To start the second QLC, I experimented with conducting a brief check-in that involved answering the question, what is alive in you right now? This type of phrase is commonly used within NVC to address the feelings and needs of a person in the present moment. The purpose of asking this question was to gain information on each teacher’s state of being, to balance the teachers’ participation (so that talkative and quiet teachers started the group equally), and to produce a sense of mutuality and group concern. After explaining the meaning of this question and modelling an answer, each participant briefly stated what was going on for them in that present moment. Once check-in was over, Michael and Peter shared their experiences of trialling NVC, which related to the concept of feelings and needs that were discussed in the last meeting. In his first example, Michael described an incident in his classroom with two students who were French kissing in his class:
I was the only one seeing it ‘cos they were all the way at the back … I had to say something or they would never have noticed that I’ve seen them. I had to say stop, stop this … [laughing] that just stopped me in my tracks … I felt frustrated.
83
With the help of the other teachers in the QLC, Michael came to the conclusion that he had felt frustrated because he had a need for connection and trust. He thought that the students had decided to not pay attention anymore in class because it was too intense for them;
however, they weren’t conveying this to him. While Michael did not confirm this theory by directly asking the students, the fact that he investigated his own emotions and those of his students demonstrated a step towards more empathetic connection in his teaching practice.
In his second example, Michael reported applying NVC to an informal conversation with a colleague named Stephanie (pseudonym) who had come across as being somewhat
aggressive. In this example, Michael had difficulty conveying his feelings and needs to Stephanie and noticed that his intention during that conversation had shifted from establishing a positive connection towards venting his frustration:
I said [to her], I feel a bit like I’m put in a box … like I’m labelled and you judge me on that. So that was not really a good way of expressing a feeling … and all I got back was, yeah, you are in a box, that’s how it is. At this point I realised that my purpose was not the process of NVC anymore, my purpose was to get my frustration out and so I just stopped.
Michael counted this example as a failure as he told Stephanie what he thought she was doing (judging him) rather than how he was feeling. Michael believed this happened because:
I was not fluent enough in NVC to use it effectively … [and] it was too hard to hear the needs behind Stephanie’s words in that moment.
After recounting this experience, Michael decided that he would try to empathise with Stephanie more in their next encounter. Next, Peter talked about how had has started to take more personal responsibility for his feelings inside of the classroom. He mentioned that when he felt frustrated he now looks inwards to explore what he needs, rather than getting angry at the students:
I’ve been using it [NVC] all the time now and I find that it is really good for me to catch myself and self-monitor … so I’ve been catching myself and going, What are you feeling Peter? … What are you needing? … [and] most of it comes down to me needing to feel like I am doing a good job.
This reflects a shift in thinking from an habitual and reactionary response to challenging student behaviour, towards a more reflective and self-exploratory process. In an example that he shared with the group, Peter described how he had been approaching students who had been noisy during class:
I’ve been going up to individuals and saying, look guys, you keep calling across the room and it’s making me feel quite anxious because I need to feel like I am doing a
84
good job and if someone walks past …. And they [the students] listen to you … Their behaviour sometimes carries on, but I think there is a long game here … I feel like they are slowly modifying themselves and self-managing [their behaviour], rather than me just saying, stop doing that, stop doing that.
In this example, Peter attributes his honesty surrounding his fear of being perceived of not doing a good job as the motivating factor for changing student behaviour. He believed that by being honest in this way his students were able to empathise with him and were more likely to change their behaviour as they could understand his needs.
As Jake and Sarah did not have an example to share for this meeting, I introduced the next key concept of NVC: observations and evaluations. This involved giving examples of each, with emphasis on how using evaluations in the form of moralistic judgements can be perceived as criticism and trigger defensiveness in individuals. I then gave the teachers a hand-out that outlined this step and concluded the meeting by addressing the collaborative nature of shaping the QLC. This aspect is outlined in the following, and each subsequent, section.
Shaping the second QLC meeting
At the end of the group meeting, I drew attention to key features of the QLC as a professional learning tool. Namely, that in each QLC I would provide some clarification about NVC principles and then we would discuss them by identifying issues and examples from practice. I then described different areas of NVC that they may want to focus on (e.g., four-step process of NVC, empathy, and conflict resolution) and different methods to explore NVC (e.g., role-playing, group discussions on key concepts of NVC, as well as sharing examples in their professional lives and working together to find solutions). During this process I emphasised that the way the group would be run would be determined by the teachers themselves.
There was a general consensus from all the teachers that they thought working on the central four-step process was most important, alongside ways to use empathy in conflict situations.
Sarah stated that she wanted to focus on practical examples that pertained to everyday situations in the classroom. For instance, one method that Sarah wanted to utilise was using role-playing with real life examples. In addressing Michael, who was also a colleague at her school, she stated:
85
I find that [role-playing] quite useful to practice because it is rooted in real life problems … and it would be lovely to come up with a common strategy that we are both using so that the students notice this.
Sarah also mentioned that 30 minutes was not long enough for this group as the interesting conversations often began near the end of the meeting and had to be cut short because of time. In remarking on this, she asserted:
I’m wondering whether an hour’s blitz would help us move forward in it [NVC]
because I feel like I’m getting a bit behind in it … I feel like I’m just about getting into it, then I’m out again … So I would like to invest a bit more time … I’m not giving it the attention I would like to.
Through voicing her opinion on both matters, a discussion ensued by the teachers on how they potentially wanted to structure the following QLC and a decision was made to try out role-playing in the next meeting, alongside increasing the length of the meeting to an hour.
Summary and personal reflections
In summary, this QLC marked the beginning of power shifting from myself
facilitating the group, towards the teachers discussing what they wanted to focus on and how they would go about doing this. At this stage, three out of the four main points of NVC ideology had been outlined (observations, feelings, and needs), which provided a firm basis for the teachers to step off from. Whilst I was aware that my intention at the beginning of this research was to create a space where the teachers could direct their own learning process, I grappled with ensuring that they understood the mechanics of NVC in order to progress their learning of the approach. I believe this led to a tension between my role as a facilitator, who essentially organised the structure of the first two QLCs, and the teachers’ ability to co-construct their own learning. Having been propelled by the teachers’ desire to take more control of the group, I decided to ‘let go’ of the reins in order for the following QLCs to become more experimental in nature. In addition, since the time would increase from 30 to 60 minutes in the next meeting, this would allow more space for the teachers to discuss and contribute to each other’s ideas. This was important because I noticed myself becoming very conscious of the length of time each teacher spoke, as I wanted to ensure even participation within the group.
86