Four Interviews
Rodney Lots

Case #1: The Phone Call
This case involved a parent who did not agree with a teacher's grading methods.

During class on this particular day, students were taking a test. The test consisted of several pages, and the students had been instructed on how to staple the pages together when they completed the test. The teacher (teacher A) informed the students that failure to staple the test together properly would result in a one-letter grade deduction. All but one student in the class (student A) successfully followed the directions on stapling the test together, and keeping up with his rule, teacher A promptly deducted one letter grade from that one student's overall test score. Following class that day, the parent of student A called teacher A at home, requesting that the grade student A received on the test should be the grade recorded in the grade book, not this lower grade, since stapling the test together correctly had nothing to do with learning this particular subject. Teacher A explained to the parent that the students had been given instructions (several times) on how to properly staple their test together, and that student A had simply chosen not to listen to those directions. At this time the parent became extremely upset; teacher A was told that he was a terrible teacher, that his grading methods were unrealistic, and that student A's grade would be changed or the parent would complain to the school board about teacher A. Becoming quite upset, teacher A told the parent to do what they pleased, but until student A learned to listen, they would never amount to much in life, and learning these listening skills in school was at least a start; with that comment, the parent hung up on teacher A.

Reflective Comment:

While this story deals with a situation that never amounted to anything, (the parent never pressed the issue any further) it presents several good examples of parent conflict and things that could have been done to reduce the potential conflict. When asked how he would have changed things, teacher A stated that he should not have gone on the offensive with the parent, he immediately was angry with the parent for having disrupted him at home, and this anger, while partially justified, did not help the situation at all. The parent had a legitimate concern, and that if he (the teacher) would have tried to explain things better, with less "attitude," then the parent may have been more cooperative. If, on the other hand, the parent would have continued the negative approach, then teacher A would simply have had to explain that he was sorry, and the grade would stand. If the parent was still upset, then so be it, but the teacher had made his best attempt to try to diffuse the situation. Another concern teacher A had is that after some time to think about the policy to drop the grade a full letter because of not stapling things together correctly, he decided it was indeed too harsh. Teacher A felt that if he would have simply discussed this with the parent, they may have come to an agreement of some other way to help student A gain better listening skills. Overall, teacher A felt that the conflict was both parties fault, but one that could have been avoided if better communication had existed.

Case #2: The Letter
This story involves a letter written by a parent to a teacher, and the following conversations between them.

In this case, the teacher (teacher B) had a policy of sending home written statements to parents anytime the class was about to begin a major project. This letter would state the purpose of the project, some ideas on things parents could do to help, and how this project would affect the student's overall grade in class. Parents were asked to sign the paper and return it with their child to the teacher, so the teacher knew that each parent was aware of their child's responsibilities. After sending home the letter for the first time one year, teacher B received all the signed letters back, save one. Instead of the signed letter, this one student (student B) brought in a note from their father. It turns out that the father of student B was a lawyer, and the lawyer had written back a letter to teacher B (all in nice legalese) explaining his disgust that this teacher would expect a parent to help their child on a school project. By the time a child was this age (this was in a sixth grade class) they should be more responsible for themselves, they should be able to do their own school work, and that by attempting to get parents to help with school projects, would only lead to the child relying on their parents for support all their lives. The letter appalled teacher B, and it was obvious the child was concerned as well (the whole time teacher B was reading the letter, student B cried). Once that day was over, teacher B called the parent of student B and attempted to explain why she felt it was necessary for a parent to be involved with their child's school work. Parent B wanted to hear no such comments from teacher B, and quickly dismissed the phone call and hung up. Over the next few days teacher B tied several times to contact the parents of student B, but each time met with an answering machine, (an no call was returned) or a busy signal. Feeling defeated, teacher B accepted the fact that this parent was not interested in the concerns teacher B had, so teacher B quit calling, and let student B work on the project as their parent expected. When student B turned in their final project, it was obvious that their project was below average, and teacher B assigned the student a grade that fit their below average project. Student B was devastated, and for the remainder of the year struggled in teacher B's class.

Reflective Comment:

On reflection, teacher B felt there were many different things she should have done. First, she said, she wished she would have thought to try to set up a meeting with parent B, herself, and a school administrator (or had an administrator attempt to contact the parent). Teacher B also felt that she could have personally tried to help student B more to make up for the lack of parent support. This help may have created a bond between teacher and the student, and may have made the year go better for both. Teacher B felt that while she did make several attempts to talk with the parent, she did not go far enough, and that more could have been done.

Case #3: The Visitor
This case involves a parent coming to a teacher's class and verbally harassing her.

During the school year, this teacher (teacher C) had gotten several new students; one of these students (student C) had leukemia. While the disease was in its early stages, it was serious, but student C did his best to work hard in the class. As the year progressed, student C gradually started to lose his work ethic, and started becoming much more disruptive in class, both to the teacher, and to other students. Teacher C tried several times to talk with student C, but the general answer she got was that since he had such a terrible disease, why should he work hard in school. Teacher C told student C that while his disease was unfortunate, it did not give him the right to disrupt class, and that any more disruptions would result in student C receiving lunch detention. The disruptions continued, and despite several warnings, student C continued causing problems. Teacher C finally got fed up, and assigned student C three days lunch detention. On the following day, student C's father came to campus, got the principal, and proceeded to come into teacher C's room (fortunately during her prep period). On arrival, it was obvious that the parent was upset, and said parent immediately started on the offensive with teacher C. The parent questioned teacher C's qualifications to teach, where she had received her degree, said his son never causes problems, and that the teacher was a liar. The parent continued to badger teacher C, calling her a "punk" teacher, stating that her teaching credential was no good, and that she had no business being in a classroom (this whole time the principal was present and said nothing). The parent then asked the teacher, "Don't you even care that this boy is dying, how can you be so cold?" Teacher C responded that while it was unfortunate that student C had such a terrible disease, student C was indeed the liar, and this disease did not give him any special privileges in the classroom. On hearing this response, the parent exploded, told teacher C that he would see that she was fired within the week, and that she was never to talk to his child again. With that, the teacher pointed to the door and said you can leave now, and please don't ever come back. The principal's only response to the whole situation was to say to teacher C that he felt she should have responded differently to the parent.

Reflective Comments:

On reflection, teacher C felt ashamed of the comment she made about the student's disease not giving him any special privileges. While she felt the student was indeed "milking" his disease, she felt she could have been more empathetic with the situation at hand. She also felt that even though this parent was very rude to her, she could have easily tried to make a deal with the parent, to possibly lesson the punishment, or try to find some other method to resolve the situation. It seemed obvious to her (after the fact) that the parent was also struggling with the fact that the son had such a debilitating disease, and that by making such comments to them in this meeting, she did not make things better. She also noted that she wished that she had taken the time to contact the parent as soon as problems arose with student C. Had she done this, many of the problems may have been avoided, and this parent blow up would probably also have been avoided.

Case #4: More Lawyers on the Phone
This case involves an issue with a parent who felt a teachers "words" were very poorly chosen and that she knew nothing about dealing with kids.

This teacher (teacher D) had been dealing with a difficult student (student D) for sometime. Student D always liked to push other students around, and several times had attempted to do so in class. After several warnings, teacher D assigned student D lunch detention for a "hands off violation," detention was served by the student that day. At the end of the school day, teacher D contacted the father of student D to make him aware of the problems in class and the consequences that student D had received. When told about the lunch detention, the parent questioned when the child would be required to be in the detention, and teacher D commented that he had "served" the detention that day. The parent became very angry, stating that as a lawyer he knew that his son had the right to defend himself, and that he should not have been assigned any punishment without the parent's notification. He then accused teacher D of not being able to control her class, and that it was her fault the kids were misbehaving, not theirs. He continued to tell teacher D that she also had bad grammar. She should not tell the kids they have to "serve" detention as to "serve" time is compared to that of a convict and this comparison would lead kids to idolize criminals and would put the kids at risk for getting into more trouble. Teacher D apologized to the father, finished getting some more advice from him, and then hung up.

Reflective Comment:

While this conversation was over rather quickly, this event does address several problems. One, we are dealing with an irrational parent, and two, the teacher was very upset with how she handled the situation. Teacher D felt that she should have attempted to explain the child's behavior better to the parent, and let the parent know that this was not normal behavior for her class. She further felt that when the parent addressed the issue of "serving time" she could have defended her use of the words better, and not agreed with the parent so much. While teacher D felt that defending her decision may have further aggravated the parent, she felt that she should not have allowed the parent to feel he could tell the teacher anything he felt like. In the future, if contact between this parent and the teacher arises, teacher D feels that an administrator should be present to help smooth out the conversation.