Category: Caring Teacher

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]One of the most common learning outcomes expected of students in any school is the ability to constructively work together with others on various academic and non-academic tasks. Students who do not work well with others are considered ill-prepared for the world of work. They invariably perform poorly on tasks like group projects and presentations that require collective effort of everyone to be successful.

The paradox

While school administrators and teachers work hard to create interest and instill skills that would enable students to work cooperatively on various school tasks, little emphasis is placed on the level and quality of cooperation that exist between administrators and teachers, as well as among teachers. While collaboration is a catchword in the field of business management and leadership, it is hardly a concept that depicts the realities of how adults in a school behave and respond to each other.

Schools are supposed to be places where the concept of collaborative problem solving and decision making is upheld and promoted. Unfortunately, the opposite is true. While students are coaxed into cooperative learning, administrators and teachers work themselves out of it. Students understand the benefit of cooperating with their peers conceptually, but they hardly see the same principle put into action by their role models. By doing this, we give mixed messages to the youth of tomorrow.

Believing we can

Expecting administrators and teachers to harmoniously work together without any bickering is like expecting impossibilities. This may be possible in a perfect world, but it cannot be true in our world. The kind of stress and pressure that everyone is exposed to in the school does not allow them to work together as well as we would want them to. These are the excuses most people give.

I would like to believe otherwise. It is possible for people to effectively work together in the school system. If students can do it, why can’t administrators and teachers who teach them how to do it in the first place? It takes deliberate decision and effort on the part of adults to make this happen. Often, adults are quick to and good at teaching things to others, especially those younger than themselves – but they seldom reflect on whether or not they believe in what they teach; they often overlook the fact that their lives are totally opposite to what they teach to kids.

An example

One of the reasons that encouraged more competition than cooperation among administrators and teachers is the way education was organized and delivered in the past. Take curriculum development for example. Curriculum was developed by a “group of geniuses” who literally had no access to or any connection with actual classroom experiences of teachers and students. Their work was to put together a curriculum (What to teach, how to teach, and how to assess learning) and prescribe it to teachers. An administrator was appointed to make sure that the prescribed curriculum is implemented as instructed. Teachers on the other hand were preoccupied with covering the curriculum as best as they could. They were closed within the four walls of their own classrooms because they did not have the luxury of time and space to think about and work with other teachers – because everyone was busy finishing up his/her own curriculum tasks.

However, new ways of looking at the curriculum and how it is developed have revolutionized how administrators and teachers respond to each other. Although the concept of curriculum mapping is fairly new, it embodies a fresh outlook on how education is organized and delivered in the 21st century. Curriculum mapping requires that teachers who teach a subject work on their own curriculum map. This means that teachers are empowered to decide on what students should learn, how they should be taught, and how learning is assessed. Additionally, and this is very important, curriculum maps are regularly reviewed by groups of teachers and administrators who gather to fill in the gaps that exist in the document through reflective discussions.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]While many feel the pressure to label the energetic, restless, actively-exploring child as hyperactive, there are others who feel that these are characteristics of a “normal” child. The terms “normal” and “abnormal” have been loosely used by many specialists in the field of psychology and/or education. The use of these words invariably reflects subjective judgment (of someone or a group of people) about different aspects and quality of human experiences, often through limited, narrow perspective.

Because of its subjective nature, it is difficult to accurately identify, categorize, and label behaviors in the classroom. The best we could do is cautiously place behavioral habits and patterns on a continuum of norm and out-of-norm conduct.

Defining normal/abnormal

In the context of classroom teaching/learning, normal behavior could be characterized by responses that are facilitative of successful teaching/learning. Normalcy in this light encompasses both student and teacher behavior. While it is important to have normal kids in the classroom (to ensure learning), it is equally important to have normal teachers who deliberately plan and design positive learning environments. Literature in behavior modification has always and almost completely focused on student behavior that little attention is given to the fact that a lot of “abnormalcy” in the classroom springs from out-of-norm practices of educators.

As a teacher trainer, I end most of my teacher training courses by encouraging student-teachers to take time to examine themselves, identify personal conflicts and complexes, and resolve the same. In other words, before one becomes a teacher, he or she must straighten out emotional insecurities, come to terms with his or her true self, and accept and constructively work with strengths and weaknesses. A teacher who has had an opportunity to healthily resolve his or her own internal battles treats students respectfully, possesses a broad mindset (believes that every student can and does learn), and does not resort to harsh punishment to manage student behavior. Hence a teaching practice that stems from emotional insecurities of a teacher could be considered as abnormal.

In the same manner, most out-of-norm student behaviors stem from their feeling of dissatisfaction toward unmet basic and growth needs. Significant lack in the experiences of belonging, achievement, and meaning propel students into behaving counter-productively at home and in the classroom. Hence students engage in many internalizing (withdrawn, passive, and extremely shy) as well as externalizing (vandalizing, abusive, and unruly) behaviors that are considered unacceptable.

Additional criteria

Inconsistencies in behavior are expected because humans posses dynamic personality patterns. Not all out-of-norm behaviors are unacceptable.

A behavior is considered truly out-of-norm and in need of special attention when it differs significantly from that of student-peers (e.g. drawing vulgar graffiti, hitting other students, not listening to lectures, etc.) and teacher-peers (e.g. screaming to get student attention, administering harsh punishment that are degrading, etc.). This recurrent behavior also lessens the possibility of successful teaching/learning. When a teacher screams at his students to get their attention, he looses their respect and trust. The class becomes more chaotic and quality of teaching suffers. Conversely, a student who does not listen to lectures performs poorly in exams.

An out-of-norm behavior represents a serious, persistent, chronic safety threats to individuals in the classroom. For example, a student who hits other children may end up seriously injuring his or her classmate. A teacher who administers harsh punishment to his or her students may injure them physically and emotionally. This affects overall desire to teach/learn.

Furthermore, to accurately identify out-of-norm behaviors, it is important to differentiate between behaviors that stem from cultural differences and the ones that don’t. For example, it is not abnormal for a Japanese student to avoid eye-contact while talking to a teacher compared to his/her American counterpart. In fact, in many Asian cultures, it is abnormal for a student to look at a teacher straight into his/her eyes. In this case, avoiding eye-contact is not considered out-of-norm behavior.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]While most teachers would think that their primary duty is to deliver contents as specified in the curriculum, some understand the value of slowing down and spending time in planning and designing a classroom climate that is conducive to learning. This is especially true if a teacher is new to the profession, which is mostly the case in international schools in Thailand. Adults coming into the teaching profession from various other backgrounds of work tend to take this simple, yet significant factor for granted. Most adults getting into the teaching profession wrongly thinking that “teaching” is the only thing expected of them in the classroom. Before long, they realize that teaching is just one of the many things teachers are responsible for. There are other more important things that teachers do and are expected to do in order to be effective disseminators of knowledge/skills.

Difference in expectation

Because of the nature of their previous jobs, adults who newly come into the teaching profession tend to view working in a school similar to working in a corporate sector. While there are definite similarities, the overall culture and function of a school is different from that of commercial ones. For example, productivity in a factory is more concretely measurable (in the rate and quality of production) than productivity of staff or students (ambiguous measures of performances) in a school. Additionally, the importance placed on human interactions could be minimal if not completely absent in a factory setting. This is not the case in a school, where its success or failure is founded upon the quality of interactions among members of its constituency.

Bridging the gap in practice

One of the greatest challenges faced by an adult undertaking teaching for the first time in his or her career history is dealing with the complexities and idiosyncrasies of interactions in the classroom. If children were robots, they could be easily programmed to behave in a certain way to pay undivided attention to a teacher. However, since teachers deal with human children who are different, unique, and lively, teaching has to be put in the context of social-emotional dynamics. Thus, apart from teaching a subject, teachers engineer (design) the social-emotional climate of their classes to ensure effective learning. In essence, this requires every teacher – experienced or inexperience, trained or untrained – to be aware of the psychology and sociology of human interactions. Effective teachers use this knowledge, along with an understanding of child and adolescent development to create positive classroom climate.

Definition

According to Richard and Patricia Schmuck, the authors of Group processes in the classroom, classroom climate is defined as, “the emotional tones associated with informal interaction, attitudinal responses to the group, and to both the self-concepts of students and their motivational satisfactions and frustrations.” In other words, teachers are constantly responding to the different social-emotional needs of students, as reflected in their attitudes and behavior toward self and others. Additionally, the quality of social-emotional experiences in the classroom determines the breadth and depth of learning. Managing and constructively channeling these informal interactions and the subsequent attitudinal and behavioral vacillations constitute a teacher’s primary task. These includes, but are not limited to, taking care of the physical movements, bodily gestures, seating arrangements, and patterns of verbal and non-verbal communication.

Positive classroom climate

A positive classroom climate is characterized by students who support one another, share high amounts of potential influence with one another and teacher, experience high levels of interaction, function by norms that are supportive of getting academic work done, recognize and respect individual differences, dialogue openly and genuinely, and deal constructively with conflicts. The outcome of such a climate guarantees the accomplishment of common goals, fosters positive self-esteem and feeling of security, allows for shared influenced and high involvement in academic learning, and ensures high degree of healthy interactions with one another.

On the other hand, a negative classroom climate is characterized by competition, alienation, and hostility that leads to anxiety, discomfort, and intellectual deprivation.

The following could be done by teachers to ensure a positive classroom climate:

1. Come before the class

2. Stay after the class

3. Talk to students

4. Tell in advance if you are rushing and if you are not available to talk to students

5. Make yourself available

6. Provide Safe environment for participation
•Don’t attack!
•Don’t ridicule!
•Mediate when students attack each other

7. Communicate expectations (for academic and non-academic tasks) early and clearly!

8. Provide a non-threatening physical setting (seating) – regularly changing seating arrangement is recommended

9. Be sensitive to individual difference

10. Learn students’ names and call them by their names!!!

11. Encourage your students[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]It is said that the first three years of marriage is the most beautiful, after which couples tend to lose their “first love.” Usually, marriages hit a wall after the third year, especially if the first three years were unpleasant. This phenomenon is also seen in workers, who tend to experience burnout after three years of working in a particular profession. Teachers are not exempted from this effect. Most often, teachers who start out with enthusiasm and passion for teaching become disheartened in less than three years.

Loss of passion

A variety of factors account for the decline in level of enthusiasm among teachers. Young teachers start out in the profession wanting to make a difference. They are gung ho about giving the best, diversified instruction, managing students’ behavior in non-threatening manner, using assessment results to improve student achievement, and engaging in life-long learning to improve teaching. These are the ingredients that make up for successful teaching, that directly and positively impact student learning. However, teachers tend to gradually lose their initial beliefs about and passion for the profession as they continue in the school system.

Primary cause

First and foremost, this is due to the fact that schools curb teacher autonomy. Although teachers are considered to be professionals, they are hardly treated like one. Teachers do not have the independence of determining what is educationally sound for their students.

In many countries, the National Curricula are developed by a group of geniuses in complete isolation from the social and emotional realities of how teachers teach and how students learn. Teachers are required to follow and complete the curriculum within a specified time, which further increases stress at work. Instead of providing meaningful contents and skills that are founded upon the needs, strengths and passion of individual students, teachers resentfully disseminate “empty” knowledge that is prescribed by curriculum designers.

Apart from the lack of autonomy in determining the contents taught, teachers are also required to teach using prescribed teaching methods. For example, when the concept of learning styles was popularized, teachers were required to be trained in the use of different teaching strategies to cater to different learning styles of students, only to be told by researchers that measuring and identifying learning styles would be psychometrically flawed. Additionally, psychologists also argue that humans use a variety of modalities to learn and never stick to any one learning style.

The same was seen when the concept, “meta-cognition” was introduced. Lots of money and time were spent in training teachers to teach meta-cognition; however, the term was overused until it became a cliché.

Consequences

Teachers who are stripped off their sense of autonomy to carry out professional tasks through the micromanagement of higher authorities feel “proletarianised”, de-professionalised, de-skilled and sometimes demoralized. As a result, disillusionment sets in; the level of commitment to the profession of teaching deteriorates. This explains why many teachers start off very excited about teaching and become completely disappointed with the profession.

Reviving passion

When people go to a medical doctor, they listen to the doctor’s diagnosis of the illness and accept whatever prescription given. Unfortunately, teachers (who are also professionals in teaching) are not treated this way. Hence, instead of listening, society prescribes to teachers what they need to do. This continues to de-motivate and discourage them.

One of the best ways to keep teachers enthusiastic about teaching is to give them opportunities to be actively involved in school matters. Teachers should be empowered to determine their own (educationally-sound) decisions and actions. They should do so by utilizing their highest creative prowess as educators. In other words, teachers must be allowed to be the professionals they are supposed to be.

“Good teachers are born; great teachers are made; extraordinary teachers are inspired!”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Do you wonder why parents of primary school children are eager to brag about their children’s academic performances (“My son got A’s in Math, Language Arts, and Science”) while parents of middle and high school kids prefer to be silent about their children’s performances at school? Why does the eagerness with which parents share their children’s successes at school dwindle as they get older and move into middle and high school? A variety of answers are possible, but the major cause for this has to do with how intelligence, learning, and motivation are viewed.

Old paradigm

We start off life full of curiosity. We wonder why, ask a variety of questions, and engage in purposeful investigation of the world around us to know more about everything. Somehow as children, we believed that there was no limit to how much we could learn and absorb. However, as we got older, adults introduce us to the concept of smart vs. stupid. Suddenly, we are required to conform to the popular belief that people can be categorized as intelligent, average, and dumb, and that they remain the same throughout life. Sadly, this paradigm influences how schools and the systems therein operate, even today.

Once labeled, people tend to think, feel, and behave in accordance to the expectations imposed on them (self-fulfilling prophecy in action). Hence, by the time children get into middle and high school, they are convinced that their intelligence is set – and it is impossible to change. This is why many children who possess excellent academic record during primary school fail to achieve the same type of excellence by the time they get into middle and high school. Their mindset (belief about intelligent) become their greatest enemy and they find themselves trapped in unhealthy thoughts about themselves and how their brains work.

Fixed vs. growth mindset

Psychology professor at Stanford University, Dr. Carol Dweck and her colleagues have conducted extensive research in understanding how mindset (belief about intelligence and how the brain really works) affects motivation, academic performance, and a host of other factors that contribute toward excellence in school and life.

In one of their experiments, Dr. Dweck and her associates designed an eight-week intervention program that taught some junior high school students study skills and how they could learn to develop their intelligence – describing the brain as a muscle that became stronger the more it was used. A control group also learned study skills but they were not taught Dr. Dweck’s expandable theory of intelligence. In just two months, the students from the first group, compared to the control group, showed marked improvement in grades and study habits.

According to Dr. Dweck, students who were energized by the idea that they could have an impact on their mind and its growth were highly motivated. These students possess the growth mindset (belief that neurons in the brain continue to make new connections – hence learning makes one smart-er regardless of past academic records). Internal motivation to study harder and better is significantly higher in these students compared to their counterparts (those with fixed mindset who believe that intelligence is set and learning doesn’t help change anything).

It was also found that students with growth mindset had a very straightforward (and correct) idea of effort – “the harder you work, the more ability will grow; even geniuses have had to work hard for their accomplishments.” On the other hand, students with the fixed mindset believe that if you work hard, it meant that you didn’t have ability, and that things would just come naturally to you if you did.

Application

Growth mindset motivates both teachers and students to hold a more optimistic attitude toward learning and intelligence. Schools should eradicate the fixed mindset from its operational philosophies and inspire every student to achieve the best he/she could by sincerely examining and working toward fulfilling his/her true potential. This is possible when our belief about intelligence, learning, and motivation changes![/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Adults from the old school often wonder why psychologists consider many traditional practices at school as unhealthy for children’s social-emotional well being. Additionally, psychologists use research-based empirical data to convince educators to move away from controlling children through coercion, punishment, threat, and fear to get things done. Instead, psychologists have provided alternatives such as positive reinforcement, point system, behavioral contracts, counseling, etc. to effectively approach idiosyncrasies in behavior and learning.

Because of this shift in thinking, the incidences of administering harsh punishment to children have progressively and significantly reduced over the past few decades. This is evident in the way children are treated at school in the 21st century. More and more teachers and administrators display a sense of respect and appreciation for students. In other words, children are treated more humanely than any other time in the history of education!

What’s wrong with being harsh?

However, many adults are still convinced that harsh treatment has its own place in the process of educating children. The argument that adults often use to defend this position is one that most of us can identify with – “When I was a child, my father used to threaten to hang me upside down if I couldn’t recite any times table from 2 through 15,” “My teacher wouldn’t let me go for recess or eat anything the whole day if I didn’t keep quiet throughout his/her lesson,” and “I would be sent to a dark room if I don’t memorize the correct spelling of words.”

For many adults, threats and fear-evoking commands worked just as effectively as strategies proposed by psychologists because they produced desired behavioral and learning outcomes – memorization and recitation of times table, being quiet in the class and memorization and recall of correct spelling of words. Although adults accept the presence of adverse psychological consequences of using such threats and fear-evoking commands on children, they still consider them useful as ways to get things done!

It doesn’t work anymore

Despite harsh treatments from adults, children in the past did well in the school because all they needed to do was memorize and regurgitate information. Repetition and intense practice defined learning. Success at school was determined by the amount of knowledge one accumulated over time and presented when required. Hence, it was possible for children to be sad, terrified, and upset and still learn academic contents as well as acceptable behavior because they were programmed to associate a set of stimuli with a particular set of responses. As long as the combination of these two sets of stimuli and responses were correctly presented, children were rewarded; otherwise, they were punished.

This kind of behavioral and cognitive programming perfectly matched the needs of a work culture that required no thinking and creative problem solving. However, the 21st century demands a completely different kind of education. Children living in this century cannot afford to passively accumulate information and regurgitate them when necessary. Theirs is a world where learning is synonymous to thinking and education is synonymous to problem solving.

Science of thinking

Research in neuroscience and psychology indicate that negative emotions such as fear, sadness, frustration, anger, anxiety, and worry drain mental energy and interfere with one’s ability to think clearly. Unhealthy emotions muddle thinking, make decisions difficult to reach, disrupt communication, reduce physical coordination, and make it harder to solve problems (a condition known as cognitive inhibition). On the other hand, healthy emotions lead to better performance and achievement, allow for more creativity and innovative problem solving, help in decision making, ease memory recall, and improve skill, precision, and coordination (a condition known as cognitive facilitation).

Children preparing for 21st century and beyond learn by thinking. The pre-requisite to thinking is positive, healthy emotions. It is the duty of every adult, whether parent, teacher, or administrator, to provide experiences that would enable children to be happy, before they delve into learning.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]In the past, schools did everything to prevent students from making mistakes. Mistakes were considered bad. To get back tests and assignments filled with red marks was a sure sign of failure and incompetence. Hence students were programmed to do everything they could to avoid making mistakes, to the extent that they would cheat to get the right answers. Additionally, students memorized words, phrases, and sentences from textbooks in order to reproduce the exact same texts expected of them in the exam. Apart from leading to under-achievement, mistakes became another psychological weapon that terrorized students and their attitude toward learning, themselves, and the world around them.

According to the most popular lecturer at Harvard University Dr. Tal Ben-Shahar, we cannot learn and grow if we don’t make mistakes. He illustrated this in one of his “Happy” classes. In the lecture, he called out a volunteer who was asked to draw a circle as best as she could. The circle looked close-to-perfect. He then asked the same student to draw two more circles: one circle as she would have drawn it when she was three years old, and another one when she was one year old. You can imagine how the three circles looked. The two latter circles did not look like a circle at all. Dr. Tal Ben-Shahar followed-up by saying that the student had attempted thousands of circles all her life up to this time to be able to draw a close-to-perfect circle. She wouldn’t have done it if she didn’t draw thousands of imperfect circles. The lesson that Dr. Ben-Shahar wanted to draw out from this exercise was summarized in this catch phrase: “learn to fail or fail to learn.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]It is relatively easy to get children to do what parents or teachers want them to do. Toys, candy, cartoon and play time, PS3, stickers, etc. serve as rewards to motivate children and direct their behavior. However, research in psychology of learning indicate that by the time an individual becomes a teenager, his behavior is no longer motivated by external rewards.

The growing child

As a person matures with age and subsequently experiences growth in cognitive, social-emotional and physical functions, his needs and priorities change as well. Hence an individual who was previously driven by stickers, toys, etc. may not find them appealing anymore. Parents and teachers who are not aware of this significant developmental milestone may get frustrated. Their attempts to direct their teens’ behavior fail. Parents/teachers and teens view each other as being inconsiderate and uncaring. At times, parents feel that their teens are rebellious and disrespectful of their authorities. Moreover, teachers feel that students are trying to act smart and make their work difficult. Teens on the other hand feel that parents and teachers will never understand them and provide them with what they really need. The gaps among these individuals grow wider with each passing day.

Identify crisis – the underlying cause

Why do the effects of external motivation dwindle by the time a child becomes a teen? Why can’t parents and teachers motivate adolescents with the same stickers and certificates as they would with children? While there are no definite answers to these questions, there seem to be a significant relationship between the uniquely-adolescent-experience called identity crisis and the changes in what makes adolescents tick.

It is during teenage years that an individual begins to strongly feel the need to develop a clear understanding of who he is, what his strengths and weaknesses are, and what he intends to accomplish in life. Teenagers experience the need to articulate this to themselves and others. If the question “Who am I?” is not answered constructively at this stage, then an adolescent is prone to painfully prolong identify crisis. Many carry on with this crisis into adulthood and old age. Sadly, both parents and teachers do not actively help teenagers with this task. Hence teenagers are typically pre-occupied with the thought, but do not necessarily know how to go about this difficult, yet important life assignment.

Mind over matter

As the need to define one’s self become pronounced, teenagers become more interested in subjective, intangible experiences and less attracted to material objects. In other words, the “mind over matter” outlook emerges. They become fascinated by ideas, concepts, and philosophical thoughts. They eagerly thread new territories that provide them with emotionally-packed experiences. Anything perceived to have no emotional value is of secondary value. This explains why teens are keen on “falling in love” with members of the opposite sex (apart from the fact that their bodies are undergoing hormonal and physical changes).

Soft motivation

Motivating teens with the use of external rewards, punishment, or other aversive stimuli fails to yield the results expected. These, whether positive or negative, are not the things that make a teen tick.

To motivate a teen, parents and teachers should focus on unconditionally assisting and supporting him to develop a positive sense of self-concept and self-worth. Additionally, parents and teachers should encourage the teen’s need for achievement and celebrate every success experienced, whether it is small or big. Talking about and modeling self-discipline to regulate one’s thinking, emotion, and behavior is another effective way to motivate a teen. Lastly, parents and teachers should be committed to challenging and stimulating teens to use their creativity to solve real-life problems. This entails helping them with useful, relevant knowledge and/or skills that results in mastery and increased efficacy.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]How do we effectively deal with student complaints, appease parents who are not pleased with what happens at school in terms of their children’s learning, and keep teachers motivated despite difficulties and conflicts at work? These are questions that school leaders constantly grapple with. However, due to lack of strategic thinking and the inability to confront people in situations engulfed in unpleasant interpersonal tension, ineffective leaders tend to either brush off the issue and let things remain the way they are or partially respond to quickly fix the problem, hence temporarily neutralizing the situation. These are ingredients for disaster, in the long run.

Uncovering the mask

Instead of trying to pretend to know much about leadership and behave professionally toward resolving issues, we would do ourselves a favor if we go back to the basics of human interaction and problem solving. One does not need to be a rocket scientist to solve the day-to-day conflicts and tension that arise in a school. We should bear in mind that professionalism in work does not necessarily mean that we give up our natural tendencies and ability to work with others on humanitarian levels. In an attempt to professionalize everything, we forget that some problems are easily solved if we pay attention to the basics of human living.

Simple suggestion

When students, parents, teachers, counselors, and leaders come to me for advice on conflict resolution, I give them one simple suggestion. However, I also realize that it is not easy for everyone to see the value of the proposal made to them. My suggestion, almost always, requires them to get together and talk the issue over with people who affect and are affected by the whole situation. In my opinion, as long as conflicts involve people, there is no other better, more humane way than to talk things over and get things clarified. This is a fundamental strategy used by humans since time immemorial. And it has never failed, when done properly.

The answer that I give to teachers, counselors, and leaders when they face conflicts that need immediate resolution is to get together with the people involved in a conference. Conferencing is powerful. Conferencing allows people to re-establish lost trusts, build bridges that were previously burned down, and develop relationship based on openness and transparency, even if this means building everything right from the scratch.

Vital component and process

Regardless of how a conference is executed, the primary aim of any such exercise should be to clarify expectations. Often, problems are perceived (not real). Most problems are problems because we look at them as such. In reality, they may not be problems. However, when something is perceived as a problem, that itself is enough to ruin a social institution like a school. An effective way to handle misperception is to bring into light existing perceptions, analyze and evaluate them, correct wrong perceptions, and adopt new, more accurate ones. This has to be done out in the open, in the presence of people implicated in the conflict situation.

For example, if students complain about a teacher being ineffective, then it is the responsibility of a leader to bring those two parties together and 1) allow them to express their perception toward and expectations of each other, 2) compare perception and expectations to identify similarities and differences, 3) correct wrong perception by clarifying expectations and coming to a consensus as to how each party would respond to each other’s needs, and finally 4) be committed to operating in the context of new perception and expectations.

At the heart of this whole process, it is important to know that both parties are not to be blamed and in their own way, are doing their best to function well in the school. The actual problem that we need to address is clashes in expectations and our response should be to get people together and clarifying expectations.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]