Building rapport in schools

 

Henry was married to a college professor. Since moving to a new city, he and his wife decided that Henry would work mostly from home so their children would have one parent who would be easily accessible to their school. Henry was often at school earlier than other parents and stayed after school to connect with the teachers. Henry and his wife visited the classrooms often to share stories and culture-based activities and assist with special events. They believed that connecting with their children’s teachers was essential to the children’s success.

Dr. Car, their son’s teacher, stood at the door each morning greeting families with a smile and calling the children by name. She always stood to the side of the door, which indicated to parents they were welcomed to enter the classroom. The teacher arrived early and stayed late to be available for brief conversations with families. At the start of the school year she met with parents, in a circle, to share various ways they could get involved inside and outside of the classroom. She left the door open for families to share in ways she had not mentioned. She asked only that families that wanted to visit the classroom let her know a day prior so she could make the most of their time. Although Dr. Car was not good with email, she wrote notes home, smiled often, and frequently communicated positively about the children before parents were ever told about a concern. Henry and his family believe this teacher-family connection contributed to the fact that their son enjoyed one of his best school years while in Dr. Car’s classroom.

 

-->

The culture of most schools urge education professionals to exercise caution, avoid conflicts of interest, set boundaries, document carefully, think twice about accepting gifts, and encourage independence (Johnson and Ridley 2008). Professional ethics are not bad; they just don’t always lend themselves to exceptions, flexibility, and divergent thinking. A problem with ethical professionalism is that it may be motivated by self-interest (school/school employee) and may be used to justify unethical courses of action (Fox 2008; Johnson and Riley 2008). When interacting with professionals, families need to understand that their attempts to connect with education professionals may be met with indifference. This cultural disconnect is one of many found in school settings.

-->

To connect to collaborate, one must first build rapport (Dettmer et al. 2009; Palmer 1998). Rapport building is more about interaction than a set of procedures (Palmer 1998). For example, meeting at back-to-school night is something that teachers are contractually required to do; however, the contact could be developed into an opportunity to build rapport. What if you volunteered to help organize parents to bring in light snacks for the night, provided child care, or helped the teacher infuse icebreaker activities into the agenda? These activities not only permit parents to build rapport with one another, but they may also be used as opportunities for families to connect with the teacher. Don’t assume that education professionals know how to do build rapport with you. 

Tickle-Degnen & Rosenthal (1990) offered a three-phased model for building rapport in schools. In their model rapport consists of three elements: mutual attentiveness, positivity, and congruency. Mutual attentiveness is a posture of “we” that suggests that the individuals are more concerned with the group than with themselves. Teachers want to know that you understand their responsibilities and limitations as well as your child’s needs. Positivity encourages friendliness, care, and concern for others. Even criticism can be given in a positive, constructive way. Congruence means that the people involved can predict the actions of others; you know each other well enough to know how the other will react to given circumstances. Each component—mutual attentiveness, positivity, and congruency—contributes to building rapport.