Esther B. Schupak points out that when reading a text, individuals read “exclusively through the lenses of their own ideologies and for the purpose of building their own arguments, failing to respect what is actually there and refusing to attempt to find a point of identification with the text (p. 196).” As a result of this, I am sure that some faculty members might react negatively to David D. Perlmutter when he advises administrators to listen carefully to angry parents so that they can “Ascertain the facts of the issue, as the parents see it” and that administrators should do this “Even if something doesn’t sound right or if they [the parents] are asking for an impossibility.” I know that not too long ago, I would have had a negative reaction to Perlmutter’s advice and immediately declared him wrong.

My lenses would have prevented me from seeing that my role as a faculty member and an administrator’s role in dealing with angry parents or students is different. Furthermore, I could not imagine why an administrator wouldn’t immediately end a discussion with a parent or student who was being unreasonable. Because of my lenses, I could easily have missed Perlmutter’s caveat that the administrator not “render an opinion too quickly.”

I recently read Thich Nhat Hanh’s Anger in which he explains that we should “Listen with only one purpose: to allow the other person to express himself and find relief from his suffering (p. 4).” and that “Deep listening, compassionate listening is not listening with the purpose of analyzing or even uncovering what has happened in the past. You listen first of all in order to give the other person relief, a chance to speak out, to feel that someone finally understands him or her (p. 94).”

By first hearing the angry parent out, Perlmutter realizes that the administrator makes “sure they know that someone is appreciating their concerns.” To understand concerns is not the same as agreeing with them. Or, as I tell my students, I can understand why the Aztecs thought it was a good idea to rip the still beating heart out of someone, but I don’t condone the practice.

Unfortunately, administrators can render a decision too quickly before taking the time necessary to conduct their own investigation. In “When Administrators Make Mistakes,” which was likely written before Perlmutter’s article was published, Kimberly A. Yuracho cautions that “administrators may give in, and give in quickly [to an angry student] — even if they believe the best response is slower and more deliberative action.”

For many years I worked with a staff member who make decisions based only on what a student told them. Other evidence was irrelevant to this person. This is not the type of listening advocated by Perlmutter. Furthermore, such listening represents one type of mistake Yuracho identifies. Administrators need to listen. Pause. Investigate. Then continue the discussion.

Listen, pause, investigate and then continue the discussion can be a strategy for faculty dealing with angry students. I know that I have been quick to shut down a student who is making unreasonable demands or whose claims don’t sound right. Even in cases where I have the evidence that the student is misrepresenting the situation, I am now trying to listen to the student without immediately pulling up the proof that they are lying. Even if my investigation would only need to take two minutes, I don’t have to look up the records immediately. I can listen to the student, pause, tell them that I will investigate, and then arrange to meet with them later. The student is heard and, after the pause, might be more receptive to working on a reasonable solution to the problem.

I don’t have much experience with this new approach and I have no fantasy that it is a strategy that will work in every situation. However, Perlmutter and Hahn seem to agree that it is an approach that is worth trying. I also know what happened the last time I listened to an angry student to ascertain the facts as the student saw them instead of pulling up the evidence that they were wrong. The following week, the very angry student (who had walked out of my office because I was being unreasonable) and I enjoyed a very pleasant conversation during which the student agreed that the approach I had initially proposed made a lot of sense and that I was a “cool” professor for taking the time to help them.

–Steven L. Berg, PhD

Hanh, Thich Nhat. Anger. Riverhead, 2001.

Perlmutter, David D. “Admin 101: Why You Should Meet the Parents.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. 28 Dec. 2021.

Schupak, Esther B. “Listening Rhetoric in the Diverse College Classroom: Suggestions for Praxis.” College Teaching, vol. 6, no. 3, 2019, pp. 196-204. DOI: 10.1080/87567555.2019.1614899.

Yuracho, Kimberly A. “When Administrators Make Mistakes.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. 29 Dec. 2021.

 

---

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.