There’s one skill that no 21st century leader can do without: the ability to skillfully mediate conflicts in the systems they lead. School leaders in the United States are no different.
The role of a school leader is inherently difficult and conflict-ridden. They’re answerable to stakeholders both above and below them. They’re answerable to parents, and they’re responsible for the well-being of their students. There’s bound to be friction between the various factions they manage. The level and pitch of these conflicts, however, have intensified over the last two decades.
Thanks to social media, there are countless polarizing conflicts that have seeped into schools’ fabric in recent years; principals and superintendents now find themselves navigating conflicts around big-ticket, national issues like a presidential election, as well as the divisive, local politics of book bans, masking mandates, gender-neutral bathrooms, or changing a school’s name.
Diffusing a polarizing issue isn’t just a leader’s superpower, it’s also a survival mechanism, said Katy Anthes, leader of the FORWARD Initiative at the Public Education and Business Coalition, a Denver-based teacher training and advocacy organization. Anthes, Colorado’s former Education Commissioner, works with school systems to help them deal effectively with conflict.
“The reality is that leaders have some responsibility to model better behavior. It’s one more thing that leaders need to [learn how to do] or it’s possible they won’t keep their jobs,” Anthes said in an interview with Education Week.
Our muscles for productive disagreement are atrophying. We need to rebuild them.
It’s not just that school leaders have to model how to diffuse conflicts. In a nationally representative survey conducted this summer, more than 3 out of 4 K-12 educators told the EdWeek Research Center that they believe schools have a responsibility to teach students how to have respectful conversations about important topics with people they disagree with.
Education Week spoke to mediation experts and school leaders to delineate essential practices that can help resolve polarizing conflicts.
When leaders can anticipate conflict, they diffuse it quicker
Leaders should have their ear to the ground and identify the rumblings of conflict that could quickly polarize a group—like parents—against the school.
Suzan Harris, the principal of the 800-student Henderson Middle School, located in rural Georgia, relies heavily on her power to anticipate a conflict. As she watched a national debate unfold about age-appropriate books and the correct methods to teach reading, she knew the conflict would come to her school as well. By 2021, Harris was prepared.
“We knew the reading wars were coming. My superintendent and I decided to look at the curricula we were offering,” Harris said.
When they reviewed the books their vendor had supplied, Harris found what she called “controversial” material that “wouldn’t have sat well with the community.” The books in question featured families with same-sex parents, which, according to Harris, would have sparked tension in a community who holds conservative values.
These books were removed from the syllabus, Harris said.
“What helped me diffuse the issue was that as a school, we’ve worked hard to understand our community and the values that are important to them,” Harris said.
Harris is now contemplating a separate “book club” for the parents in the community who may want their children to read books that feature non-traditional family structures.
That may still be a controversial solution: Supporters of diverse books have said all children need access to a range of stories that reflect their own experiences and provide a window into the lives of people who may seem different from them.
When leaders can preempt conflict, Anthes said, they can train their brains to deal with it better. In her workshops with school leaders, Anthes encourages them to learn a few conversation starters to use if arguments get heated. Phrases like: “I hear you’re frustrated,” or “can we brainstorm this together?” can help diffuse the tension.
Always be open to listening
There are going to be conflicts that school leaders cannot resolve, but they can bring down the temperature of the conversation.
It’s important for school leaders to always have a “listening posture,” said Mark R. Leary, a professor of psychology and neuroscience at Duke University, who’s researched the role of “high-quality” listening in depolarizing arguments.
“If leaders can show they’re genuinely listening, that they’re considering the other person’s opinions and seriously, [an opponent] is more likely to accept or at least tolerate a decision they don’t agree with,” Leary said.
In contrast, he said, if leaders go into the conversation with a defensive attitude or are dismissive or inattentive during an argument, they aren’t moving any closer to depolarizing attitudes.
Leaders shouldn’t listen with the aim to change anyone’s mind, Leary added, but to shake loose tightly held beliefs. Listening well can diffuse tensions during arguments, but leaders also need to be prepared to take unpopular decisions.
“It takes courage to know that a significant percentage of their staff or parents are going to be upset with the decision,” he said.
Leary said leaders shouldn’t get defensive, and instead discuss with their opponents how they reached the decision.
Inoculate against future conflict
As leaders learn to anticipate conflict, Anthes said they should adopt a few key practices, like regularly getting coffee with people they disagree with, and getting curious about those people’s worldview.
It also helps school leaders to access spaces where they can model listening to and mediating polarizing conflicts, said Scott Guggenheimer, who leads programming for a leadership development program for educators, situated within the University of Virginia.
Guggenheimer’s team runs yearly cohorts where leaders from school districts across the country bring specific leadership challenges to resolve. Guggenheimer said that over the last few cohorts, more leaders have tried to build their skill to have “tough conversations” with different groups, like school boards.
Through this program, which supports participants over two years, Guggenheimer has created a deliberate space for leaders to “practice” disagreement. The leaders are taken through case studies from different industries outside of education and put through difficult conversations with each other.
Guggenheimer has noticed that participants are much more willing to listen to each other, if before the discussion, they talk to each other about a moment when they felt like they were their best selves.
“The leaders get a deep insight into how others view themselves. When we transition to the case study, they have more productive discussions,” he added.
This humanizing activity, Guggenheimer said, helps people within a system celebrate each other.
While it’s not possible to do frequent simulations or role-playing exercises in a school, leaders do carry back an important message from the program, Guggenheimer said: “The more people feel that they are affirmed and celebrated in their schools, the more open they may be to having difficult conversations.”
