Over the last couple of months the conflict and dissatisfaction
at work has been mounting due to the inconsistencies between teacher
expectations and procedures. Instead of honestly expressing my concerns as they
occur as discussed on the NVC website, I began stuffing my frustrations which
quickly turned into anger. A couple of weeks ago, we did hold a meeting in
which everyone involved had an opportunity to express their desires and
expectation surrounding a multitude of issues such as meal time expectations,
scheduling conflicts, discipline problems. Overall, it was a fairly productive
meeting: many opinions were openly expressed and some changes were implemented.
Unfortunately, some issues remain unresolved; in part because of the time and
effort required to initiate them, but, I fear, in part because of
procrastination or hesitation.
One yet unresolved concern is that of consistent rules for
the outdoor play area. As part of the outline for our initial meeting (a
meeting which incidentally probably should have occurred before school started)
each person was asked to express their own expectations for the primary
activities and pieces of equipment on the playground. As our previous meeting
became very lengthy, we did not discuss the issue then, but were all asked to
devise a method by which these guidelines would be agreed upon and documented
so that everyone concerned would be on the same page. As of Friday morning,
this had not yet occurred. Although, I am still a bit questionable as to how to
facilitate the efforts, I believe the creative response approach to this issue
would prove to be beneficial (CRN, 2010). Instead of looking for a perfect
solution to each of the issues that arise, we should collectively evaluate our
concerns in order to come up with acceptable ways to manage these expectations.
For example, there does not seem to be any rhyme or reason as to when bikes are
“open” or “closed” unless there is a flagrant misuse of the equipment – someone
gets run over or there is a fight over possession. But since specific
guidelines have not been established the children (nor staff) have any real way
of knowing what is acceptable behavior concerning the activity. By expressing
the concerns about children getting hurt by a passing tricycle because they are
drawing on the sidewalk with chalk, we can establish that this must be an
either/or area; bikes or chalk, and alternate them appropriately. But by
looking at the situation as a “win – learn” opportunity, we are setting ourselves
up renegotiation if we see that our restrictions are either unwarranted or
insufficient. This principle accepts that success is a learning process.
Another continuing concern is that of scheduling. Even
though we discussed the necessity for a more workable/reliable daily schedule
as well as sticking to a schedule, issues continue to arise. As the senior
member of the team, I revamped our old schedule to reflect the adjustments discussed
in the meeting and requested input from my colleagues as the practicality of
the changes. After making some adjustments, we all agreed on the new schedule
as well as giving each other permission to help enforce the changes by
reminding others about activities and timing of events. Regrettably, the timing
is still off. The primary concern is nap time; it was suggested that lunch be
pushed back a half of an hour which would in turn result in nap being pushed
back as well. This seemed to make sense since our dialogue also resulted in the
desire to shorten the time the children would sleep. However, the issue is that
the children are being held at a group activity past the time that they should
be eating which not only cuts lunch time, but bleeds over into nap time since
some children are being rushed to eat and thus move slower. The ultimate result
is that children go down for their naps much later than anticipated, are
allowed to sleep a bit longer to make up for it and do not have time for the next
activity before some of them leave for the day. One child is almost always
forced to wake up only moments before his aunt picks him up whereas, according
to the schedule, he should have at least 30 minutes to collect himself, wake up
and participate in a large group activity before going home.
I would, therefore, like to see the “Three-Chair Model” used
to help mediate the necessary changes (either in scheduling or behavior)
between the director and staff members. In doing so, each person in the team is
given the opportunity to express their needs and desires in a non-threatening
way, airing our grievances with a neutral third party who can ensure that each
person is heard and understood and an acceptable solution is reached. In this
case, is would not only need to fulfill the expectations of the teachers but
begin with what will be beneficial to the children.
During this course, I am not only learning a great deal
about my own communication skills – and the shortcomings therein – but am
becoming more acutely aware of the communication styles of those around me. I
am trying desperately to improve my listening skills and encourage others to
express their actual needs instead of jumping to assumptions that are
frequently incorrect. But I am also noticing how others (my co-worker and
mother included) use emotion to manipulate my responses. It is my hope and goal
that throughout the remainder of this course, I will continue to gain practice
in listening and confronting that will improve my communication and conflict
resolution skills.
Lasater, I., Kinyon, J., Stiles, J. (2010). The three-chair
model for learning NVC mediation: Developing capacity for mindful presence,
connection, and skill with NVC. Center for Nonviolent Communication. Retrieved
from
http://www.cnvc.org/node/6945
