitimate responses to systemic inequalities.

Critics also suggest that the book’s portrayal of resilience places the burden of adaptation on students without adequately recognizing that resilience can also be cultivated through structural support and a campus culture that genuinely cares for students’ well-being. Promoting resilience should not mean abandoning support but rather providing it in ways that empower students.

Then, too, questions have also been raised about the book’s evidentiary base, which relies on anecdotal evidence and isolated incidents to support broad claims about a culture of fragility. Many also view the book as part of a recurring “kids these days” narrative that highlights perceived flaws in younger generations. They argue that every generation faces scrutiny from older generations who fear that society is losing resilience, independence or civic values.

Nevertheless, the book’s insights have significant implications for colleges and their role in fostering intellectual growth, resilience and maturity. Here are several ways in which the arguments in The Coddling of the American Mind suggest rethinking current campus policies and practices:

1. Encouraging resilience over avoidance: The authors argue that current trends—such as trigger warnings, safe spaces and the avoidance of controversial speakers—reinforce fragility by allowing students to avoid ideas that challenge their worldview. According to Lukianoff and Haidt, this avoidance can hinder students’ intellectual resilience and problem-solving skills. Instead, colleges could emphasize resilience by promoting exposure to diverse perspectives and teaching students strategies for managing discomfort constructively.
2. Promoting critical thinking over emotional reasoning: The trend toward validating feelings as equivalent to facts can undermine critical thinking skills. Colleges may inadvertently reinforce this by framing discomfort as harm, allowing emotional reasoning to replace rational analysis. Rather than affirming students’ feelings unconditionally, colleges should teach students to question assumptions, analyze evidence and develop well-reasoned arguments, even when discussing emotionally charged topics. This approach can cultivate self-awareness and help students distinguish between emotional reactions and logical analysis.
3. Fostering dialogue rather than polarization: An us-versus-them mindset, which sees opposing views as not just different but morally wrong, fuels polarization, discourages open debate and fosters an adversarial atmosphere, where students feel pressure to conform or to avoid expressing dissenting views. Colleges should encourage civil discourse by creating forums where students can debate and discuss controversial ideas with mutual respect. Programs that emphasize listening, empathy and the value of understanding multiple perspectives can help counteract polarizing tendencies and foster a more inclusive intellectual environment.
4. Redefining the role of support services: Mental health support is critical on college campuses, but The Coddling of the American Mind raises concerns that some well-meaning efforts to support students may contribute to dependency and emotional fragility and should instead emphasize building coping skills. Rather than shielding students from discomfort, colleges could offer resilience training, mindfulness workshops and stress management resources. Such programs can equip students to handle adversity, which is crucial for both academic and personal success.
5. Balancing safety and free speech: The concept of safety on campus has expanded from physical safety to include emotional or intellectual safety, where students are sometimes protected from views deemed offensive or harmful. This expansion can lead to calls for censorship, especially around controversial topics, stifling academic freedom and intellectual diversity. Colleges, they argue, must protect free speech while fostering an environment where students can engage with—and critically examine—difficult ideas. Clear policies that uphold free expression without condoning hostility or harassment are key to achieving this balance.
6. Preparing students for real-world challenges: Finally, The Coddling of the American Mind implies that overprotection in college could leave students unprepared for the realities of postcollege life, where they will inevitably face setbacks, challenges and differing viewpoints. By cultivating a culture of resilience, self-reflection and constructive conflict, colleges can better prepare students to navigate a complex world. Real-life situations will not always provide safe spaces or trigger warnings, so fostering adaptability and the ability to handle discomfort on campus can serve as critical preparation for adulthood.

---

To truly prepare students for the complexities of adult life, colleges must balance compassionate support with strategies that foster resilience, self-reliance and accountability. Striking this balance empowers students to navigate real-world challenges with confidence, equipping them with the skills to succeed independently.

Rather than shielding students from life’s inevitable difficulties and disappointments, institutions should focus on providing tools for self-efficacy, autonomy and adaptability, cultivating an educational experience that builds confidence and flexibility to face life’s unpredictability. Support structures should act as scaffolding rather than shields—guiding students through challenges in ways that promote growth rather than dependency.

To fulfill their mission of preparing students for successful adulthood, colleges must prioritize personal responsibility, skill-building and resilience over purely protective measures. Policies that emphasize independent problem-solving, accountability and constructive feedback help students experience growth that extends beyond academic success, nurturing essential life skills they will carry far beyond campus.

Higher education institutions should view students as active participants in their own development, fostering environments where resilience, accountability and self-reflection are consistently encouraged. Embracing this approach supports students’ transformation into self-sufficient adults who are not only ready for their careers but also equipped to navigate life’s broader challenges.

While student wellness is rightfully emphasized, colleges must remember that true empowerment lies in fostering resilience, not simply providing accommodations. This balanced approach—rooted in genuine support but focused on growth—offers students the tools to face life’s demands with strength and maturity, creating a generation of resilient, adaptable adults ready to thrive in the adult world.

---

Colleges should view students not as passive recipients of support but as active participants in their own growth, encouraging autonomy, resilience and self-reflection through a reimagined approach to both academic and nonacademic experiences.

To cultivate self-efficacy, autonomy, accountability, resilience and self-reflection, colleges should shift toward a support model emphasizing skill-building, constructive feedback and personal responsibility over excessive accommodation. Here are ways colleges can make this shift:

1. Encourage active learning and real-world problem-solving. Design courses that emphasize experiential learning, critical thinking and practical application, including project-based assignments, internships and service learning. These experiences allow students to apply classroom knowledge to real-world challenges, teaching adaptability, autonomy and personal accountability. Also, follow a recommendation made by the authors of The Coddling of the American Mind and introduce Big Questions courses, which expose students to diverse viewpoints.
2. Provide constructive, actionable feedback. Move beyond grades by focusing on growth-oriented feedback that highlights specific actions for improvement. Rather than just noting what went wrong, emphasize strengths and suggest clear ways to build on them. This approach helps students see challenges as opportunities for development rather than setbacks.
3. Foster a culture of accountability and ownership. Set clear expectations around academic integrity, timeliness and professionalism, underscoring the importance of accountability. While offering support, also encourage students to take responsibility for meeting deadlines, breaking larger assignments into manageable steps to reinforce time management. Peer study groups and accountability partners can add a collaborative layer to personal responsibility.
4. Normalize self-advocacy and independence. Encourage students to seek help proactively and communicate directly with professors, promoting self-advocacy. Workshops on communication and resource management provide essential skills for independent problem-solving and ensure students feel equipped to navigate both academic and personal challenges.
5. Emphasize resilience and adaptability. Offer workshops on problem-solving, stress management and adapting to change, equipping students with tools to handle challenges effectively. Modules on executive function—goal-setting, time management, emotional regulation and self-discipline—foster independence, preparing students for life beyond college.
6. Build a culture of self-reflection and growth. Integrate reflective assignments and portfolios to encourage self-awareness and goal-setting. Reflective practices, such as journaling, peer discussions and mentorship, allow students to evaluate personal goals, values and experiences, promoting a habit of thoughtful self-assessment critical for mature decision-making.
7. Encourage autonomy through guided choice. Offer flexible learning options, such as independent research, to help students develop autonomy and decision-making skills. Advisers can guide students through choices with thought-provoking questions, prompting them to reflect on their interests and goals rather than simply prescribing a path.
8. Model and reinforce resilience and perseverance. Open conversations about failure and perseverance normalize these experiences and reinforce resilience. Host workshops or events that share stories of resilience and success, encouraging students to view setbacks as learning steps rather than roadblocks.
9. Promote mental well-being as empowerment. Focus on mental health support that empowers students to develop emotional resilience. Counseling services can teach stress management techniques, helping students manage pressures constructively. Offering mindfulness programs as tools for self-care rather than safety nets fosters a proactive approach to mental well-being.
10. Provide opportunities for leadership and community engagement. Extracurriculars, student organizations and community service provide settings for students to build interpersonal skills, manage conflicts and make decisions in complex situations, all essential for personal maturity. Leadership roles encourage accountability and provide a sense of purpose and connection within the college community.

By adopting these strategies, colleges can create an environment that empowers students to actively shape their own development, fostering resilience, autonomy and a readiness for life beyond campus. Through constructive feedback, practical skill-building and encouragement of independence, colleges will better prepare students to face future challenges with confidence, self-reliance and adaptability.