ABSTRACT Hannah Arendt insisted that people who share a society should talk to each other in order to inhabit as far as possible the views of fellow citizens. While for Arendt, the aim of such thinking is to consider other citizens’ views when evaluating issues, this article suggests another purpose that is more readily available in highly polarized contexts. In such settings, “representative thinking” may be best equipped to reveal the conceptions of the good that motivate views with which one disagrees. In antagonistic contexts such as the contemporary United States in which many people doubt that others’ opinions are premised on any sense of the good, this recognition can provide the groundwork for better relations between citizens, by cultivating acknowledgment of those with whom one deeply disagrees as legitimate cocreators of democratic society.

This article examines the unique perspectives of nine writing center practitioners reflecting on the experience of conducting a collaborative and multi-tiered research project in their center. The focus of their work is on the process of conducting research rather than the product; therefore, much of the work is on how research is conducted and how it functions as an avenue for professional development, creating community, and benefitting the center. The article includes narratives from all of the researchers: undergraduate students, graduate students, and administrators/ faculty members. Each narrative presents positive experiences, insights, and obstacles encountered for each group of researchers. The article concludes with recommendations that could benefit others conducting multi-tiered research.