(PDF) Teaching and Emotion

New Directions for Teaching and Learning Catherine M. Wehlburg Editor-in-Chief Teaching and Emotion Harriet L. Schwartz Jennifer Snyder-Duch Editors Number 153 • Spring 2018 Wiley Teaching and Emotion Harriet L. Schwartz, Jennifer Snyder-Duch (eds.) New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no. 153 Editor-in-Chief: Catherine M. Wehlburg NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, (Print ISSN: 0271-0633; Online ISSN: 1536-0768), is published quarterly by Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., a Wiley Company, 111 River St., Hoboken, NJ 07030-5774 USA. Postmaster: Send all address changes to NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, John Wiley & Sons Inc., C/O The Sheridan Press, PO Box 465, Hanover, PA 17331 USA. Copyright and Copying (in any format) Copyright © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., a Wiley Company. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior permission in writing from the copyright holder. Authorization to copy items for internal and personal use is granted by the copyright holder for libraries and other users registered with their local Reproduction Rights Organisation (RRO), e.g. Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA (www.copyright.com), provided the appropriate fee is paid directly to the RRO. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying such as copying for general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, for republication, for creating new collective works or for resale. Permissions for such reuse can be obtained using the RightsLink “Request Permissions” link on Wiley Online Library. Special requests should be addressed to:

Information for subscribers New Directions for Teaching and Learning is published in 4 issues per year. Institutional subscription prices for 2018 are: Print & Online: US$502 (US), US$560 (Canada & Mexico), US$612 (Rest of World), €397 (Europe), £314 (UK). Prices are exclu- sive of tax. Asia-Pacific GST, Canadian GST/HST and European VAT will be applied at the appropriate rates. For more information on current tax rates, please go to www.wileyonlinelibrary.com/tax-vat. The price includes online access to the current and all online back- files to January 1st 2014, where available. For other pricing options, including access information and terms and conditions, please visit www.wileyonlinelibrary.com/access. Delivery Terms and Legal Title Where the subscription price includes print issues and delivery is to the recipient’s address, delivery terms are Delivered at Place (DAP); the recipient is responsible for paying any import duty or taxes. Title to all issues transfers Free of Board (FOB) our shipping point, freight prepaid. We will endeavour to fulfil claims for missing or damaged copies within six months of publication, within our reasonable discretion and subject to availability. Back issues: Single issues from current and recent volumes are available at the current single issue price from

. Disclaimer The Publisher, New Directions for Teaching & Learning and Editors cannot be held responsible for errors or any consequences arising from the use of information contained in this journal; the views and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the Publisher, New Directions for Teaching & Learning and Editors, neither does the publication of advertisements constitute any endorsement by the Publisher, New Directions for Teaching & Learning and Editors of the products advertised. Publisher: NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING is published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc., 350 Main St., Malden, MA 02148- 5020. Journal Customer Services: For ordering information, claims and any enquiry concerning your journal subscription please go to www.wileycustomerhelp.com/ask or contact your nearest office. Americas: Email:

; Tel: +1 781 388 8598 or +1 800 835 6770 (toll free in the USA & Canada). Europe, Middle East and Africa: Email:

; Tel: +44 (0) 1865 778315. Asia Pacific: Email:

; Tel: +65 6511 8000. Japan: For Japanese speaking support, Email:

. Visit our Online Customer Help available in 7 languages at www.wileycustomerhelp.com/ask Production Editor: Abha Mehta (email:

). Wiley’s Corporate Citizenship initiative seeks to address the environmental, social, economic, and ethical challenges faced in our busi- ness and which are important to our diverse stakeholder groups. Since launching the initiative, we have focused on sharing our content with those in need, enhancing community philanthropy, reducing our carbon impact, creating global guidelines and best practices for paper use, establishing a vendor code of ethics, and engaging our colleagues and other stakeholders in our efforts. Follow our progress at www.wiley.com/go/citizenship View this journal online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/tl Wiley is a founding member of the UN-backed HINARI, AGORA, and OARE initiatives. They are now collectively known as Research4Life, making online scientific content available free or at nominal cost to researchers in developing countries. Please visit Wiley’s Content Access - Corporate Citizenship site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-390082.html Printed in the USA by The Sheridan Group. Address for Editorial Correspondence: Editor-in-chief, Catherine M. Wehlburg, NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, Email:

Abstracting and Indexing Services The Journal is indexed by Academic Search Alumni Edition (EBSCO Publishing); ERA: Educational Research Abstracts Online (T&F); ERIC: Educational Resources Information Center (CSC); Higher Education Abstracts (Claremont Graduate University); SCOPUS (Elsevier). Cover design: Wiley Cover Images: © Lava 4 images | Shutterstock For submission instructions, subscription and all other information visit: wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/tl FROM THE SERIES EDITOR About This Publication Since 1980, New Directions for Teaching and Learning (NDTL) has brought a unique blend of theory, research, and practice to leaders in postsecondary education. NDTL sourcebooks strive not only for solid substance but also for timeliness, compactness, and accessibility. The series has four goals: to inform readers about current and future di- rections in teaching and learning in postsecondary education, to illuminate the context that shapes these new directions, to illustrate these new direc- tions through examples from real settings, and to propose ways in which these new directions can be incorporated into still other settings. This publication reflects the view that teaching deserves respect as a high form of scholarship. We believe that significant scholarship is con- ducted not only by researchers who report results of empirical investigations but also by practitioners who share disciplinary reflections about teaching. Contributors to NDTL approach questions of teaching and learning as seri- ously as they approach substantive questions in their own disciplines, and they deal not only with pedagogical issues but also with the intellectual and social context in which these issues arise. Authors deal on the one hand with theory and research and on the other with practice, and they translate from research and theory to practice and back again. About This Volume Teaching is often seen as a solitary practice, especially in higher education. This volume focuses on the role that emotion plays in teaching in higher education. Emotions can help better understand the social and cultural con- text that impacts teaching and learning. Reflecting on and fully experienc- ing the emotional aspects of what we teach and how we teach can enrich the teaching experience of our faculty and grow the students’ learning ex- periences. Catherine Wehlburg Editor-in-Chief CATHERINE M. WEHLBURG is the associate provost for institutional effectiveness at Texas Christian University. CONTENTS Editors’ Notes 7 Harriet L. Schwartz, Jennifer Snyder-Duch 1. Emotion and Professors’ Developmental Perspectives on 13 Their Teaching Douglas L. Robertson Dr. Robertson shares his extensive research on teaching and learning in which he conceptualizes teaching as a helping relationship. He de- scribes his model of teacher/learner centeredness, or systemocentrism, and explains how the emotional lives of teachers are central to the teacher-student relationship. 2. Radical Empathy in Teaching 25 Judith V. Jordan, Harriet L. Schwartz Interactions with students are a significant part of teachers’ lives. Dr. Jordan and Dr. Schwartz propose the concept of radical empathy to encourage optimal learning and growth on the part of students and teachers. They discuss complexities of empathy in the teaching context and provide related strategies. 3. Anger in the Classroom: How a Supposedly Negative 37 Emotion Can Enhance Learning Ryan C. Martin Dr. Martin draws on his own research on anger and his experience as a teacher to explore anger in the college classroom. He argues that anger can have a positive effect by energizing teachers to confront problems and create a better teaching and learning environment. He offers strate- gies to help professors use anger productively. 4. Joy of Being a Teacher 45 Indira Nair Drawing on a range of theoretical frameworks and her experience as a professor of engineering and public policy, Dr. Nair considers the interplay of teaching, learning, and joy. She proposes that faculty can enhance their effectiveness and their own experiences by attending to relationship and emotion in the teaching endeavor. 5. Relational Advising: Acknowledging the Emotional Lives of 55 Faculty Advisors Jennifer Snyder-Duch In this chapter, Dr. Jennifer Snyder-Duch explores the unseen emo- tional demands of academic advising and encourages consideration of advising as a relational practice. She provides strategies to help faculty deal with the emotional demands of active advising and recommenda- tions for institutional leaders to better support the important work of advising. 6. Online Education and the Emotional Experience of the 67 Teacher Judi Puritz Cook Navigating the digital learning environment is an emotional endeavor for many faculty, especially those who have years of face-to-face teach- ing experience. Dr. Cook uses her years of experience developing her own online learning experiences, her expertise as a director of instruc- tional design, and results of a faculty survey on online teaching to describe the feelings of faculty developing online courses. She offers recommendations to help teachers gain confidence and cope with emo- tional stress. 7. Slow Feeling and Quiet Being: Women of Color Teaching in 77 Urgent Times Linh U. Hua Women faculty of color face emotional demands that reflect their con- trary identity in the university as faculty and as women of color. These demands stem from institutional practices of tokenism and broad cul- tural assumptions of incompetence from colleagues and from both white students and students of color. Dr. Linh Hua explores this through the lenses of vibrancy fatigue and pacing grace. 8. When it Hurts to Work: Organizational Violations and 87 Betrayals Lisa L. Frey In this chapter, Dr. Lisa Frey explores workplace bullying and orga- nizational betrayal. She applies Relational Cultural Theory and the concept of psychological contracts to unpack these phenomena and provides recommendations for responding on individual and organiza- tional levels. 9. The Emotional Balancing Act of Teaching: A Burnout 99 Recovery Plan Karyn Z. Sproles Dr. Sproles recounts her own experiences as a literature professor, col- lege administrator, and director of a center for teaching excellence in order to describe the emotional ups and downs of college teaching. She draws from the work of Parker Palmer, Robert Boice, and Douglas Robertson to offer advice on how to seek balance and avoid burnout. Editors’ Notes Harriet L. Schwartz, Jennifer Snyder-Duch As faculty, we often work alone, reviewing student work that may be im- pressive, average, or disappointing. Likewise, in the classroom we have mo- ments when students are engaged and ideas fly like sparks and other times when students are bored, unprepared, or even resistant to the content. And for those who teach online, depending on the structure (e.g., synchronous or asynchronous, video conferencing vs. no virtual face-to-face contact), we may feel a strange distance from our students or we may enjoy a connection. We are passionate about our discipline(s) and we want to be good teach- ers. Clearly, teaching is full of highs and lows and sometimes the boredom of the in-between. Teaching involves relationships in every direction (stu- dents, colleagues, staff, and administrators). In our work as teachers, we plan and provide structure and yet much of the endeavor is guided by our students’ responses, and therefore, is beyond our control. All of this com- bined can lead to frustration, sadness, and even anger, as well as satisfaction, curiosity, and joy. Teaching is an emotional journey. The purpose of this sourcebook is to explore emotion and teaching in the higher education context. In contemporary education literature, emo- tions are understood as episodes experienced in response to a particular event (either an occurring event, or a remembered or imagined event) (Shuman and Scherer 2014). Emotions consist of subjective feelings, mo- tivation, meaning-making, communicative motor activity such as smil- ing or slouching, and a physiological response such as changes in pulse (Shuman and Scherer 2014). In addition, social and cultural context as well as our scholarly disciplines (which vary regarding how they understand and position emotion) shape how we experience emotions and perceive them in others (Boler 1999) and so it follows that the expression and perception of emotions can also reflect power dynamics, privilege and marginalization, and even the political climate. While emotions are described as specific responses to particular events, moods are understood as less intense and lacking a specific stimulus (Pekrun and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2014). Affect, which includes emotions and moods NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, no. 153, Spring 2018 © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). • DOI: 10.1002/tl.20276 7 8 TEACHING AND EMOTION as well as other elements such as self-concept, is a more generalized term used to describe states (Pekrun and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2014). For exam- ple, a motivated, confident, and generally happy person is described as hav- ing a positive affect, while an angry and resistant person may be referred to as having a negative affect. While this sourcebook focuses primarily on emo- tion, we also include considerations of phenomena particularly relevant to teaching that are likely to be considered affective states such as burnout. Robertson (1999, 2001) and Schwartz and Holloway (2017) have pro- posed models in which the teacher’s emotional awareness and experience is central. Robertson (2001) urges us as teachers to attend to our emotions and the intersubjective systems “that develop from the interaction of the inner experiences of teachers and students” (p. 8). After an extensive re- view of college teaching literature (more than 350 items including research and first-person accounts) and his own career as a college and university teacher and leader in faculty development, Robertson (1999) developed a model of teacher/learner centeredness and named it systemocentrism. He argued that faculty and students are better served when faculty learn to rec- ognize feelings such as annoyance, fear, guilt, anger, sadness, and love in the teaching realm, asserting that these “feelings will reveal themselves and affect the teaching/learning ecology and the educational helping relation- ships with students whether or not the teacher is aware of them” (Robertson 2001, 10). Schwartz and Holloway (2017) conducted a grounded theory study in which they explored master’s faculty experiences of assessing student work. Faculty in the study reflecting on assessing thesis and capstone projects recalled feeling anger, frustration, sadness, joy, and satisfaction as well as experiences that reveal moments of countertransference (projection of feel- ings from an earlier or other significant relationship onto a student or current interaction). In the visual modeling of the findings, Schwartz and Holloway (2015) identified visible and unseen domains; the latter include experiencing positive and negative emotions in the course of assessing stu- dent work. Findings in this study support earlier work by Robertson as well as other studies that revealed teacher experiences of countertransference (Lahtinen 2008; Slater, Veach, and Li 2013). While few researchers explore the faculty experience of emo- tion, related areas are covered extensively elsewhere in the litera- ture: student emotion and learning (we refer readers to the work of Reinhard Pekrun and Lisa Linnenbrink-Garcia (2014) regarding undergraduate education and Stephen Brookfield (2013) and Carol Casworm (2008) regarding adult students) and a philosophical socio- political perspective–see Schutz and Zembylas (2009) and Megan Boler (1999). However, our intent as scholar–practitioners is to explore profes- sor’s daily and often-routine experiences of emotion in teaching. We believe that while faculty may vent to each other about frustrat- ing experiences and consult colleagues regarding difficult students, faculty NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl EDITORS’ NOTES 9 are not typically encouraged to reflect deeply on their emotional and inner experiences of teaching. Even in conversations about this volume, we no- ticed that colleagues had difficulty addressing their own emotions without quickly turning to the students’ emotional experiences and unique circum- stances, as if they themselves do not bring their own self-knowledge and feelings to their interactions with students. As we reflected on these responses from our colleagues and the lack of literature regarding the faculty experience of emotion, we identified three factors that may limit the discourse. First, prominent and important thinkers have pushed the profession toward a learner-centered approach. We agree that as teachers, we should focus extensively on the student ex- perience and student learning but we do not think this excludes critical reflection about our own emotion. Second, many people are more com- fortable discussing other people’s emotions than their own. While we un- derstand this as a very human response, we push ourselves and others to reflect on emotional experiences with the goal of improving our teaching. Third, focus on student emotion allows faculty to hold onto a more tradi- tional view of themselves as objective and unwavering which may support desired feelings of power and safety. As constructivists who also subscribe to a relational approach to teaching (Schwartz and Holloway 2012, 2014), we believe that while we strive to be fair, a removed objectivity is elusive and that as faculty we experience emotion, whether we acknowledge it or not (Robertson 2001); identifying and working with our emotions positions us to be better and more resilient teachers as we can respond with greater awareness, intentionality, and differentiation. Some might wonder if we are recommending a level of reflection and self-awareness that can only be achieved in therapy or even if we are sug- gesting that all faculty need therapy (!). Neither of these ideas reflects our thinking. We believe that for the most part, the introspection and consid- eration of emotion that is discussed in the following chapters is realistic and accessible to faculty without engaging in psychotherapy. There are sit- uations (and several chapters recognize this) where a teacher may experi- ence a level of anger, deep frustration, or sadness, or a triggering of deeper emotions that seem to go beyond the moment at hand and be potentially problematic—that are best addressed in counseling. However, the basic re- flective praxis that we and the chapter authors propose should be in the range of most working professional’s capability and experience. Influential writers who have preceded this work have also suggested that reflection, emotional awareness, and adjustments based on this awareness are essen- tial for effective teaching and longevity in the profession (Brookfield 1995, 2015; Daloz 1999; Palmer 1998; Robertson 1999, 2001). We have invited chapter authors from a variety of disciplines and school types to contribute to this sourcebook. Authors apply their dis- ciplinary perspectives and teaching philosophies and at the same time provide perspectives on the inner experience of teaching that will be NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 10 TEACHING AND EMOTION relevant to colleagues and faculty development practitioners across disciplines. Further, each author provides strategies to encourage greater emotional awareness and intention in teaching. As Robertson (1999) ex- plains, effective teachers “not only attend to the inner experience of learn- ers and that experience’s origins—for example, learning style, learning trau- mas, race/class/gender background, transference patterns, immediate social networks, and so forth—[they] also attend to similar dimensions of their own inner experience” (p. 284). Across chapters, we explore a range of emotions and affective states experienced by college teachers: joy and excitement, anger and frustration, satisfaction, burnout and balance, sadness, vulnerability, and empathy. In the first chapter, Douglas Robertson revisits his developmental model systemocentrism, in which he conceptualizes college teaching as a helping relationship. Robertson’s model was one of the first to consider teaching and emotion in the higher education context and his work has influenced many of the other sourcebook contributors. The next three chapters examine particular emotions and affective ex- periences typically experienced by college teachers. Harriet Schwartz and Judith Jordan propose radical empathy as a framework that helps faculty balance challenge and support while recognizing the emotional challenges that emerge as we acknowledge both our students’ humanity and our own. Psychologist Ryan Martin, who studies anger, considers the role of anger in teaching and describes how to use anger as information to improve prac- tice. Next, physicist Indira Nair explores the joy of being a teacher, both as an approach to guide pedagogy and as a celebration of the experience. The following two chapters consider specific teaching practices through a teaching and emotion lens. We do not offer an exhaustive ex- ploration of responsibilities and daily tasks of college teachers; rather, we intend to demonstrate how it might look to add the emotional experience of the teacher as a dimension to understand specific elements of teaching. Jennifer Snyder-Duch considers emotion and academic advising. Judi Puritz Cook addresses emotion in the online teaching environment. The final three chapters explore relevant social and institutional con- texts. Linh Hua analyzes the experience of faculty women of color and argues that their affective character is inimitably observed and critically evaluated by students. Lisa Frey places faculty in the context of their institu- tions and explores how organizational violations and betrayals may impact faculty emotion. And Karyn Sproles explores teaching as a profession and the implications for our well-being, offering a conceptual framework and recommendations for avoiding burnout and seeking balance. References Boler, M. 1999. Feeling Power: Emotions and Education. New York, NY: Routledge. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl EDITORS’ NOTES 11 Brookfield, S. D. 1995. Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Brookfield, S. D. 2015. The Skillful Teacher: On Technique, Trust, and Responsiveness in The Classroom, 3rd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Daloz, L. A. 1999. Mentor: Guiding the Journey of Adult Learners, 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Kasworm, C. E. 2008. “Emotional challenges of adult learners in higher education”. In J.M. Dirkx (Ed.) Adult Learning and the Emotional Self, New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education 35–43. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers. Lahtinen, A. 2008. “University Teachers’ Views on The Distressing Elements Of Peda- gogical Interaction.” Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 52(5): 481–493. Palmer, P. J. 1998. The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher’s Life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Pekrun, R., and Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. 2014. “Introduction to Emotions in Education.” In International Handbook of Emotions in Education, 1–10. New York, NY: Routledge. Pekrun, R., and Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., eds. 2014. International Handbook of Emotions in Education. New York, NY: Routledge. Robertson, D. L. 1999. “Professor’s Perspectives on Their Teaching: A New Construct and Developmental Model.” Innovative Higher Education 23(4): 271–294. Robertson, D. R. 2001. “Beyond Learner-Centeredness: Close Encounters of The Syste- mocentric Kind.” The Journal of Faculty Development 18(1): 7–13. Schutz, P. A., and Zembylas, M. 2009. Advances in Teacher Emotion Research: The Impact on Teachers’ Lives. New York, NY: Springer. Schwartz, H. L., and Holloway, E. L. 2012. “Partners in Learning: A Grounded Theory Study of Relational Practice Between Master’s Students and Professors.” Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning 20(1): 115–133. Schwartz, H. L., and Holloway, E. L. 2014. “’I Become a Part of the Learning Process’: Mentoring Episodes and Individualized Attention in Graduate Education.” Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning 22(1): 38–55. Schwartz, H. L., and Holloway, E. L. 2017. “Assessing Graduate Student Work: An Emo- tional Relational Perspective.” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching 28(2): 29–59. Shuman, V., and Scherer, K. R. 2014. “Concepts and Structures of Emotions.” In Inter- national Handbook of Emotions in Education. New York, NY: Routledge. Slater, R., Veach, P. M., and Li, Z. 2013. “Recognizing and Managing Countertransference in the College Classroom: An Exploration of Expert Teachers’ Inner Experiences.” Innovative Higher Education 38(1): 3–17. HARRIET L. SCHWARTZ, PhD, is a professor of psychology and counseling at Car- low University where she is chair of the MA in Student Affairs program. She also serves as lead scholar for education as relational practice at the Jean Baker Miller Training Institute. JENNIFER SNYDER-DUCH, PhD, is an associate professor and chair of the commu- nication department at Carlow University. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 1 This chapter revisits a developmental model of professors-as-teachers that provides a useful framework for considering emotion in teaching and learning. Emotion and Professors’ Developmental Perspectives on Their Teaching Douglas L. Robertson When the intellect and affections are in harmony; when intellectual con- sciousness is calm and deep; inspiration will not be confounded with fancy. Margaret Fuller (1855/1845, 105) That harmony about which Margaret Fuller writes exists for sure, but it is elusive and rare. For many of us as college teachers, after years of intel- lectual training, we have been taught, largely unsuccessfully, to repress our affections—our emotions—in deference to our intellect—our thoughts. Yet still, that student in the back row with his hat on backward clearly play- ing games on his iPhone while I do everything I can to engage him, lights my fire. Emotions get the best of us all the time as teachers, and we have precious little preparation for dealing with them constructively. For a number of years, I worked on conceptualizing and researching college teaching as an educational helping relationship, and I found that the emotional life of the teacher was at the heart of this helping relationship. In my limited way, I pursued a clear-eyed description and understanding of the realities of the tens of thousands of human beings who each day engage in their work as teachers in colleges and universities. In addition, I wanted to identify the most effective college teaching perspectives and to articulate how a college teacher might work toward becoming more ef- fective. In short, I was interested in the potential developmental path of professors-as-teachers and how to facilitate movement along that path. The outcome of this work was an empirically based developmental model of the professor-as-teacher and the identification of a new concept—a teach- ing perspective, called Systemocentrism, that lies beyond the dichotomous NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, no. 153, Spring 2018 © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/tl.20277 13 14 TEACHING AND EMOTION teacher-centered and learner-centered concepts (Robertson 1996, 1997, 1999a, 1999b, 2000a, 2000b, 2001, 2001–2002, 2002, 2003, 2005). I am pleased to report that as I write this chapter, these papers and their ideas have been cited in 390 scholarly works and have been used in thirty-four different countries (Google Scholar, February 1, 2017). Several of the authors in this volume refer to this developmental model with its ultimate Systemocentric teaching perspective. So in this chapter, I describe the model briefly for readers, highlighting key concepts that are particularly generative to developing as a college teacher. Also, I briefly re- view the literature in the last 20 years regarding the use of this model and the general perspective of college teaching as an educational helping rela- tionship. The emotional dimension of professors-as-teachers is critical to understanding their teaching lives, and I give it special attention. Developmental Model After a meta-analysis of more than 200 scholarly books, monographs, chap- ters, and journal articles that probed the inner experience of professors going about their work as teachers, I concluded that three basic perspec- tives could be identified in this research and that these three perspectives tended to evolve in a developmental sequence one after another (Robertson 1999b). The nature of these three perspectives has a tremendous impact on the way in which professors-as-teachers handle the emotional dimensions of their teaching. I will briefly summarize below the developmental model in order to provide a framework for how teachers in different developmen- tal positions handle emotionality in the teaching and learning process. The original work is developed in eleven published articles (Robertson 1996, 1997, 1999a, 1999b, 2000a, 2000b, 2001, 2001–2002, 2002, 2003, 2005), and the reader is encouraged to explore that work for a fully developed and documented explanation of the model. Definition of Development. In presenting this developmental model, I believe that I have an obligation to explain exactly what I mean by “developmental” because it is a term that has generated a variety of meanings. Early in my career, I published a book-length elaboration of what I mean by development, and that definition has served me well (Robertson 1988, 2017). Simply put, development is adding something to what already exists, and with the integration of that novelty, a transformation occurs. I think of development as being synonymous with growth. Development- as-growth = addition plus transformative integration. Development is not inevitable from this point of view, and with regard to the developmental model of professors-as-teachers, progression through the three stages is not a given, particularly at research universities where sponsored research and publication is rewarded much more than teaching. An example of development (addition plus transformative integra- tion) that relates to emotion could involve handling transference and NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl EMOTION AND PROFESSORS’ DEVELOPMENTAL PERSPECTIVES ON THEIR TEACHING 15 countertransference in the teacher/learner relationship (Robertson 1999a). Transference is the unconscious association of thoughts, feelings, and be- haviors from a previous relationship with a current relationship. When the learner does it, we call it transference; when the teacher does it, we call it countertransference. For example, when a student moves from inappro- priately loving me to inappropriately hating me, often transference is the cause of what looks on the surface to be bizarre behavior. The student may be making unconscious associations of me with another person, and when I do not behave as I am supposed to behave as this other person, the stu- dent becomes disappointed and angry with me. Based on a meta-analysis of more than 350 scholarly publications, I have identified fifteen indica- tors for professors-as-teachers to use to identify possible transference or countertransference enactments (Robertson 1999a, 159–161) and nine rec- ommendations for what to do about it (Robertson 1999a, 161–165). One important recommendation about managing transference is to look for it, or “exercise active awareness” (Robertson 1999a, 162). Transference and countertransference are extremely common and have a significant impact on the teacher’s relationship with specific learners as well as on the group climate. Most likely, these phenomena are occurring in every course that we teach and are worth our attention. In addition, they are phenomena that by definition are unconscious. We need to go looking for them. As we add our techniques for identifying unconscious associations by ourselves or by the learners to our current repertoire of teacher/learner relationship skills, per- haps we transform our overall capacity to handle the intense emotionality of transference and countertransference and, thereby, to establish effective teacher/learner relationships. If so, we have developed in this area; we have grown. Orders of Development. Development occurs at two levels. Within my current perspective, I can continue to develop and to elaborate my effec- tiveness (addition plus transformative integration within the perspective), or I can transform the entire perspective (by integrating some particularly generative addition, transforming the perspective itself). As the saying goes, you cannot simply add the belief that the world is round to the belief that the world is flat. Something has to give. So there are some things that we learn as teachers that are so powerful that those learnings transform how we see ourselves as teachers. Engaging the undeniable emotionality of the teaching and learning process is undoubtedly one of those learnings. Basic Teaching Perspectives. So what are the three basic perspec- tives that make up the developmental model of professors-as-teachers? And how do the perspectives relate to the topic of this volume—emotion in teaching? Egocentrism (Teacher-Centeredness). First, we have Egocentrism, the perspective in which professors-as-teachers typically begin their college teaching careers (Robertson 1999b, 274–276). The predominant focus is on the professor-as-teacher’s own content mastery, the traditional sine qua NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 16 TEACHING AND EMOTION non of college teaching. In this perspective, little time or thought is given to instructional process design; professors-as-teachers mimic what their teach- ers did that worked for them as students and avoid that which did not work. The learners are treated as abstractions—“they” and “them”—not complex individuals. The professors-as-teachers focus on themselves as master learn- ers and on contexts that are important to them, such as their promotion and tenure. Professors-as-teachers can stay in this perspective for their entire ca- reer if the environment reinforces it. In this perspective, serious considera- tions of emotion in teaching and learning are to be avoided. If they are given any attention, the focus is on the professor-as-teacher’s feelings, and if the learners are considered, the professor-as-teachers tend to project their own thoughts and feelings onto the learners rather than actually empathically apprehend them. Aliocentrism (Learner-Centeredness). With developmental movement to the perspective of Aliocentrism, the professor-as-teacher’s conception of teaching shifts from being the dissemination of knowledge to being the facili- tation of learning (Robertson 1999b, 279–281). This shift is a game changer in so many ways. Professors-as-teachers are still concerned with their con- tent mastery, but they add to that concern a genuine and transforming focus on the lived experience of the learners as unique human beings with id- iosyncratic characteristics and on how to facilitate learning for those unique human beings. The contexts that are important now for the professors-as- teachers are the learners’ contexts—for example, their current life circum- stances and accumulated biographies. The professors-as-teachers are still not focusing on themselves as unique human beings, who with the learners comprise a complex, dynamical, intersubjective system. Instead, they see themselves as idealized learning facilitators. Emotions are important and relevant now; however, the focus in on the learners’ emotions and how they relate to their learning. Systemocentrism (Teacher/Learner-Centeredness). I should note that the third developmental perspective (Systemocentrism), which is the most effective perspective for managing emotionality in the teaching and learn- ing process, is a novel construct that has not appeared in other typologies (Robertson 1999b, 274–275) and was first introduced in an early article in this line of work that I wrote construing teaching as an educational help- ing relationship (Robertson 1996). Systemocentrism has two distinguishing features (Robertson 1999b, 283–288; Robertson 2001). First, professors-as- teachers authentically attend to their inner experience as a unique learning facilitator, just as the learners are unique, and they put all of that idiosyn- cratic lived experience of teacher and learners together into a complex, intersubjective system. And second, professors-as-teachers focus on the course ecologically as an existential, complex, dynamical system of which they are merely a part, albeit an important part, and over which they have fundamental design responsibilities. Within this perspective, the emotional- ity of teaching and learning is obvious. The unique human beings occupying NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl EMOTION AND PROFESSORS’ DEVELOPMENTAL PERSPECTIVES ON THEIR TEACHING 17 the teacher and student roles are emotional, and their emotions are inter- active. For example, in systemocentrism, learning to look for transference and countertransference enactments is an obviously necessary discipline. Professors-as-teachers need to construct teaching and learning ecologies in which the emotional lives of the individuals occupying the teacher and stu- dent roles are anticipated and managed for optimal learning. The chapters in this volume—on topics such as empathy, anger, joy, trauma, and burnout— illustrate how this works. Developmental Transitions. In most developmental schema, all we see are the developmental positions—the boxes in the figure. However, the simple black lines between the boxes matter. The whole story is that be- tween these developmental positions are transitions that are meaningfully difficult and that take time (Robertson 1999b, 274, 277–279, 281–283). They are periods of change that are profoundly emotional for the person making them and pertain importantly to the topic of this volume. In the 1980s, I worked with William Bridges just after he had published his clas- sic, Transitions (Bridges 1980), with its model of the person’s psychological adaptation to change, and I incorporated his three-phrase transition process into my developmental model. Incidentally, Bill Bridges (1933–2013) was a joy to be around and, quite generously, wrote the foreword to my first book, Self-Directed Growth (Robertson 1988). Bill was influenced by the turn-of- the-century work of the Dutch anthropologist, Arnold van Gennep, who in Rites of Passage (van Gennep 1960/1908) identified three phases in the status passage rituals in traditional societies that Bill found to describe pre- cisely the path of a person’s psychological adaption to change. Interestingly, I saw the same three patterns in Thomas Kuhn’s analysis of the way in which scientific communities move from one paradigm to another (Kuhn 1970). The three transition phases that typify the passage from one position to an- other in my developmental model appear to repeat in a variety of systems, contexts, and scales. Endings. Typically, we do not give up an accustomed way of think- ing, feeling, and doing until we become convinced that it simply does not work anymore. Resistance to change in ourselves and in our relationships is natural and strong. As my teaching failures and dissatisfaction mount, I still continue to do things the same old way. I resist changing fiercely. Even- tually, the data indicating my own teaching dysfunction are overwhelming, and I accept that I must change. I grieve the loss of my old way of doing things. I am tempted to retreat. But I know that it is over, and I must move on. But to where? Neutral Zone. Now I must continue teaching but without a perspec- tive in which I have confidence. I know that the old way does not work, but I do not see clearly the new way. I am disoriented, uncomfortable, and often afraid. Courage is required. Without a paradigm, I can see things that my old paradigm had blocked. I have a heightened sense of awareness. I am exhausted and overwhelmed. I have many false starts as I think that I see NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 18 TEACHING AND EMOTION the new paradigm that will deliver me from the agony of the neutral zone only to find that I am wrong again. Much experimentation occurs. Seeing new possibilities and experimenting—those are two of the main functions of the neutral zone. New Beginnings. After much work in the in-between-ness, I find my solution, my new paradigm. Remember that development is adding some- thing new to what was there before and through its integration having a transformation occur that creates a new whole. If I am transitioning from Egocentrism to Aliocentrism, I am adding a keen focus on the learners and their learning process to my previous focus on my own content mastery. This addition needs to be integrated with the approach that preceded it. In addition, my colleagues are accustomed to my Egocentrism which in most cases matches their own teaching perspective. If I lunch everyday with peo- ple who see the world as flat, as I used to see it, and now I see world as round, I may have to change with whom I lunch. Again, something has to give. Integrating the new perspective into ourselves and our relationships is the work of the new beginnings phase. Use of the Work The line of work discussed in this chapter (Robertson 1996, 1997, 1999a, 1999b, 2000a, 2000b, 2001, 2001–2002, 2002, 2003, 2005) has involved articulating an overarching developmental model of teaching perspectives that begin with teacher-centeredness (Egocentrism), then cross a ma- jor developmental threshold to learner-centeredness (Aliocentrism) and teacher/learner-centeredness (Systemocentrism). Further, the work has de- veloped the conceptualization of teaching as an educational helping rela- tionship and has explored the dynamics of teacher/learner relationships in the domains of Aliocentrism and Systemocentrism. As mentioned earlier, the work has been cited in 390 scholarly works in thirty-four different coun- tries. I will briefly highlight some of the uses of this work so that readers of this volume can increase their awareness of this literature as they pursue their interest in teaching and emotion. Developmental Model. Hodges (2004, 2013) has connected the de- velopmental model of professors-as-teachers to the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) and shown how SoTL can support and accelerate devel- opmental transitions in faculty (Hodges 2004, 2013). In a qualitative study of changes in participants of a multi-year faculty development program, Kerwin-Bodreau (2009) provided empirical support for the developmental model, particularly as a framework for faculty development. Similarly, Simmons’s (2011) study of the development of teacher identity in neophyte academics provides empirical support for the model, as does Greensfeld’s and Elkad-Lehman’s (2006) study of the professional development of Israeli science educators. Alegre de la Rosa and Villar Angulo used the model as a conceptual framework in a study of the development of online faculty NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl EMOTION AND PROFESSORS’ DEVELOPMENTAL PERSPECTIVES ON THEIR TEACHING 19 in Spanish universities (Alegre de la Rosa and Villar Angulo 2006; Villar and Alegre 2008). In a significant and well-developed line of work, Feixas (2004, 2006, 2010) and Feixas and Euler (2013) have used the model to create a questionnaire that characterizes professors’ teaching perspective and that provides the empirical basis for quantitative studies of faculty’s perspectival development. Multiple researchers (González-Calvo et al. 2013; Guzmán Valenzuela 2012; McQuiggan 2012; Watts 2015) have used the model to describe the perspectives of beginning college teachers. De- doussis (2007) employed the model in fascinating cultural research about the sometimes dissonance in teaching conception between third-country faculty, their colleagues, and their students. Finally, Lindholm and Astin (2008) and Tisdale (2006) in separate studies have connected Aliocentrism and Systemocentrism (post-Egocentrism) to faculty spirituality (not reli- giosity) and have presented data that comment on the nature of professors’ conceptions of teaching and their spirituality—a must-read, in my opinion. Teacher/Learner Dynamics. In my initial statement of post- Egocentric teaching (Aliocentrism and Systemocentrism) as an educational helping relationship (Robertson 1996), I noted that we often hold up with veneration the goals of facilitating deep learning, paradigm shifts, or de- velopment in the learner but that we do not prepare teachers adequately (or at all) to deal with the intense emotionality of this enterprise. These issues that surround promoting transformative learning without prepar- ing teachers to do it bring to the fore ethical issues. Those points seem to have struck a chord with adult and higher education scholars, and a number of these scholars have pursued them (Courtenay et al. 2000; Gasker and Cascio 2001; Hughes 2002; McCormack 2009; Moore 2005; Tiberius 2001, 2002). Vega and Tayler (2010) have extended empirical work among teachers of heavy content courses in exploring how to re- solve the oppositions that I have identified as inherent in the teacher/learner dynamics in the Aliocentric and Systemocentric teaching perspectives (Robertson 2003, 2005). In both conceptual and grounded theory research, Schwartz (2017) and Schwartz and Holloway (2017) have focused use- fully on the difficult relational dynamics of the highly important facili- tator/evaluator opposition in Aliocentrism and Systemocentrism. Regard- ing effective teacher/learner relationships, I have proposed the appropri- ate application of concepts from psychotherapy such as “working alliance” (Robertson 2000b), and several researchers have extended that idea im- portantly (Estrada 2015; Rogers 2009, 2014). Finally, in reference to the potentially powerful dynamics of teacher/learner relationships, I have elab- orated the critical significance of transference and countertransference— that is, unconscious applications of thoughts, feelings, and behavioral patterns from previous relationships to current relationships (Robertson 1999a). This observation has supported a significant body of work in sev- eral cultures regarding these phenomena in teacher/learner relationships (Hubbell and Hubbell 2010; Jagodzinski 2006; Kuldas, Ismail, and Hashim NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 20 TEACHING AND EMOTION 2013; Lahtinen 2008; McNinch 2007; Mottern 2013; Slater, Veach, and Li 2012). Conclusion To me, discussing teaching and learning without including emotion is like Mona Lisa without her smile—hard to imagine, unreal, and just plain weird. We need much more work on the role of emotion in the real, intersub- jective learning systems that constitute our courses and our teaching and advising lives. Contributing to the fulfillment of this need is the goal of this volume. In this chapter, I have overviewed a developmental model of professors-as-teachers that can provide a useful framework and vocabulary for understanding emotion in the lived experience of college teachers who see their work through decidedly different lenses. Further, I have briefly identified how other scholars have used this model and its elaboration of post-Egocentric (teacher-centered) perspectives—what I have called an ed- ucational helping relationship. I hope that these discussions contribute to the readers’ own scholarship and practice related to emotion and teaching as well as to their understanding of the other chapters in this volume. References Alegre de la Rosa, O. M., and Villar Angulo, L. M. 2006. “Medición del Aprendizaje del Profesorado Universitario en Cursos en Lı́nea de Capacidades Curriculares y Didácticas (CCD).” Revista de Enseñanza Universitaria 27: 43–56. Bridges, W. 1980. Transitions. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Courtenay, B. C., Merriam, S., Reeves, P., and Baumgartner, L. 2000. “Perspective Trans- formation over Time: A 2-year Follow-Up Study of HIV-Positive Adults.” Adult Edu- cation Quarterly 50(2): 102–119. Dedoussis, E. V. 2007. “Issues of Diversity in Academia: Through the Eyes of ‘Third- Country’ Faculty.” Higher Education 54: 135–156. Estrada, F. 2015. “The Teaching Alliance in Multicultural Counseling Course Education: A Framework for Examining and Strengthening the Student-Instructor Relationship.” International Journal for the Advancement of Counseling 37: 233–247. Feixas, M. 2004. “La Influencia De Factores Personales, Institucionales Y Contextuales En La Trayectoria Y El Desarrollo Docente De Los Profesores Universitarios.” Educar 33: 31–59. Feixas, M. 2006. “Cuestionario para el Análisis de la Orientación Docente del Profesor Universitario.” Revista de Investigación Educativa 24(1): 97–118. Feixas, M. 2010. “Enfoques y Concepciones Docentes en la Universidad.” RE- LIEVE 16(2). Accessed January 1, 2016. http://www.uv.es/relieve/v16n2/ RELIEVEv16n2_2.htm. Feixas, M., and Euler, D. 2013. “Academics as Teachers: New Approaches to Teaching and Learning and Implications for Professional Development Programmes.” International HETL Review 2(12). Accessed January 1, 2016. https://www.hetl.org/academics-as-teachers-new-approaches-to-teaching-and- learning/. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl EMOTION AND PROFESSORS’ DEVELOPMENTAL PERSPECTIVES ON THEIR TEACHING 21 Fuller Ossoli, M. 1855. Woman in the Nineteenth Century and Kindred Papers Related to the Sphere, Condition, and Duties of Woman. Edited by A. B. Fuller. Boston, MA: Brown, Taggard & Chase. (Original work published 1845) Gasker, J. A., and Cascio, T. 2001. “Empowering Women through Computer-Mediated Class Participation.” Affilia 16(3): 295–313. González-Calvo, G., Babero-González, J. I., Bores-Calle, N., and Martı́nez-Álvarez, L. 2013. “(Re)Construction of a Teacher’s Professional Identity from His Initial Train- ing: Autobiographical Narration.” American Journal of Sociological Research 3(4): 101– 110. Greensfeld, H., and Elkad-Lehman, I. 2007. “An Analysis of the Processes of Change in Two Science Teachers Educators’ Thinking.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 44(8): 1219–1245. Guzmán Valenzuela, C. 2012. “Enseñanza Reflexiva y Profesores Universitarios Noveles: Desafı́os para la Mejora de la Enseñanza.” Revista de la Educación Superior XLI (3), No. 163: 115–137. Hodges, L. C. 2004. “The Problem’ as Metaphor in Teaching.” Thought & Action (Sum- mer): 39–48. Hodges, L. C. 2013. “Postcards from the Edge of SOTL: A View from Faculty Develop- ment.” Teaching & Learning Inquiry 1(1): 71–79. Hubbell, L., and Hubbell, K. 2010. “When a College Class Becomes a Mob: Coping with Student Cohorts.” College Student Journal 44(2): 340–353. Hughes, C. 2002. “Issues in Supervisory Facilitation.” Studies in Continuing Education 24(1): 57–71. Jagodzinski, J. 2006. “Is There an Ethics of Diabolical Evil? Sex Scandals, Family ro- mance, and Love in the School & Academy.” Studies in Philosophy and Education 25: 335–362. Kerwin-Boudreau, S. 2009. “The Master Teacher Program: Professional Development for College Teachers.” LEARNing Landscapes 2(2): 225–241. Kuhn, T. S. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Kuldas, S., Ismail, H. N., and Hashim, S. 2013. “How Thinking Works: The Challenge of Teaching How to Think.” Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences 97: 368–376. Lahtinen, A. M. 2008. “University Teachers’ Views on the Distressing Elements of Ped- agogical Interaction.” Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 52(5): 481–493. Lindholm, J. A., and Astin, H. S. 2008. “Spirituality and Pedagogy: Faculty’s Spiritual- ity and Use of Student-Centered Approaches to Undergraduate Teaching.” Review of Higher Education 31(2): 185–207. McCormack, D. 2009. “’A Parcel of Knowledge’: An Autoethnographic Exploration of the Emotional Dimension of Teaching and Learning in Adult Education.” Adult Learner: The Irish Journal of Adult and Community Education 13–28. McNinch, J. 2007. “Queering Seduction: Eros and the Erotic in the Construction of Gay Teacher Identity.” The Journal of Men’s Studies 15(2): 197–215. McQuiggan, C. A. 2012. “Faculty Development for Online Teaching as a Catalyst for Change.” Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 16(2): 27–61. Moore, J. 2005. “Is Higher Education Ready for Transformative Learning? A Question Explored in the Study of Sustainability.” Journal of Transformative Education 3(1): 76– 91. Mottern, R. 2013. “Teacher–Student Relationships in Court-Mandated Adult Education: A Phenomenological Study.” The Qualitative Report 18(Article 13): 1–40. Robertson, D. 1988. Self-Directed Growth. Muncie, IN: Accelerated Development. Robertson, D. 1996. “Facilitating Transformative Learning: Attending to the Dynamics of the Educational Helping Relationship.” Adult Education Quarterly 47(1): 41–53. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 22 TEACHING AND EMOTION Robertson, D. 1997. “Transformative Learning and Transition Theory: Toward Develop- ing the Ability to Facilitate Insight.” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching 8(1): 105–125. Robertson, D. 1999a. “Unconscious Displacements in College Teacher and Student Re- lationships: Conceptualizing, Identifying, and Managing Transference.” Innovative Higher Education 23(3): 151–169. Robertson, D. 1999b. “Professors’ Perspectives on Their Teaching: A New Construct and Developmental Model.” Innovative Higher Education 23(4): 271–294. Robertson, D. 2000a. “Professors in Space and Time: Four Utilities of a New Metaphor and Developmental Model for Professors-as-Teachers.” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching 11(1): 117–132. Robertson, D. 2000b. “Enriching the Scholarship of Teaching: Determining Appropriate Cross-Professional Applications among Teaching, Counseling, and Psychotherapy.” Innovative Higher Education 25(2): 111–125. Robertson, D. 2001. “Beyond Learner-Centeredness: Close Encounters of the Systemo- centric Kind.” Journal of Faculty Development 18(1): 7–13. Robertson, D. 2001–2002. “College Teaching as an Educational Helping Relationship.” Essays on Teaching Excellence, 13(1) Ft. Collins, CO: The POD Network. Robertson, D. 2002. “Creating and Supporting an Inclusive Scholarship of Teaching.” The Eastern Scholar 1(1): 46–58. Robertson, D. 2003. “Integrity in Learner-Centered Teaching.” In To Improve the Academy, vol. 21, edited by C. Wehlburg and S. Chadwick-Blossey, 196–211. Bolton, MA: Anker. Robertson, D. 2005. “Generative Paradox in Learner-Centered College Teaching.” Inno- vative Higher Education 29(3): 181–194. Robertson, D. 2017. Making Change, Lessons Learned: A Primer for Change-Agents. Still- water, OK: New Forums Press. Rogers, D. T. 2009. “The Working Alliance in Teaching and Learning: Theoretical Clarity and Research Implications.” International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 3(2): Article 28. Rogers, D. T. 2014. “Further Validation of the Learning Alliance Inventory: The Roles of Working Alliance, Rapport, and Immediacy in Student Learning.” Teaching of Psy- chology 42(1): 19–25. Schwartz, H. L. 2017. “Sometime It’s about more than the Paper: Assessment as Relational Practice,” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching 28(2): 5–28. Schwartz, H. L., and Holloway, E. L. 2017. “Assessing Graduate Student Work: An Emo- tional Relational Perspective,” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching 28(2): 29–59. Simmons, N. 2011. “Caught with Their Constructs Down? New Academics’ Develop- ment as Teachers.” International Journal for Academic Development 16(3): 229–241. Slater, R., Veach, P. M., and Li, Z. 2012. “Recognizing and Managing Countertransference in the College Classroom: An Exploration of Expert Teachers’ Inner Experiences.” Innovative Higher Education 38: 3–17. Tiberius, R. G. 2001. “Meeting the Challenge of a Changing Teaching Environment: Harmonize with the System or Transform the Teacher’s Perspective.” Education for Health 3: 433–442. Tiberius, R. G. 2002. “A Brief History of Educational Development: Implications for Teachers and Developers.” In To Improve the Academy, vol. 20, edited by D. Lieberman and C. Wehlburg, 20–37. Bolton, MA: Anker Tisdale, E. J. 2006. “Diversity and Spirituality in Secular Higher Education: The Teaching Paradox.” Religion and Education, 33(1): 49–68. Van Gennep, A. 1960. Rites of Passage. Translated by M. Vizedom and G. Chaffee. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1908) NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl EMOTION AND PROFESSORS’ DEVELOPMENTAL PERSPECTIVES ON THEIR TEACHING 23 Vega, G. C., and Tayler, M. R. 2010. “Incorporating Course Content while Fostering a More Learner-Centered Environment.” College Teaching 53(2): 83–88. Villar, L. M., and Alegre, O. M. 2008. “Measuring faculty learning in curriculum and teaching competence online courses.” Interactive Learning Environments 16(2): 169– 181. Watts, L. 2015. “An Autoethnographic Exploration of Learning and Teaching Reflective Practice.” Social Work Education 34(4): 363–376. DOUGLAS L. ROBERTSON (PhD, Syracuse University, 1978) is a professor of higher education in the College of Arts, Sciences, and Education at Florida Interna- tional University and served as the university’s dean of undergraduate educa- tion from 2008 to 2016. He has authored or co-edited eight books on change and faculty development, most recently Making Change, Lessons Learned: A Primer for Change-Agents (2017), and for the last 11 years, he has edited Thriving in Academe, the section on college teaching in the National Education Association’s Higher Education Advocate (print circulation: 150,000; plus web downloads). NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 2 Radical empathy positions us to engage and connect with our students while also staying grounded in our role and responsibilities as educators. Radical Empathy in Teaching Judith V. Jordan, Harriet L. Schwartz Whether teaching online or in a campus classroom, a significant part of the teaching life includes interacting with and responding to students. We re- spond to student comments and questions; their written work, exams, and presentations; their enthusiasm or lack thereof; and sometimes the personal joys and tragedies they share with us. We structure the course, the conversa- tions, and the assignments and within this learning environment, we engage with a range of students who have various levels of motivation, preparation, insight, ability, positivity, negativity, and commitment. As we seek to understand and educate our students, and assess their work, we experience empathy, “a complex cognitive-affective skill that al- lows us to ‘know’ (resonate, feel, sense, cognitively grasp) another person’s experience” (Jordan 2010, 103). Empathy is part of the experience of teach- ing and is often present in our interactions and relationships with students as we (and they) seek to teach and learn the material, understand each other, and move through the course. Teaching and learning involve “a dance of re- sponsiveness” (Jordan 2010, 4) and understanding this phenomenon helps us balance support and standards, role boundaries, and the power of con- nection in teaching and learning. In this chapter, we challenge tacit ideas about empathy that pervade both our larger culture and the teaching domain, and we suggest a more nuanced consideration of empathy in teaching and learning. We begin with an overview of Relational Cultural Theory (RCT), the theoretical founda- tion for this chapter and then review relevant teaching literature. Next, we explore the complexities of empathy in the context of teaching and learning. We consider why empathy is important in teaching, why it is sometimes dif- ficult to feel empathy with certain students or in particular situations, and the pull we sometimes feel with students who are in crisis or even those who influence us more than we expect. Finally, we describe relevant stances and strategies for faculty including reflective approaches for use before and after specific interactions and in the midst of engagements with students. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, no. 153, Spring 2018 © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/tl.20278 25 26 TEACHING AND EMOTION Relational Cultural Theory Prevailing western theories of psychological development have empha- sized the importance of increasing autonomy, independence, and enhanc- ing the ability to “stand on one’s own two feet.” Growth has typically been portrayed as a one-way process; knowledge and skills are seen as being transmitted from one person who has specific skills and holds power to other persons who are less skilled, less developed, and hold less power. The broader cultural investment in competitive, individualistic advance- ment is firmly entrenched in educational practice. Often competition and self-interest are put forward as intrinsic to human nature. The core impor- tance of relatedness and responsiveness to one another and the desire to engage in growthful relationships—these ideas are overlooked in the pre- vailing cultural narrative. Engagement in relationship is based on mutual empathy. Modern neu- roscience now informs us that we are hardwired for empathy (Banks 2015). We resonate with one another. The pain of social exclusion registers in the same area of the brain (the anterior cingulate) as the pain of physical in- jury, starvation, or loss of oxygen. Connection is so essential to our wellbe- ing and to our very survival that the brain is wired to respond in the same way and in the same place to social exclusion as it does to life-threatening physical pain. In mutual, growth fostering relationships we experience what Jean Baker Miller (1986) called “the five good things”: zest, worth, clarity, knowledge of self and other, and desire for more connection. Education as Relational Practice RCT has also gained traction in the higher education context as scholars have considered the role of relationship in mentoring and teaching. Stud- ies show that undergraduate students perceived mentoring relationships to be important for success (Beyene et al. 2002) and engagement in mentor- ing also resulted in higher self-esteem and less loneliness among college- age women (Liang et al. 2002). In the graduate context, Gottshall (2014) found significant correlation between mentoring and positive psychologi- cal health, as indicated by decreased depressive symptoms, increased self- esteem, and life satisfaction while McMillan-Roberts (2014) established that faculty mentors helped doctoral students develop a scholar-practitioner identity. Looking specifically at meaningful academic relationships between master’s students and professors, Schwartz and Holloway (2012) found evidence of The Five Good Things (Miller 1986), as both students and professors reported increased energy, boosts in sense of worth, increased understanding, the ability to keep moving in their work, and a desire for more connection. In a related study, students reported that single meaning- ful interactions with faculty (even interactions that were not part of longer- term ongoing relationships) helped the students move through their work, NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl RADICAL EMPATHY IN TEACHING 27 develop scholar-practitioner identity, and value and develop academic rela- tionships (Schwartz and Holloway 2014). Empathy in Teaching While there is little empirical literature regarding empathy in university teaching, the topic was addressed as early as 1953 when Rector suggested “it may be hypothesized that one of the important factors in the achieve- ment of educational goals is the extent to which students and instructors are able to predict, or to project themselves into the responses of each other” (p. 175). Researchers have also explored the related concept of caring in university teaching (Rossiter 1999; Mariskind 2014). In addition, empathy has emerged as important in studies that did not explicitly focus on empathy. Woolhouse (2002) found that students expected their disserta- tion supervisors to show empathy (among other relational characteristics), while O’Meara, Knudsen, and Jones (2013) established that doctoral students and faculty saw empathy as one of the important emotional competencies in doctoral mentoring and advising relationships. And researchers exploring instructor responses to student confusion and frus- tration with online courses concluded that “professors who are learning to teach online need to be aware that their students will need some empathic messages, not just feedback on the course content” (Burford and Gross 2002, 12). From Empathy to Radical Empathy The conventional focus on empathy in educational relationships, like in many hierarchical relationships, is on the professor conveying to a stu- dent (or a group of students) some version of, “I sense what you are feel- ing.” This is appropriate in that faculty have some degree of responsibility for student well-being whereas students do not have a responsibility for faculty well-being, aside perhaps from bringing basic civility to the learn- ing environment. However, we propose that empathy is deeper and more complex than acknowledging the feelings of another person. For the stu- dent to see, know, and feel the professor’s expression of empathy, the pro- fessor’s expression cannot be simply a rote statement. For the expression of empathy to have an impact, to bring about change, the student must sense that the professor has been touched, impacted, or influenced, even slightly, by the student’s situation. A mutually empathic statement main- tains or generates connection and real support. Students feel less alone, more effective, and develop a sense that they matter to the other person. Empathy that produces change and growth in both people goes far beyond a warm and fuzzy feeling of closeness or being understood. It is the vehi- cle for deep learning and acknowledgement of the power of relationship NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 28 TEACHING AND EMOTION where both people experience growth. The power to change in connec- tion is at the heart of radical empathy. This idea is echoed in the concept of intellectual mattering (Schwartz 2013). We convey intellectual matter- ing when we tell our students that their thinking or their questions have sparked our interest, deepened our learning, inspired us, or, in some other way, contributed to our lives as teachers. These kinds of interactions in- crease student motivation, aspiration, and confidence and enhance stu- dents’ sense as partners in their own learning (Schwartz and Holloway 2012, 2014). For example, a student emails a professor to say “I don’t know if I can do this master’s program. I can’t handle the technology and I think I’m go- ing to quit.” A professor who thinks he needs to maintain his relational distance and place in the hierarchy might respond, “Keep trying, everyone gets it eventually.” While that is encouraging to some degree, it leaves the student alone in her struggle and that isolation can exacerbate feelings of inadequacy. A different professor who feels secure in sharing her own vul- nerabilities and is more willing to connect might respond, “I think I get what you are saying, when we first switched to this system it wasn’t intu- itive for me and I felt lost—it was embarrassing because I feel like I should just know how to do this. I got help from IT and after a few sessions it came much more naturally. I encourage you to sign up for some help and to be patient with yourself.” The second response is not only more individual- ized, but it acknowledges that the student is not alone in her struggles with technology and the teacher herself has had similar struggles; this response serves the dual purpose of letting the student know that her difficult ex- perience touches something within the professor who can relate it to her own experience and it provides her with a role model who has overcome a similar challenge. In another example, a Latino student in a class discussion on racism shares his experience of being followed around a store by a salesperson. A professor who thinks she must maintain distance from her students might thank the student for sharing and move on in the discussion. However, a professor who is willing to show that she has been touched by the stu- dent’s story might pause and reflect aloud, noting how it pains her to know that this student deals with racial profiling. This professor could go even further if she is secure enough to reveal that she learns from her students. She could disclose that even though she has read about racial profiling and taught about it for years, that her visceral understanding of the pain caused by racial profiling has deepened by hearing this story from the student. Radical empathy involves radical acceptance of vulner- ability, an openness to being affected by one another. Clearly, as educa- tors we should not focus on our own growth in the midst of exchanges with students. However, to work from a place of radical empathy, we must remain open to learning from our students and to acknowledging that learning. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl RADICAL EMPATHY IN TEACHING 29 Challenges When Empathy is Difficult. As educators, we are not expected to experience deep connection or empathy with every student in every inter- action. At times, we do not feel any particular resonance with a student or we are not moved by a student’s expression of stress. Moments of deep, mutual understanding or breakthrough are powerful and often treasured. But not all interactions are characterized by empathic resonance. Not all interactions evoke a deeper response. However, when we sense a deep disconnection or frustration or anger, we have a responsibility to explore these feelings and responses because as noted previously, our disconnection can detract from the learning context. This is not to suggest that we strive to never have a negative emotion regard- ing a student, but rather that we seek to recognize these human responses and manage them thoughtfully rather than reactively. The same student be- haviors that frustrate some faculty have no effect on others. For example, many teachers have had the experience of giving a student an extension for what seems like a plausible delay such as a sick child or crisis at work, only to be asked several more times for extensions for other seemingly-believable stories of crisis. At some point, the student’s stories seem less believable and we begin to think we are being taken advantage of. This is particularly frus- trating for some instructors, while others do not feel bothered by it but simply stop giving extensions. Similarly, some teachers feel frustrated or angry with students who do not follow instructions on assignments while other teachers mark the assignments accordingly and keep grading without distress. Some faculty report having strong responses to particular student affect such as perceived arrogance or entitlement while for other instruc- tors, these students evoke no emotional charge. As humans engaged in the social interaction of teaching, we are all likely to experience some subset of student behaviors and affective states that trigger our own emotions. Our task is to identify these challenges and then learn to recognize them in the moment. RCT teaches us that even in strong positive relationships, disconnec- tion happens (Jordan 2010). People in relationship misunderstand each other, or are less able to be present, pressured by demands from many sources. There are disconnects and disappointments. Students and teach- ers may feel tension around maintaining awareness and appreciation of the other’s role. Learning to work through relational disconnection is yet an- other growth area for many of us who teach and is a process we can role model for our students. Self-Disclosure and Boundaries. In general, in situations where one person has more authority or power than the other, the more powerful person may limit their displays of emotion and self-disclosure. Revealing emotion or disclosing may be seen as exposing vulnerability. In addition to avoiding vulnerability, the more powerful person may be concerned that NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 30 TEACHING AND EMOTION showing emotion or disclosing may lead away from the focal task of serv- ing the needs of the student. This line of reasoning falls into the dichoto- mous thinking that only one person can benefit from an exchange, that one is either “giving” or “receiving.” RCT suggests that real growth is mutual. Growth most powerfully happens at the edge of vulnerability, where there can be uncertainty and complex feelings. We need to ask persistently: What is in the best interest of the student? If non-disclosure contributes to a growing relationship at a particular mo- ment, then that would be the path to follow. For example, should faculty share their experiences of professional disappointments and failures? Har- riet notes that she shares her experiences of submitting articles to journals with students, seeing it as an opportunity to role model being active profes- sionally, dealing with critical feedback, and the inherent ups and downs of successes and failures in being an active scholar-practitioner. So sharing the specific story of an article that was rejected and how she used the feedback to revise it and submit it to another journal can provide an important exam- ple for students. However, she recalls one experience wherein the feedback from a reviewer was condescending and aggressive and she was initially up- set. She chose not to share that story at that time because she thought that if students sensed her raw emotion, they might become more concerned with her well-being than with ways in which the story could inform them. Later, when she felt more settled, she shared the story with students. The point is that if the disclosure seems likely to pull students’ attention away from their own learning, then it seems unlikely to serve the students and their growth. We grow at our edges. What many call “boundaries” are actually places of intense interaction, liveliness, and growth. It is only when we see boundaries as necessary protectors, containers, screening out and defending against the encroaching surround, that we begin to pull back from the learn- ing that can occur at these places of distinctness and intense interaction. Being open to being acted upon by one another exposes us to vulnerability and also allows us to reach our greatest potential. Mutual responsiveness leads to change and growth in each person involved. When we try to main- tain an image of ourselves (e.g., “I am empathic, a truly tuned in teacher “) we set up boundaries (“I am this, not that”). Image management takes us out of relationship. And, boundary maintenance can also cut us off from others. Some role boundaries, however, are inevitable and desirable as they help protect against abuse of power. Role boundaries describe expectations in professionally defined situations, and these expectations support safety and growth. Professors have the responsibility to support the student’s role as well as to attend to their own clarity and professional standards. In one study, several faculty and their former students recalled interactions that could be described as working close to the boundaries as opposed to hold- ing on to firm and distancing boundaries (Schwartz 2011). For example, a faculty member remembered visiting an off-campus community mental NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl RADICAL EMPATHY IN TEACHING 31 health group coordinated by a student (this was not part of a formal site visit or part of any formal department program, this was an informal ex- change). The professor described her clear intentions in visiting the group, that she was there as a guest and not as an expert as she saw this as an opportunity for her to learn about this distinct community as well as to be a possible resource for young professionals. Her approach echoes radi- cal empathy as she worked close to the boundary, extending her work be- yond the typical confines of the classroom, remained open to learning from the student, and also maintained her sense of her professional role. Find- ings in this study revealed that working close to the boundaries enhanced both student and faculty learning and created relational connection that facilitated greater student intellectual risk-taking and scholar-practitioner development. Beyond the Scope of Our Role. Empathic responsiveness with stu- dents can present another set of challenges. Occasionally, a student seeks support from a professor with a situation that is critical or intense enough that the student more appropriately should see a counselor. Professional de- velopment with all faculty can provide a solid foundation for these kinds of encounters, helping faculty recognize the signs that a student needs coun- seling. University counselors can also educate faculty regarding how to mo- mentarily support a student in crisis until the student is connected with the counseling center. And finally, counselors can also educate faculty as to the most effective process by which to refer a student to counseling to increase the likelihood that the student will connect and follow-through. We also re- mind faculty that even when a student is not in immediate crisis, the depth or scope of a student struggle may be beyond the range of the faculty role and expertise and a referral to counseling would be most appropriate and helpful for the student. Balancing Empathy and Rigor. While it might sound counterintu- itive, we propose that empathy can help faculty maintain rigor and stan- dards. Student resistance and defensiveness in response to critical feedback is often an attempt to avoid feeling shame (Vierling-Claassen 2013). Many students have internalized early experiences of wrong answers as failures without opportunity for growth and have experienced public humiliation in the midst of these failures (such as doing math in front of classmates). These experiences can embed feelings of shame, a sense of being unworthy of belonging or connection in one’s social worlds. Given the essential na- ture of connection as discussed previously in this chapter, avoiding shame may be seen as a survival technique. Students who lack confidence or know they do not understand course material may withdraw, act out, or dismiss feedback to avoid shame. Radical empathy where there is mutual impact alters the distribution of power, and it vastly rearranges the dynamics of isolation and shame. To see that one “matters,” that one can “move” another person, that one can have an impact is a powerful shame-dispelling force. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 32 TEACHING AND EMOTION When we open ourselves to empathic responsiveness, we surrender the illusion of unilateral growth. We acknowledge that we are interdependent in our learning and our meaning-making. Responsiveness is not the same as reactivity or full self-disclosure. Re- sponsiveness is the basis of give-and-take interactions; it is the opposite of imposing static patterns or holding on to power over others. It involves shared power, power with others to contribute to change and to be accessi- ble to change. Students who learn to see assessment as an opportunity for growth rather than an indication of failure are more likely to be open to critical feedback. By showing empathy with students who make an effort and by appropriately sharing stories of our own experiences of using feedback to improve work, we can help students shift from seeing assessment as a bi- nary, possibly shame-inducing experience to seeing assessment as essential to learning. This is radical empathy. At the same time, students who fail to complete work or who do not exhibit an understanding of the material must be held accountable. We are not suggesting that to be empathic is to demand less of students. Instead, we seek to balance radical empathy with our commitment to our role re- sponsibilities and to our disciplines and institutions. When we are at our most effective, we are able to communicate to students when their work falls short and at the same time, convey that we understand that the work can be challenging and that we care about their success. Application The following section provides strategies that educators can implement in the moment as we experience disconnections and lack of empathy. In ad- dition, we provide questions for deeper reflection regarding our relational style and experience. When We Feel Disconnected. Feeling distant from a student, distracted, or disproportionally annoyed are signs that we have lost connection. Three steps can help us try to understand the moment and regain connection: notice, pause, and try to reconnect. Notice. Feelings such as anger, frustration, and even boredom can keep us self-consumed. Noticing these feelings and seeing them as a sign that we have disconnected is a first step toward reconnection. Pause. Once we notice these emotions, the next step is to pause and ask “what is going on here for me?” In this brief reflection, we might gain insight such as noticing that this is the kind of student behavior that triggers us or that we are projecting feelings about something unrelated. We are not going to be perfectly connected and have mutual empathy with all students all of the time. But by noticing when we are disconnected and reflecting in the moment, we can move from being reactive to being intentionally responsive, a much more constructive place from which to teach. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl RADICAL EMPATHY IN TEACHING 33 At times, we are open to connection and sense that the student has disconnected. We must work to honor their disconnection as a possible protective strategy to limit vulnerability. For example, a student might seem to shut down in the midst of a conversation about a group presentation. The student may be experiencing a deeper vulnerability and feel a need to self- protect. In these situations, it is important to honor the student’s temporary need for disconnection and continue to provide a safe environment for the student to move in and out of complex feelings. Try to Reconnect. Sometimes, simply recognizing that we were con- sumed by our own feeling state, we are able to regain presence with the student. Other times, we might need to search for one positive character- istic of the student, the moment, or self that can help us reconnect. For example, while I may be annoyed with a student, I may also be able to rec- ognize that fact that despite her attitude, she did show up to meet with me per my request. Or if in that moment, I cannot find anything engaging about a student, I might remind myself that I aspire to offer all students my com- mitment to their learning. By finding empathy or resonance, I can resume teaching from a more connected place. Further Reflection. Because we want to be good educators, we may find discomfort in admitting that we have negative feelings toward a student and thus we might become defensive and seek sanctuary in the power of our position. However, RCT encourages us to engage with the feelings of disconnection to seek to understand them more deeply. What is going on here for me? What might be going on for the student? What is going on in this relationship? Reflecting on these questions can help us understand a particular situation more deeply and we can then apply this learning in the future when we sense a growing disconnection. Additional Strategies When Feeling Overwhelmed by Student Emotion. Working with students who are in the midst of crisis, anger, or deep sadness brings an ad- ditional challenge to the work of connected teaching. When we experience mutual empathy with a student, we may find that the student’s life chal- lenges or emotions begin to overwhelm us. Noticing these feelings is very important for our own resilience and longevity in the profession. Once we notice our own feelings of anxiety or being overwhelmed, there are several questions we can ask to help us differentiate and find relational clarity. How can I stay in connection but not take on or get lost in the student’s anxiety, anger, or sadness? Are there aspects of what I’m feeling that began as the student’s emotion in regard to their own experience that I have now taken on? If I am experiencing anxiety, anger, or sadness that seems to be rooted in my own experience, what might this be about? By trying to stay present with the student and also locate the source of the emotion state and dis- connection, I can seek to differentiate, find relational clarity, and remain NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 34 TEACHING AND EMOTION connected (or reconnect). This process is often complex and we sometimes benefit from processing this later with a trusted colleague. Reflecting on Our Own Connection and Disconnection Patterns. Deeper reflection positions us to more quickly identify when we lose em- pathic connection so that we can respond with greater intentionality. A first step is to seek to understand my experiences and perceptions of various kinds of challenging interactions and relationships. When do I start to dis- connect? Are there times when I typically begin to blame other people for my emotions or experiences? What are my typical (perhaps unconscious) strategies of disconnection (e.g., revert to a power-over position, talk a lot or very little, try to end the interaction)? This clarity will then help us to recognize more quickly when we have moved out of empathy and we can then move back toward connection. This deeper work is an ongoing process in which we continue to learn and refine our practice. Self-Empathy. A robust review of self-care strategies is beyond the scope of this chapter. However, an exploration of radical empathy in teach- ing would not be complete without acknowledging the importance of self-empathy. We need to practice self-empathy when we disconnect, mis- understand, make a relational mistake, or feel tired. Practicing self-empathy and self-care models for students that empathic failures and disconnections are undeniably part of the human experience and that it is our response to these moments that is key. Practicing and modeling self-care and self- empathy is not only important for our students but also for our own well- being. Strategies such as consulting confidentially with a trusted colleague, exercise, and meditation will help us increase self-awareness and rejuvenate for the journey of teaching. Conclusion Radical empathy calls on us to be open to being effected by our students. This openness positions us to engage mutually with our students. At the same time, we maintain our awareness of and commitment to our role boundaries, the implicit contract and responsibilities of teaching, and the standards of our department and discipline. The fundamental question is how can I keep trying to move both of us into growth and learning? References Banks, A. 2015. Four Ways to Click: Rewire Your Brain for Stronger, More Rewarding Rela- tionships. New York, NY: Penguin. Beyene, T., Anglin, M., Sanchez, W., & Ballou, M. 2002. “Mentoring and Relational Mutuality: Proteges Perspectives.” Journal of Humanistic Counseling 41(1): 87–102. Burford, V., & Gross, D. 2002. “Caring On-Line: On-Line Empathy, Self-Disclosure, Emotional Expression, and Nurturing.” Presented at the National Communication Association, Seattle, WA. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl RADICAL EMPATHY IN TEACHING 35 Gottschall, S. 2014. “The Influences of Sex, Gender Identity, and Power on Faculty-Graduate Student Relational Mentoring and Its Association with Stu- dent Psychological Health.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carleton University. https://curve.carleton.ca/system/files/theses/31815.pdf. Jordan, J. 2010. Relational-Cultural Therapy (1st ed.). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. Liang, B., Tracy, A., Taylor, C., and Williams, L. 2002. “Mentoring College-Age Women: A Relational Approach.” American Journal of Community Psychology 30(2): 271–288. Mariskind, C. 2014. “Teachers’ Care in Higher Education: Contesting Gendered Con- structions.” Gender and Education 26(3): 306–320. McMillian-Roberts, K. 2014. “The Impact of Mutuality in Doctoral Students and Fac- ulty Mentoring Relationships.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fielding Graduate University. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1518540114. Miller, J. B. 1986. Toward a New Psychology of Women (2nd ed.). Boston, MA. O’Meara, K., Knudsen, K., and Jones, J. 2013. “The Role of Emotional Competencies in Faculty-Doctoral Student Relationships.” The Review of Higher Education 36(3): 315– 347. Rector, R. 1953. “Reciprocal Empathy: A Study of Student Teacher Interaction.” Presented at the Oklahoma Academy of Science, Oklahoma. Rossiter, M. 1999. “Caring and the Graduate Student: A Phenomenological Study.” Journal of Adult Development 6(4): 205–216. Schwartz, H. 2011. “From the Classroom to The Coffee Shop: Graduate Students and Professors Effectively Navigate Interpersonal Boundaries.” International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 23(3): 363–372. Schwartz, H. 2013. “Dinner at Fitzwilly’s: Intellectual Mattering in Developmental Re- lationships.” In Sixth Annual Mentoring Conference: Impact and Effectiveness of Devel- opmental Relationships, edited by N. Dominguez and Y. Gandert. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico. Schwartz, H. and Holloway, E. 2012. “Partners in learning: A grounded theory study of relational practice between master’s students and professors.” Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning 20(11): 115–133. Schwartz, H., and Holloway, E. 2014. “’I Become a Part of the Learning Process’: Men- toring Episodes and Individualized Attention in Graduate Education.” Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning 22(1): 38–55. Vierling-Claassen, A. 2013. Shame and Math. http://prezi.com/ssrbj0xbuv4m/shame- and-math-for-jmm13/. Woolhouse, M. 2002. “Supervising Dissertation Projects: Expectations of Supervisors and Students.” Innovations in Education and Teaching International 39(2): 137–144. JUDITH V. JORDAN, PhD, is the director of the Jean Baker Miller Training Institute and a founding scholar of Relational Cultural Theory. She is also an assistant professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. HARRIET L. SCHWARTZ, PhD, is professor of psychology and counseling at Carlow University where she is chair of the MA in Student Affairs program. She also serves as lead scholar for Education as Relational Practice at the Jean Baker Miller Training Institute. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 3 This chapter explores the important role that anger plays in teaching and learning. Anger in the Classroom: How a Supposedly Negative Emotion Can Enhance Learning Ryan C. Martin There are times when teaching, despite how rewarding it can be, is an ex- traordinarily frustrating experience. It can be time-consuming and difficult to do well, and even the best students do not always appreciate the hard work teachers put into their assignments and activities. Teachers are some- times swamped with resource limitations that make it difficult to achieve their learning outcomes, and even on their best days, they do not reach all the students they hope to reach. Plus, despite their best efforts, their in- novative and grand plans for teaching do not always work, leaving them frustrated. As a psychologist who researches anger, I routinely come across peo- ple who feel that anger is a purely negative emotion. That, however, isn’t true. In fact, anger is usually a valuable emotional experience, as it alerts people to problems and energizes them to confront those problems (Deffenbacher 1996). In this chapter, I will draw upon my research on anger and my experiences as a college teacher of psychology to explore the rea- sons teachers become angry, the meaning of that anger, and how teachers can use the experience to motivate students and themselves toward better learning outcomes. What is Anger Anger is an emotional state associated with having one’s goals blocked, be- ing provoked, or insulted (Spielberger 1999). It is different from aggression, which is a behavior with the intent to harm someone or something (Deffen- bacher 1996). This distinction is important, as people often misunderstand anger as being just the outward, aggressive expression. In reality, anger is the emotion at the root of some aggression (e.g., hitting, yelling), but also a host of other thoughts and behaviors (e.g., problem solving, activism, pout- ing, rumination). If we think of anger more broadly than just the aggressive NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, no. 153, Spring 2018 © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/tl.20279 37 38 TEACHING AND EMOTION behaviors sometimes associated with it, it is easier to understand how teach- ers can put the emotion to good use. Why We Get Mad To really understand how to use anger in a positive way as a teacher, one needs to understand why people get angry in the first place. Deffenbacher (1996) argued that anger occurs as a result of three factors: (1) a provo- cation, (2) the individual’s interpretation of the provocation, and (3) the individual’s pre-provocation psycho-biological state. The provocation is the easiest part to understand. This is the event that immediately preceded the anger (e.g., getting cut off in traffic, misplacing your car keys, having students fail to follow the directions you gave them). People often think of this as the cause of their anger. They say things like, “I’m angry because I can’t find my car keys” or “it makes me so mad when students don’t follow directions.” These provocations do not cause the anger directly, though. If they did, everyone would become equally angry when faced with the same provocation. But that does not happen. The things that make me mad are not the same things that make you mad. Similarly, if the provocation really did cause the anger directly, you would experience the same level of anger each and every time you faced the provocation. But that doesn’t happen either. Sometimes I get really angry when I misplace my keys, and sometimes I get just a little angry. That said, the provocation is definitely important and some types of events are more likely to lead to anger than others. For instance, those sit- uations where we are treated poorly (e.g., disrespected by our students) or when our goals are blocked (e.g., administrators require us do things that are counter-productive) are most likely to lead to anger. Much of this, though, has to do with the second of the three factors associated with the experience of anger: our interpretation of the provocation. When people face these sorts of provocations, they appraise the situation to de- termine whether or not it was negative, unfair, unjustified, or blamewor- thy. Once they appraise events in such a way, they get angry. Deffenbacher (1996) calls this evaluation of the stimulus primary appraisal. Secondary ap- praisal, according to Deffenbacher, is when we evaluate our ability to cope with the event. If we interpret this event as so negative that we cannot cope with it, we become even angrier (e.g., “Computer problems won’t allow me to grade tonight but it’s no big deal because I have time tomorrow” is less likely to lead to anger than “Not being able to grade tonight is going to ruin my entire day tomorrow.”). Deffenbacher’s third factor, the pre-provocation state, refers to our psycho-biological state right before the event occurred. When people are tense, fatigued, already irritated, or in some other negative state prior to the provocation, they are more likely to get angry. For example, a person getting stopped by a red light on the way to work may not get angry under NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl ANGER IN THE CLASSROOM: HOW A SUPPOSEDLY NEGATIVE EMOTION CAN ENHANCE LEARNING 39 normal circumstances. However, if it is hot out and they are in car without AC, they may become angrier than they otherwise would have. Similarly, a teacher may become angrier in response to student disrespect if they are already on edge, fatigued, or feeling pressed for time. Why Teachers Get Mad To get a sense for the situations that tend to drive teacher anger, I collected data via an anonymous survey asking teachers “Tell me about a time you got angry as a teacher. Please include why you got angry and how you handled it.” The responses revealed four main types of situations. First, teachers became angry when they felt students were being disrespectful. For example, one respondent wrote, “A student once wouldn’t stop talk- ing and when I called on him to answer a question, he had no idea what I even asked.” Another wrote, “A student was wearing sunglasses and head- phones in the classroom. I asked him to remove them. He did not answer me, even after I got his attention.” Typically, the appraisal of such provoca- tions had to do with the belief that students should behave in certain ways toward their teachers and that not doing so reflected an unjustified lack of respect. A second type of situation that led to teacher anger had to with stu- dents not following instructions. Here, teachers described situations where students did not complete assignments correctly, did not listen to in-class instructions, or did not follow other sorts of class guidelines. For example, one respondent wrote, “I spent ten minutes going over the instructions for an in-class activity and when it was time to begin, several students had no idea what they were supposed to do. They obviously hadn’t been listening, and it was so frustrating.” The appraisal that typically accompanied these provocations had to do with the teachers’ goals being blocked and feeling as though they could not move forward with an activity because students were slowing them down. A third provocation for teachers had to do with anger at adminis- trators or other public officials. Teachers would express frustration over what they perceived as unnecessary paperwork or ineffective policies. One respondent wrote, “I had to document a bunch of crap via educa- tor effectiveness. I used the two or three hours after school that I usu- ally spend making lessons or grading or something to benefit the stu- dents.” Again, the appraisal that seems to exacerbate the provocation is the idea that the required documentation is blocking the teacher from accomplishing his or her goals and limiting his or her capacity to teach effectively. Finally, the fourth type of situation had to do with anger over the content of the course. Some respondents described feeling angry as they discussed issues related to poverty, sexism, healthcare, violence, or other topics. One respondent wrote, “I use anger to show my passion for a NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 40 TEACHING AND EMOTION subject. I NEVER use anger directed at the students but instead use it to show how I feel about a system and its impact on our lives.” Another wrote, “I get angry every time I talk about institutionalized racism in class. I try to show students that it’s ok to be angry and that, in fact, there are some things we should be angry about.” This anger over the content stemmed from appraisals of situations that were unjustified, unfair, and blameworthy. What We Can Do When We Get Mad As I mentioned earlier, a common misunderstanding about anger is that it is the same as aggression. Research shows that most people associate anger with aggressive behavior such as yelling, swearing, hitting, kicking, pushing, or in other harmful ways. In truth, anger is a very healthy and adaptive emotion, and there are infinite ways one can express their anger (Deffenbacher et al. 1996). Anger actually plays a very important role in our lives in that it alerts us to the fact that we may have been wronged and en- ergizes us to confront that injustice (Aarts et al. 2010; Deffenbacher 1996). Thus, it’s not only normal to feel angry sometimes, it’s good for us to feel angry. Without that feeling we wouldn’t have the energy to respond to those provocations that may require a response. What we do when we get angry is what separates adaptive and use- ful anger from maladaptive and problematic anger (Aarts et al. 2010; Ford and Tamir 2012). If we get angry and immediately scream at the person who offended us, we may get ourselves into trouble or damage a relation- ship. Likewise, if we don’t respond at all, we may end up feeling frustrated, sad, or guilty later on for not having done anything when we felt wronged (Roberton, Daffern, and Bucks 2015). However, if we politely assert our- selves and try to address the provocation that led to our anger in the first place, we may end up in a better position than when we started. In fact, there is even evidence to support the notion that anger can enhance cre- ativity if handled in the right way (Van Kleef, Anastasopoulou, and Nijstad 2010). Of course, the “right” thing to do when we are angered depends on the context. There are times when it may be best to suppress our anger, times when we should forgive (Goldman and Wade 2012), and there may even be times when the right thing to do is to yell or scream. Another way of thinking about Deffenbacher’s model is that anger oc- curs as the result of a problem. In a given moment, we become angry be- cause we interpret a situation as slowing us down, interfering with our goals, unfair, or otherwise problematic. Thus, one approach to using our anger in a positive manner is to work toward solving the problem. If I am angry because my students keep texting during class, I need to make it clear that they are not allowed to text during class, outline a policy regarding the consequences of texting during class, and enforce that policy. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl ANGER IN THE CLASSROOM: HOW A SUPPOSEDLY NEGATIVE EMOTION CAN ENHANCE LEARNING 41 How Can Teachers Solve the Four Problems That Lead to Their Anger? According to the survey above, the most common reason for teacher anger was feeling disrespected by students. In many of the cases that teachers described, it seemed that anger was an understandable and appropriate re- sponse to the situation. Likewise, if student disrespect is not addressed, it can lead to further problems (e.g., other students engaging in similar be- haviors, teacher frustration increasing to a debilitating level). There are a few potentially useful strategies to channel that anger into dealing with the disrespect. First, outline expectations early and clearly. Let students know what behaviors are not acceptable. Second, explore where the student dis- respect is coming from and try to better connect with the student. Does this behavior occur with other teachers or is it unique to you? Is the disre- spect the result of frustration? Students can be disrespectful for a variety of reasons, including that they are feeling frustrated with the material or with their performance in the class. Finally, work with the student to curb the disrespectful behavior. The tendency with such behavior is for the instruc- tor to want to shut it down with a heavy-handed approach. That may be the best option in some cases, but in some situations it might be better to try and connect and work with the student to address the issue. The second reason teachers became angry is related to students not fol- lowing instructions or asking questions that had already been answered by the teacher. Again, we can think of such anger as alerting us to a problem and giving us the energy to solve the problem. One of the first things teach- ers should do if they find themselves encountering this issue often is to ex- plore whether or not their instructions are clear enough. If this is a common problem, it might actually speak to the instructor not providing adequate information or not providing information effectively. Related to this, some instructors find it useful to embrace technology as a way of minimizing stu- dent confusion over material (e.g., record yourself giving the instructions so they can go back and watch/listen to it). Similarly, embracing the “rule of three” where students are told that they must look to three places (e.g., syllabus, a classmate, assignment instructions) for the answer to a ques- tion before asking the instructor. Last, make sure you are holding students accountable for their failure to follow directions by building following in- structions into the grading scheme for the assignment. One of the reasons students do not follow directions is because there are no consequences for failing to do so. The third reason teachers became angry relates to decisions made by administrators or public officials. Specifically, teachers voiced anger over those decisions that either increased their work load or that they perceived were ineffective or even disrespectful. Such anger is often rooted in two re- lated interpretations. One, the very idea that someone who does not teach would be passing laws or making policy that influences what they do in NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 42 TEACHING AND EMOTION the classroom or how they spend their time, often times feels disrespect- ful. Second, there is often a feeling of powerlessness that is included in the interpretation of administrative decisions. Thus, in addition to the fact that your workload increased, there is a sense of decreased autonomy and decreased decision-making that leads to anger. A strategy for dealing with such anger, therefore, is to seek ways to regain some of that power and decision-making. For example, teachers might decide to express their con- cerns regarding a policy change using an assertive, respectful, and healthy approach. Likewise, they might want to find ways to work more closely with administrators to try and help them understand the impact of the decisions they make. Last, for those teachers who become angry over the content of their course, there are multiple ways this anger can be used effectively in the classroom. First, there is an opportunity to teach students that anger can be a healthy, adaptive, and reasonable response. Further, this might be an opportunity to demonstrate that there are things we should be angry about (e.g., racism, sexism, climate change). Second, such anger provides a way of modeling appropriate anger expression. Instead of the multitude of ways that anger can be negatively expressed, a teacher can demonstrate the host of ways it can be positively expressed (e.g., letters to the editor, creating public service announcements). In fact, such anger can often be harnessed into class projects designed to address the problem you and students are angry about. In the case above where the teacher expressed anger every time he or she discussed institutionalized racism, the class could begin a project designed to inform the public about what institutionalized racism is and how it can be addressed. Anger as a Reflection of Student Frustration Although this was not mentioned in the responses to the survey above, I find that teachers sometimes get angry when students struggle with the material. When students either collectively (i.e., the entire class) or individually (i.e., a particular student or small group of students) do poorly on an exam or an assignment or struggle to engage with class material, teachers may become frustrated. What is important to recognize about such frustration is that, assuming the students are putting in adequate time and effort, it is likely not anger at the student. Instead, it reflects the type of anger or frustration we often feel when our goals are blocked. This is important because the frustration the teacher feels likely echoes the same frustration the student is feeling, and can lead to one of two out- comes: (1) diminished interest in the material, followed by giving up on trying to learn or (2) increased determination and increased feelings of suc- cess at goal accomplishment. First, when frustration becomes too intense, students and teachers may decrease their effort. This is particularly true for students and teachers with a low frustration tolerance who may have NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl ANGER IN THE CLASSROOM: HOW A SUPPOSEDLY NEGATIVE EMOTION CAN ENHANCE LEARNING 43 difficulty working through frustration. Obviously, this is the worst possi- ble outcome of student or teacher frustration. The other possible outcome, though, is that the student and teacher feel even greater joy after having worked through the frustration and obtaining their goal. From a teacher’s perspective, it really speaks to the need to help students work through their frustration by modeling how to work through frustration themselves. Ob- viously, if a teacher conveys to a student, either explicitly or implicitly, that the frustration is too much and they should scale back their goals, a poten- tial learning opportunity has been squandered. Tips for Using Anger in the Classroom Although anger can certainly interfere with quality teaching, anger in the classroom has great potential to enhance teaching and learning. I have de- scribed several examples of how teachers can better handle their anger to enhance learning in specific types of situations. In summary, here are some general tips, with examples, for using anger effectively. 1. Remember that anger is not inherently bad: One of the first things teachers need to remember is that anger is inherently good in that it serves such an important role in our lives. That said, it does not always feel good to people and we often want to get rid of our angry feelings as soon as we can. That is what makes learning to deal with anger effectively so important. 2. Search for insight: Sometimes the reason for our anger is obvious. The provocation is such that our primary and secondary appraisals are very clear. In fact, sometimes the provocation is so clear that practi- cally anyone would get angry in such circumstances. However, some- times the origin of the anger is a little less obvious because it is not so much about the provocation as it is about our psycho-biological state at the time of the provocation or our interpretation of the provo- cation. It is very important for teachers to try to identify how these other two elements of the anger experience are shaping their feelings. 3. Modeling: Teacher anger has potential to help students develop their own understanding and management of anger, and can be used as an important teaching tool. By modeling appropriate and healthy anger expression for students, and by labeling it for students in that way, teachers have the ability to help students think about anger and use it as tool to motivate themselves and address issues. 4. Problem Solving: If there is one thing I have tried to make clear throughout this chapter, it is that anger alerts us to problems and en- ergizes us to confront those problems. When we feel angry (and after our search for insight into why we are feeling that way), we typically find that there is a problem we need to address. Dealing with anger effectively is often about trying to solve that problem. Problem solving can take many different forms. In some instances, it might be trying NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 44 TEACHING AND EMOTION to clarify instructions or expectations for students. In other instances, though, it might be that we need to write letters to representatives, or become involved in administrative work to address issues we feel need addressing. 5. Acceptance: We need to acknowledge that sometimes the things that we are angry about reflect problems that cannot be changed or that we are powerless to change. In other words, some problems have no solutions. While that feeling alone can be frustrating, at a certain point, teachers need to learn to accept those situations and move on. Dwelling in the anger by ruminating or pouting will likely only make things worse. 6. Seek Support or Therapy: For some, the anger is too intense, too long- lasting, or harder to control. In some instances, it may be impossible to turn that anger into a positive learning experience for students. Similarly, the acceptance of problems that cannot be changed may be particularly difficult for some teachers. When this happens, it is important for teachers to reach out to trusted colleagues for support. Additionally, if the anger interferes with teaching or is otherwise prob- lematic, meeting with a therapist to work through the anger-related problems may be warranted. References Aarts, H., Ruys, K. I., Veling, H., Renes, R. A., de Groot, J. B., van Nunen, A. M., and Geertjes, S. 2010. “The art of anger: Reward context turns avoidance responses to anger-related objects into approach.” Psychological Science 21: 1406–1410. Deffenbacher, J. L. 1996. “Cognitive-behavioral approaches to anger reduction.” In Advances in cognitive-behavioral therapy, edited by K. S. Dobson and K. D. Craig. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Deffenbacher, J. L., Oetting, E. R., Lynch, R. S., and Morris, C. D. 1996. “The expression of anger and its consequences.” Behaviour Research and Therapy 34: 575–590. Ford, B. Q., and Tamir, M. 2012. “When getting angry is smart: Emotional preferences and emotional intelligence.” Emotion 12: 685–689. Goldman, D. B., and Wade, N. G. 2012. “Comparison of forgiveness and anger-reduction group treatments: A randomized controlled trial.” Psychotherapy Research 22: 604– 620. Roberton, T., Daffern, M., and Bucks, R. S. 2015. “Beyond anger control: Difficulty at- tending to emotions also predicts aggression in offenders.” Psychology of Violence 5: 74–83. Spielberger, C. D. 1999. State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-Revised. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc. Van Kleef, G. A., Anastasopoulou, C., and Nijstad, B. A. 2010. “Can expressions of anger enhance creativity? A test of the emotions as social information (EASI) model.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 46: 042–1048. DR. RYAN C. MARTIN is a psychology professor and anger researcher at the Uni- versity of Wisconsin-Green Bay. He manages a blog and podcast, All the Rage, that provides up-to-date research, commentary, and tips on managing anger. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 4 Reflecting on one’s own emotions and seeing teaching as an emotionally complex engagement can enrich a teacher’s experience, pedagogy, and students’ motivation and response in class. Joy of Being a Teacher Indira Nair When I think of teaching, joy wells up in me. I think of the various in- stances that made teaching a unique thing that I do with heart and mind. I recall Adam’s frown when, following two students’ suggestions, I classified “infrared” as two different forms of energy. It was a class of over 80 students. When I asked him why he frowned, Adam said, “Can you do that? Put in- frared in both columns? It warps my mental model of energy,” and my heart sang with joy. I had told the students that part of learning environmental science was building conceptual schemes in their mental models. They were to examine whether what they were learning fit in with the models in their heads, or what they need to question and then integrate, in order to under- stand. And Adam did it! The resonance when a student “gets it” in the deep way you had hoped makes this joy well up. It informs and elevates your teaching and brings memories of your own joy of learning, of discovery. The longest period of my formal teaching was as a professor in an in- terdisciplinary department—Engineering and Public Policy—in a research university, and a shorter period as a high school science teacher. I taught across a wide range of subject areas and across all the years—freshman to graduate students, and middle to high school. And teaching was something I grew up with, from an emphasis on my own learning to tutoring my younger siblings—and often their friends—as they needed. It was something I al- ways enjoyed. Our feelings, acknowledged or latent, undergird the way we go about teaching and reacting to students’ ways of learning. True learning and true teaching involve deep emotions whether acknowledged at the time or not. In his beautiful book, From Brain to Mind, James Zull (2011) writes about emotions involved in learning: “ . . . all thought is emotional. We can’t get rid of emotion. The trick is to use emotion as an aid to deeper understand- ing and more effective action.” (p. 17). But, before emotion can help us understand, we must acknowledge it. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, no. 153, Spring 2018 © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/tl.20280 45 46 TEACHING AND EMOTION Teaching evokes feelings and memories. I feel emotions such as love or discomfort toward certain topics and settings, the memories of exhilaration when I grasped a new idea, or heard a teacher explain something in a beau- tiful way full of clarity and meaning. It also evokes feelings of inadequacy and diffidence in being given so much power over another’s learning. But for me the dominant feeling through all my decades of teaching has been a true joy, lit with students’ questions, expressions, and moments of doubts and of discovering of themselves. This chapter explores the joy of being a teacher. Teaching is emotional and intensely interpersonal; it is also intrapersonal. It is a mix of one-to- one relationships and one-to-many relationships. This chapter also exam- ines the impact of a teacher’s emotions on teaching and learning and the self-awareness that can evolve with reflective practice. In our efforts to be competent in teaching, and with all the advice about teaching working in our heads, teachers hesitate to take time exploring our emotions. We labor under an implicit understanding that teaching has to be “objective” for the most part, and we lose a big opportunity to connect with students in special ways. The emotional connection becomes apparent when we look at what students carry away at the end of a course or class. Recently, a practicing engineer wrote to me that every time he starts a project, he remembers a unit that I had taught in his freshman engineering class over 25 years ago, and makes sure he considers possible hidden consequences of the project. He called this the most significant learning of his engineering education. He recalled the emotions the lesson touched in him as he noticed the feelings I displayed and the speaker who came to our class—Roger Boisjoly the engi- neer who had pleaded with his manager not to OK the launch of the space shuttle Challenger on a cold morning. This learning moment occurred in a required course of 160 students! Several complementary lenses may be used to view the emotional as- pects of teaching: Whitehead’s Rhythms of Learning, the Ethic of Care as un- folded by Joan Tronto, the cycle of Appreciative Inquiry, and Donald Schön’s Reflection-in-Action. Teacher as Storyteller: Wonder, Romance, and Visualization Being a teacher is more than conveying content. While we often mea- sure our success by the product of “student learning,” being a teacher is a process that includes the tone, emotions, and competence the teacher demonstrates—how the material is conveyed including the teacher’s affect and depth and breadth of knowledge and love for the subject and for teach- ing. And therein lies one joyful aspect of being a teacher. Inviting students into a new inquiry by invoking a sense of curiosity and wonder about the subject, about the theme, and about the course, is a stage that Whitehead calls romance (Whitehead 1929). Ideally, this romance starts the journey NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl JOY OF BEING A TEACHER 47 into the teaching/learning experience. This can lead to a state of joyful res- onance between student and teacher—a meeting of the minds. The key is that the teacher realize her own emotions and work consciously and conscientiously to frame the learning at this stage. The teacher’s emotional investment is evident to the student and can be moti- vating even when the teacher may be under the impression that she is not revealing any feelings. This can also be a diagnostic stage for the teacher to assess how to address the diverse needs of her students. Conveying clearly the intent of the course and the philosophy of the discipline, not in terms of “outcomes” and “objectives” but inviting the students to join in the in- quiry can invoke romance. In STEM areas especially, there may tend to be a high degree of apprehension as we present abstract ideas. A teacher can invoke Whitehead’s romance in very young students in middle school or even earlier, by introducing science in an experiential way—with wonder at a natural phenomenon. This may seem hard to do in a freshmen engineer- ing or science class of over 100 students, particularly when many of them already have an emotional frame for the subject. The teacher herself may be feeling the apprehension of the large number of students needing to under- stand the “basics.” The teacher’s emotions at this stage are critical. She can convert her apprehension to a joyful presence by introducing the story of the discovery of that idea, or a related anecdote. I still recall instances from my first college year of chemistry. At the beginning of the dreaded organic chemistry course, our professor, Dr. Motwani told the story of the chemist Kekulé thinking hard for days to figure out the structure of benzene C6 H6 and dreaming of a serpent swallowing its tail one night. The ring structure- the basis of organic chemistry- was born! I struggled with organic chemistry, but my positive emotions in response to the story and the visualization of the chemical ring structure made the struggle easier. In my experience, visualization also became an important route for joyful learning. Small as Dr. Motwani’s story was, I became interested in the intellectual history of science as a path to joyful teaching that day—a small way of recovering Whitehead’s romance. In my senior year, as Profes- sor Gatha conveyed his sense of wonder as he introduced us to quantum mechanics through the exciting story of the struggle of physicists to under- stand the structure of the atom in the late nineteenth Century, I listened with awe and my own sense of wonder. I became a dedicated believer in story being the way to introduce romance in class, especially for college students. It takes a lot of reading to have these stories at your fingertips. But it is worth it as students tell you years later how they remember a scientific or engineering principle through that story. Bushnell (2013) writes that description can invoke emotions. This is what a story does. “By descrip- tion, I mean the concrete, the things we can observe with the five senses: sight, sound, smell, taste and touch. I do not mean simple adjectives.” (p. 50). Reading this, I realize that is how quantum mechanics evokes joy in NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 48 TEACHING AND EMOTION me—Dr. Gatha’s recounting the story of the place—Vienna—making us go to that time and place, leading us through the existing theories by draw- ing out what we had already learned about nineteenth century thinking in physics. We participated in the arguments of the time. This and his descrip- tions of the characteristics of the scientists involved form the nucleus of my ecstatic feeling about quantum mechanics—a great work of the human mind! Reflecting the idea of the story and the visualizations it invokes, I have students draw concept maps of the progress of a model of something in physics, such as matter or light, over centuries. A concept map is a picture of concepts connected by arrows that show the connection of one to another. It can be a way of having students reveal their mental frameworks or schema and the teacher seeing what depth of concepts and even misconceptions they have on an idea or process. Novak (1998) and others provide extensive descriptions of the use and the benefits of using concept maps. What they don’t point out explicitly is that this technique can engage emotions of the joy of discovery as students trace the historical sequence of how we came to understand a concept. In a general education course on Einstein, students have produced some great maps of the evolution of our ideas of matter, light, and energy over centuries—ideas that Einstein’s thinking changed radically. Teacher as Student: Self-Awareness, Questions My personal history of the role models I had for each of the multiples roles of a teacher contribute to the spectrum of emotions and reactions I have to the students, their learning, their behavior, and expectations. Most of all, over the years, I have learned about myself. I began to understand what Parker Palmer meant when he wrote in his essay The Heart of a Teacher, “ . . . knowing myself is as crucial to good teaching as knowing my students and my subject.” (Palmer 1997). A tone or look may convey the teacher’s emotions. Students have in- terpreted the faraway look I get when I think deeply as a frustration at their question or their lack of understanding. On topics considered controver- sial such as nuclear energy policy, I try to keep my rather strong opinions out of the class. When a student asked what I think about something in a policy class, I said, “I want to keep my feelings out of it.” Another student responded, “We know when you agree with a policy and when you don’t. You say, “the U.S. policy” or “your policy” when you don’t like it. But you say “our policy” when you agree with it.” Even as a U.S. citizen, I had lapsed into being a foreigner when I didn’t agree with a U.S. policy and the students had deciphered my unintentional code. I love learning. There is a welling of a joy of discovery when you “get” something, even when it is much later. I recall a moment and the exact spot when hanging on for dear life in a crowded bus in Bombay, I saw one aspect of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, 3 years after I had studied it in NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl JOY OF BEING A TEACHER 49 a course. So I tell students to stay with questions and to ponder over them over time. Sometimes, when I ask a question whose immediate answer is not central to progress in class, I say, “Let’s leave the question with you.” Some students find that frustrating. I recall when Ellen from my ethics class called me 2 years later saying, “I am on a vacation on a beach. And I think I know the answer to that question.” And she did! Charlie, a former student, sent me Rainer Maria Rilke’s poem, that starts with “Learn to Love the questions” and concludes, “Live the questions now: And perhaps, some distant day, without realizing it, you will live into the answers.” Charlie wrote, “This is what you told us. Rilke says it so much better”! After that, of course, I used the poem in class to introduce the value of staying with the questions. Shaping questions, and helping students shape questions is a vital part of being a good teacher. The relationship the teacher has to questions and how they were posed to her along her learning journey can determine the comfort, tone, and shaping she gives to questions. Appreciative Inquiry (AI), a way of crafting unconditional positive questions is a framework for bringing out the positive potential of a group or organization (Cooperrider and Whitney 2005); this contrasts with a “problem-solving” approach. The three dimensions of questions in AI are the construction, scope, and as- sumptions (or beliefs) around these questions. The teacher can use the AI method to raise positive questions within the framework of her own emo- tional responses (Vogt, Brown and Isaacs 2003). This practice of living with questions also conveys to students a re- spect for the time it takes to learn. This is a great challenge in a society where instant availability of “knowledge” via the Internet has become the norm. A few strategies can help students develop a respect for time and for their emotions. First, I give students projects or reflective assignments early in the semester, and revisit the underlying questions through a process of staged reporting in class of their progress in these assignments. For exam- ple, in my engineering ethics course, on the first day, I gave the students the assignment of reading Daniel Quinn’s Ishmael: writing their reflections—an assignment due toward the end of the semester—and also finding the ten sentences they thought resonated most with them. I gave them a reading guide that said that if they got irritated or even angry, or thought Ishmael’s messages were trivial, they were to lay the book aside and come back to it later. As we checked on the progress of the reading as the semester went on, Shalom, an orthodox Jew, said one day, “I am glad you told us about getting angry; I got angry when I thought Quinn was questioning all the beliefs I held firm. Laying the book aside, and reading later, it began to dawn on me that he actually reinforced them in a framework that now fas- cinates me.” In more technical subjects too, I would have students report on their early frustrations as they were starting the project and had to define some of the boundaries. This gave validity to their feelings and conveyed that emotions are OK when learning engineering. In an environmental sci- ence and decision-making course, after his first attempt to do the initial NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 50 TEACHING AND EMOTION exploration for a semester-long project, Randy asked, “So what else should I be seeing at this point in addition to the pain (to locate all the data needed for the project)?” This led to a fruitful discussion of the difficulty of getting data to assess environmental impacts of human activity and how simplis- tic headlines such as “paper is better than plastic” are based on a number of value assumptions. Schön (1984) developed critical reflection-in-action as a process of continuous learning, an essential component of professional practice. Learning to teach is an evolution. With each class, the teacher learns more about how to change her pedagogy, what remains invariant even as she adjusts her teaching mode and habits to the current set of students and to their individualities. The challenge is to remember to remain a student, hard amidst all the expectations, most of all the burden of being an expert. The pressure inherent in teaching—real or imagined—to provide ex- pert knowledge can make it easy to miss the need for us to be open to learn- ing and to provide students with opportunities to wonder, and convey a sense of the uncertainty inherent in all “expert” knowledge. Students’ ap- preciative inquiry can be born from such moments of wonder. The teacher modeling wonder and giving students the opportunity to wonder can make all the difference for motivation, and in turn for exhilarating moments for the teacher. Caring about the student and the topic, and which of these takes pre- dominant attention in a given instance, is important to me. The ethic of care is based on daily activity and process rather than on abstract prin- ciples, and teaching is a day-by-day activity. It occurs to me that the ethic of care could form a good framework for practicing care in teaching (Pantazidou and Nair 1999). We looked at care in a formalism that Joan Tronto developed in Moral Boundaries (Tronto 1993). Under the ethic of care, one is constantly learning the students, attentive to their needs, deter- mining what a situation demands, being competent in the subject area as well as in pedagogy and student development, and finally ascertaining that the teaching is “received.” While all these reflective actions sound obvious, each takes learning and investment of emotions. It turns one into a student, turning to one’s peers, and books for guidance and more learning. My reactions and emotions when receiving “care” informed how I in- voked care. I expected that my students would have similar emotions when I cared for them through teaching. These reactions are so personally and culturally informed that I had to be careful that I perceived them in the way they were intended. This was a big learning for me as a teacher-learner educated in one culture, and teaching in another. I also needed develop my sense of how boundaries work in another culture. My early teaching had been for my younger siblings, then for stu- dents junior to me when I was a graduate teaching assistant. When I became a high school teacher, and then a college instructor, I became a professional teacher, and that meant observing boundaries. “Boundaries are the basic NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl JOY OF BEING A TEACHER 51 ground rules for professional relationships . . . ” (Barnett 2008, 5). If bound- aries and power differential become the ruling parameters in a learning en- vironment, the joy of learning and of teaching can be lost. At the same time, the teacher has professional obligations to the student, to the institution and mediated by these, to society. So I had to learn this—understanding and ob- serving boundaries in my own style, without losing my general tendency to show my feelings. I also noticed that seeing a foreigner, the students gave you the benefit of the doubt in many instances that they didn’t afford teach- ers of their own nationality. In very touching ways, they even try to teach you things like the pronunciation of a word, sometimes usage or the mean- ing of an American expression. They also appreciate candor. I felt it was a great compliment when one of my high school students said to me, “You are the only teacher who says, “I don’t know the answer; let’s all try to find out.” This also holds true in college teaching—students see the state of wonder and inquiry in me, and try to join me in learning something I didn’t know before. The openness to my own learning is what I try to keep. Humility is invoked when I try to learn, even now. When I was a young teacher, with very bright students in the class, some of them interpreted this humility, combined with me being an obviously foreign woman teaching engineering, as a lack of knowledge. Many students assume that authoritative knowledge comes with a display of authority and from people who resemble those they have seen as authorities. I learned early in the engineering courses, to simply and playfully demonstrate with in-class problem solving exercises that I could think and calculate quickly and efficiently on my feet. I could see some students changing their attitudes. Later some students even told me that. At the same time, most students appreciated these in-class examples of playfulness and fun solving problems as a new way to look at learning. I realized as time went on that I had been fortunate in my college days to have several friends with whom I had had these kinds of fun problem- solving sessions. Those stood me in good stead when I was a teacher-learner in another culture. You learn all the time as a teacher. Sometimes, teaching the same course for the tenth time or so, I went in thinking “I have seen it all.” But the variety in students keeps teaching you. After over 20 years of teaching ray diagrams in light, my high school student Vince showed me one aspect I had never realized. I also learned my style of teaching could be frustrating to some good students. We would take unexpected turns sometimes because a student raised an interesting question not obviously connected to the lesson at hand. It was a teachable moment and I would say, “Let’s explore that for a minute” and come back to topic after that. Nancy, a top student was in two of my classes one semester. She asked to drop one, because she “couldn’t take two of these.” I felt insulted at first, and then felt I had failed. On more thought, I learned a valuable lesson, to be careful about diversions even NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 52 TEACHING AND EMOTION when they had a bearing on the subject at large. But I didn’t give up on teachable moments. I realized that older students tended to appreciate this mode. Jim, a graduate student in my predominantly undergraduate course in ethics, said as I was introducing the course, “Listen carefully to her. You may only un- derstand the full meaning later. She has a Zen way of teaching.” I hadn’t thought of my style thus. Then I realized it was probably my Eastern up- bringing that this style seemed natural to me. It does not work with first- year students. Teacher as Performer “Teaching is a performative act. And it is that aspect of our work that offers the space for change, invention, spontaneous shifts, that can serve as a catalyst drawing out the unique elements in each classroom.”, wrote bell hooks in “Teaching to Transgress” (hooks 1994, 18). Being ready for each of my performances was a significant part of my ethic. As I believed in taking advantage of examples and reactions in class to help students gradually build their mental models, I couldn’t be ready for everything. That type of readiness wasn’t easy. This readiness demanded flexibility and thinking on my feet. I needed to also learn appropriate ex- amples, even expressions, for each generation of U.S. students when my instinctual thinking brought to mind examples based on the Indian cul- tures. Having moved frequently when I was young helped me develop this ability to adjust quickly. I could absorb the essence of a new environment and adapt quickly. The thorough way in which we were taught concepts in my science and other courses especially in India, also helped in think- ing on my feet for some diversions and improvisations that help learning. But the Indian way focused on theory rather than applications and the U.S. students to a large extent are pragmatic in their thinking and have to see the “use.” I learned to motivate a topic with application first and then build the foundational knowledge. Whitehead’s rhythms of learning, his frame- work of romance, precision, and generalization stood as a good organizing principle. I am always excited by, and love, the development of a story, not know- ing where it is leading. So I like the invention and shifts that bell hooks writes about. This means that the performance cannot be rehearsed; one has to improvise, allow a change of flow, and still keep an organization and “plot” that brings one back to the topic at hand. This requires a repertoire of possibilities, some of which can come with practice, and one needs to do a lot of reading on the history, philosophy, and context of the topic. While this can be joyful, it can also be daunting at times. The current practice of narrowly defined learning objectives against which the teacher accounts NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl JOY OF BEING A TEACHER 53 for the performance of a student has short-changed this process. I tried to practice “developing a story” as the mode in my classes. Students who were not used to this could get frustrated. But again sharing with them my method of approach and rationale was immensely helpful. The Joyful Teacher The joy of teaching comes from a balancing dance between all the aspects that are an inevitable part of a community that comes together for an in- tended purpose. Every move has to be considered and in time, one learns the rhythm of teaching and learning with joy. Yet, it is important to remem- ber that this is different for each type of class, for each mix of students, for each discipline, and for each generation of students. This takes time and practice. And a joyful teacher is first and foremost a joyful learner. The first step to finding this joy is of course developing a reflective self- awareness, looking inward for the experiences that shaped your learning but also acknowledging the characteristics of your way of learning. In a rapidly changing and globalizing world, one also has to think of how those may be different from what your students have experienced, or are experiencing. One has to continually update this knowledge. A second step is to recognize opportunities when a story is the most appropriate way to motivate and introduce or enhance a topic, and what parameters of the story would convey the correct conceptual base. For ex- ample, a story that depends on analogy rather than direct history can often cause students to miss the point. A third strategy is to continuously update one’s repertoire and apprecia- tive understanding of “happenings” in the field. While the stories of histor- ical discovery motivate joy, there is a unique response in the students when a topic relates directly to their current world, and their teacher is excited about it. A regular feature of a class may be students reporting on something current and relevant to the class. Additionally, seek to strike a balance between organizing a class ahead of time and allowing for improvisation—for those “spontaneous shifts,” recognizing that some students may be uncomfortable with this style. The teacher too may find it hard to let go of some of the control in this kind of teaching. Being able to do this comes with time and practice, if you are continuously aware of your own shifts in life and work. It may be useful to write a couple of observations along these lines after each class, to recall these experiences later. Coming to this joy takes mindful practice. It fosters a unique relation- ship with the students and they in turn develop a lifelong relationship with learning and with you. It is a slow climb and at times, you feel you are in an eternal circle, but it is a “spiral staircase” akin to Karen Armstrong’s (2004) description of struggle and transcendence. One climbs, gradually, learning new lessons from seemingly old surroundings and one rediscovers more and NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 54 TEACHING AND EMOTION more sophisticated versions of the childhood lessons of joyful learning. A teacher also gets joy when she sees many of her students become teach- ers. And, one emerges from being a teacher by an institutional definition to becoming a teacher for whom teaching is a work of joy. References Armstrong, K. 2004. The Spiral Staircase: My Climb out of Darkness. New York, NY: Knopf. Barnett, J. E. 2008. “Mentoring, boundaries, and multiple relationships: opportunities and challenges.” Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnerships in Learning 16(1): 3–16. Bushnell, J. T. 2013. “The Heart and the Eye: How Description Can Access Emotion.” Poets & Writers Jan/Feb: 48–56. Cooperrider, D. L., and Whitney, D. 2005. Appreciative Inquiry: A Positive Revolution in Change. San Francisco, CA: Barrett-Koehler. hooks, b. 1994. Teaching to Transgress. New York, NY: Routledge. Novak, J. D. 1998. Learning, Creating and Using Knowledge: Concept Maps as Facilitative Tools in Schools and Corporations, New York, NY: Routledge. Palmer, P. J. 1997. The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher’s Life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Pantazidou, M., and Nair, I. 1999. “Ethic of Care: Guiding Principles for Engineering Teaching and Practice.” Journal of Engineering Education 88(2): 206–212. Schön, D. A. 1984. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think In Action. New York, NY: Basic Books. Tronto, J. C. 1993. Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care. New York, NY: Routledge. Vogt, E. E., Brown, J., and Isaacs, D. 2003. The Art of Powerful Questions: Cat- alyzing Insight, Innovation, and Action, Mill Valley, CA: Whole System Asso- ciates. Retrieved January 2016, from http://umanitoba.ca/admin/human_resources/ change/media/the-art-of-powerful-questions.pdf Whitehead, A. N. 1929. The Aims of Education and Other Essays. New York, NY: Free Press. Zull, J. E. 2011. From Brain to Mind: Using Neuroscience to Guide Change in Education. Sterling, VA: Stylus. INDIRA NAIR is professor emeritus of engineering and public policy and former vice provost for education at Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA. Born and brought up in India, she holds a PhD in physics from Northwestern Univer- sity and taught high school science in Pittsburgh for several years. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 5 Academic advising—formal and informal—is an emotional undertaking on the part of college faculty. Relational Advising: Acknowledging the Emotional Lives of Faculty Advisors Jennifer Snyder-Duch I came into my office early one Thursday morning. As I approached my door, I saw one of my advisees curled up sleeping in a hallway chair. She woke as I unlocked my door but didn’t acknowledge me. She picked up a book as if she simply chose this spot to study. I asked how she was doing, we made some small talk, and eventually she made her way into my office where we began to talk about her semester. As it turns out, she was deal- ing with a very difficult situation at home and feeling overwhelmed at her job and at school. Over the course of 45 minutes, we were able to identify strategies to deal with the struggles in her courses, and she seemed a little more at ease by the end of our talk. Even so, we ended by walking together to the campus counseling center, and she met with a counselor to discuss her issues at home and her self-described anxiety. As an undergraduate teacher and advisor, I had experience and training that allowed me to advise this student in some of the ways she needed. My advice related to time management strategies, approaches to studying, and writing support seemed to relieve some stress. I used my knowledge of student development theories to understand her challenges, and I assumed that my role as a caring person willing to listen helped her. Additionally, I recognized that she needed support that I was not equipped to give, so we sought out a professional counselor as well. So, essentially, this was a successful advisor–advisee interaction. What I did not think to do at the time was to acknowledge my own emotional experience. To reflect on it now, I realize that this interaction was intense for both of us. I felt drained afterward as I needed to prepare myself on the spot to respond to her needs, and quite simply, I felt sad that she was having such a difficult time. Additionally, it was time-consuming as I needed to meet with her and then spend some time afterward thinking through next steps; it was stressful to lose the time I was planning to use for something else on a typically busy work day. At the same time, I experienced NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, no. 153, Spring 2018 © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/tl.20281 55 56 TEACHING AND EMOTION positive feelings. The interaction provided a small boost to my self-esteem; I felt good at what I do for a living and satisfied that I helped someone in need. Had I thought to explore my emotions at the time, I could have been more prepared to advise this and other students in the future. Not to mention, it would have been healthier for me to process and relieve some of my own stress on that day. But it did not occur to me. Typically, professional development doesn’t address advisor self-care, and advising loads do not allow the time. Academic advising is an essential function of undergraduate faculty at many colleges and universities (NACADA 2011). An extensive advising literature extends back over four decades. The dominant paradigm is the developmental approach, which is characterized by a collaborative advisor– advisee relationship and focuses on the personal, career and academic de- velopment of the student. The literature offers advice, best practices, theory, and criticism that have contributed to the growth of academic advising as a professional practice. However, scholars have not adequately theorized about the experience of the faculty advisor, incorporated the advisor’s emo- tional response into a model, or recommended professional development strategies to manage advisors’ emotions. In this chapter, I will argue that academic advising involves a significant emotional undertaking on the part of the faculty advisor, faculty can improve their advising practice by prepar- ing for their own emotional responses and administrators can contribute to better advising practice by allowing the needed time and professional devel- opment. My experiences and most of the literature I review in the early part of this chapter focus on undergraduate advising; however, the arguments I will make about the emotional lives of advisors have resonated with my colleagues who advise graduate students as well. Approaches to Undergraduate Advising Professors approach advising from a range of professional perspectives and in a variety of contexts. For many undergraduate faculty members, aca- demic advising is a natural extension of their teaching role. For others, it is a burden and a source of frustration that takes time away from teach- ing and scholarship. Additionally, at many institutions, advising is a re- quired part of a faculty member’s workload, and even when required, the extent to which the advisor’s work is supported by the institution may vary (NACADA 2011). Even if not an official role, most professors act as infor- mal advisors for individual students who seek out advice and guidance af- ter class, during office hours, in hallway conversations, or in other informal contexts. For the past four decades, the scholarship and practice of advising have been dominated by the developmental approach. Many point to Crook- ston’s 1972 essay as introducing the concept and indicating a paradigm shift in student support in higher education. Crookston (1994) described NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl RELATIONAL ADVISING: ACKNOWLEDGING THE EMOTIONAL LIVES OF FACULTY ADVISORS 57 developmental advising as “concerned not only with a specific personal or vocational decision but also with facilitating the student’s rational pro- cesses, environmental and interpersonal interactions, behavioral awareness, and problem-solving, decision-making, and evaluation skills” (p. 5). He in- troduced the idea that advising is teaching, and further, he conceptualized advising through a constructivist lens. This was in contrast to prescriptive advising, according to Crookston, which focused on advisors disseminating information about curricula and policies and keeping records of students’ academic progress. In his recent overview, Grites (2013) affirms that devel- opmental advising is still the dominant approach. Grites (2013) summa- rizes, “[T]he developmental academic advisor gathers information to rec- ognize where the student stands along the educational, career, and personal dimensions of her or his life, discusses where the student plans to be, and assists the student in getting to that point as readily as possible” (p. 13). The focus on students’ cognitive development is reasonable to some degree; ul- timately, our goal as educators is to support students to learn. However, the literature can benefit greatly from a growing body of research that sees the student–teacher relationship as mutual and focuses on the emotional responses of teachers. The Emotional Lives of Advisors Advising can be an intense experience for faculty. It is in the role of advisor—formal or informal—that we really get to know our students. Our relationship with individual students may vary from intimate for some to relatively distant for others. But regardless of where the relationship falls on the spectrum, advising interactions are significant to faculty–student rela- tionships: they are most often dyadic and the context allows for sharing of personal stories. This is in contrast to the classroom environment, where the group dynamic does not allow teachers and students to connect in the same way and not usually for the purpose of accomplishing a student’s individual goals. The vast and rich literature on academic advising provides invaluable theoretical connections and advice for effective advising practice; however, the feelings of the advisor are rarely examined in depth. The advising literature does examine the advisor–advisee relationship (See Vianden 2016), and at times acknowledges the emotions of advisors. Ford and Ford (1989) describe the “caring attitude” required of effective advisors. According to Yarbrough (2002), “learning in higher education environment requires an ongoing process that assesses and compares the thoughts, feelings and goals of the student and the instructor/advisor” (p. 61). Ryan (1995) argued that for the advisor, the process involves the informational (understanding of curriculum and policies), conceptual (understanding of student development), and relational (ability to provide “a welcoming and non-judgmental atmosphere”) competencies (p. 40). McClellen (2014) argued that effective advising depends on developing a NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 58 TEACHING AND EMOTION trusting relationship between student and advisor. Rawlins and Rawlins (2005) provided a theoretical framework that aligns advising relationships with friendships. Drawing on a classic essay (Sheridan 1988), Kramer (2001) called on advisors to advise “with heart and mind” (p. 5). And countless articles remind advisors that students are most responsive to a warm and friendly presence. So, it’s clear that the emotional responses of faculty advisors are important to advising practice, but the literature does not adequately explain this dynamic or offer advice to advisors in managing their emotions. A growing body of research takes a relational approach to teaching and learning. This research is often rooted in Relational Cultural Theory (RCT), and if applied to advising, would help advisors to conceptualize their role in a way that more closely resembles their daily work and acknowledges the desired outcomes of advising. RCT is a human development theory that counters traditional notions that value autonomy and independence as the ultimate human experience. RCT suggests that people are at their best, not when they strive for ultimate autonomy, but when they are in healthy, growth-producing relationships (Miller and Stiver 1997). When applied to education, RCT suggests that the connections made between students and teachers can boost energy and self-esteem of both teachers and students, and in the case of students, can prepare them to overcome obstacles and contribute to academic success (Schwartz 2013; Schwartz and Holloway 2014). The relational approach is aligned with developmental advising in that they both value the interactions between advisor and advisee, use a strength-based approach to students, and focus on student growth and suc- cess rather than grades and degree completion. However, the research and professional guidance about developmental advising falls short of a rela- tional approach in its focus on developing students as independent and its limited focus on the advisor’s emotions in the advising relationship. Given the significance of advisor–advisee relationships in student suc- cess and the dominance of advising interactions in the daily lives of college faculty, it seems we need to integrate this scholarship into the advising liter- ature. Through my review of the literature and interactions with dozens of colleagues about my writing of this chapter, it is clear that even though fac- ulty will note the importance of their relationships with advisees, for most, the “job” of advising is defined by the tasks. Advising is described by ad- visors as registering for classes, filling out forms, and monitoring students’ progress through the curriculum—a largely prescriptive approach. This ap- proach undervalues and potentially renders invisible the work that faculty engage in daily. The interaction I described at the opening of this chapter was taxing and took most of my morning, and it’s important to note that it was not exceptional; for most faculty who play formal and informal advisor roles, similar interactions happen regularly. Several studies have provided valuable insight into the inner experi- ence of college teachers, and their findings provide useful perspectives for NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl RELATIONAL ADVISING: ACKNOWLEDGING THE EMOTIONAL LIVES OF FACULTY ADVISORS 59 academic advisors. Schwartz and Holloway (2017) examined faculty mem- bers’ experiences of assessing student work and found that grading involves a significant emotional investment on the part of faculty. Teachers in their study described their anger, frustration, and sadness as they assessed the work of students who are underprepared, resistant to feedback, and even combative. They also describe positive emotional responses to students whose effort, energy, and quality of work provide them with joy and satis- faction. Slater, Veach, and Li (2012), also explored the inner experience of teachers by examining countertransference in college teaching. They found that countertransference in the classroom, reactions to particular students that are caused by the teachers’ internal conflicts, most often manifested itself as intense negative thoughts and feelings toward the student or to- ward themselves. Lahtinen (2008) examined the distressing experiences of university teachers. In in-depth interviews with eight college teachers, Lahtinen identified two primary areas of distress for faculty: coping with students’ negative emotions such as hostility or disappointments and deal- ing with uncertainty or conflicting expectations between themselves and students. This line of research reveals the rigorous emotional landscape that college teachers tread. These researchers ultimately suggest that self- awareness and self-care are important to the teacher–learner relationship in higher education and can have a positive effect on student success. As Schwartz and Holloway (2017) explain, “deep reflection and attempt to un- derstand our emotional selves in the teaching context could help us to be less reactive and more intentional with student work.” Based on their findings, Schwartz and Holloway (2017) developed a model of the work of assessment that integrated the emotional labor of fac- ulty. They included two domains: visible and unseen work. This captures the idea that in addition to the explicit tasks and interactions involved in grading, faculty in the study “also revealed internal dialogues and process as they navigated their emotional, relational, and political aspects of assess- ing student work.” This seems especially relevant to the work of faculty advisors. Reflecting on the interaction I describe in the opening, the stu- dent did not come to my office for an “advising appointment,” and much of the advising “work” happened internally as I navigated a difficult emotional terrain for me in response to what was clearly an emotionally challenging time for the student. Through his extensive research on teaching and learning, Robertson (see chapter 1 of this volume) concluded that teaching is best conceptual- ized and practiced as a helping profession and central to this perspective is the inner experience of the teacher. He argued that a focus on the learner is of course critical, but in the move to learner-centered approaches, fac- ulty may neglect to recognize their own emotions. Teachers must “be aware of their own idiosyncratic experience as they attempt to help individual learners. For example, they must be aware of how they react when they meet learner resistance, when they get mad at learners, when they become NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 60 TEACHING AND EMOTION sad from learners, when they fall in love with learners, when they despise learners, when they feel guilty, when they feel threatened, and so forth” (Robertson 2001, 8). He proposed a model of systemocentrism or teacher/ learner-centeredness. “Teacher/learner-centeredness has teachers—in their role as fully human learning facilitator—attending to both their own and their students’ emotional life and the way in which they interact and in- fluence each other” (Robertson 2001, 10). The emotional lives of teachers are an often noted but rarely examined aspect of teaching and learning. As Parker Palmer (1998) wrote in The Courage to Teach, “If identity and in- tegrity are more fundamental to good teaching than technique—and if we want to grow as teachers—we must do something alien to academic culture: we must talk about our inner lives—risky stuff in a profession that fears the personal and seeks safety in the technical, the distant, the abstract” (p. 12). Rethinking the Job of Advising Faculty as Relational Advisors. Not only do faculty neglect to ac- knowledge their emotions, some professors see it as their jobs to mask their negative feelings and emphasize, and perhaps exaggerate, their positive feel- ings (Constanti and Gibbs 2004). That may make sense to some degree. For example, we may empathize with an advisee’s high level of stress or despair, and yet, we would want to model resilience and optimism. However, we may practice this habit to such a degree that it becomes internalized, and we our- selves may not reflect on our own feelings. Emotional labor is draining and time-consuming. Perhaps, we ignore our own emotional needs as teach- ers and advisors simply because we do not have the time to acknowledge them, but this masking is disruptive to our work as teachers and advisors. As Robertson (2001) explains, “Systemocentric teachers attempt to avoid allowing annoyances, fears, and guilt feelings to go unnoticed because they understand that the feelings will reveal themselves and affect the teaching learning ecology and the educational helping relationships with students whether or not the teacher is aware of them” (p. 10). Relational advisors engage in their work in ways that are intentional; they recognize their emotional responses and use them to build healthy and productive relationships with students (Snyder-Duch and Schwartz 2017). Purgason et al. (2016) provide a compelling argument that a relational ap- proach to doctoral advising will support student success by increasing advi- sor self-awareness and mutual empathy. This approach is particularly useful in decreasing the power differential in the relationship and supporting the success of students from underrepresented groups. Advisors may begin their journey toward relational advising by doing the following: • Recognize your triggers: For example, in recent years, I have worked hard to recognize how I respond to student resistance to rigorous academic NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl RELATIONAL ADVISING: ACKNOWLEDGING THE EMOTIONAL LIVES OF FACULTY ADVISORS 61 work. Student resistance frustrates me. However, I am aware of my re- sponse and it no longer catches me off guard. In fact, I feel I’ve grown to be better able to empathize with students (see chapter 2 by Schwartz and Jordan). • Notice your energy: Faculty advisors should be careful to notice their positive responses as well. Some faculty advisors may find particular joy in talking to students about their career goals, others about their research or coursework, still others about their jobs or extra-curricular activities. Recognizing and engaging in interactions that we enjoy will boost our energy and will likely have a positive effect on students. Research on in- tellectual mattering indicates that students who feel that their ideas or interests matter to a professor may engage more in learning (Schwartz 2013). It is important that these responses from advisors are authentic. The advice here is not to act interested in students; it is to notice those instances in which we are truly energized by our interactions. “Recogniz- ing the occurrences that most invigorate us and our advisees and inten- tionally engaging in those interactions—rather than letting them pass by in order to finish a task—can have positive effects on student success” (Snyder-Duch and Schwartz 2017). • Learn from colleagues: Seek guidance in recognizing and managing emo- tional challenges prevalent in teaching. For example, read relevant re- search and published advice from teaching and learning scholars. Refer to chapters and references in this volume on anger, empathy, joy, and burnout—as well as stressful contexts such as institutional betrayal. Con- fide intentionally in trusted colleagues and share experiences in order to recognize your own patterns and responses. Institutional Support. In today’s higher education environment, in which institutions are called on to be more and more accountable to students and parents, some see academic advising as critical to student success. As Hunter and White (2004) explain, “Academic advising, well de- veloped and appropriately accessed, is perhaps the only structured campus endeavor that can guarantee students sustained interaction with a caring and concerned adult who can help them shape such an experience” (p. 21). Research supports the notion that advisor–advisee relationships can pos- itively affect students’ connection to their institutions and their academic success (Drake 2011; Light 2001; Vianden 2016; Vianden and Barlow 2015; Young-Jones et al. 2013). At the same time, Aiken-Wisniewski et al. (2015) found that advisors reported a lack of professionalism in academic advising with no standardization of tasks and limited recognition as a profession. A NACADA survey (2011) found that faculty and professional advisors re- ported a lack of recognition and lack of needed professional development. This is a significant problem considering the value of advising for student growth and degree completion. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 62 TEACHING AND EMOTION The lack of institutional attention to academic advising, despite its pos- itive impact on student success and retention, is arguably a result of the current trend in higher education characterized by a radical move toward accountability. Some refer to this as the corporatization of higher educa- tion. At many institutions, faculty are required to account for their time in concrete ways, so daily schedules are filled, even overloaded, and fac- ulty spend hours using a number of different methods documenting their output, reporting on how they spend their time (Berg and Seeber 2016). Ef- fective teaching and advising involve thinking and planning, as well as pro- cessing of the emotional ups and downs of faculty. As Katie Hogan (2017) describes the current academic environment, “There is simply insufficient time to do the work of program and department planning, ‘slow’ teaching, curriculum innovation, research and publication, mentoring of students and untenured faculty, and all the other forms of service associated with university and college workplaces” (p. 255). If we measure the outcome of academic advising as the number of students who register for the correct classes each semester, we are not counting the hours of labor that make up an advisor’s job. Nor are we acknowledging the knowledge and skill sets needed to be an effective advisor. The primary work of advising becomes invisible. My years of experience as an undergraduate advisor and my explo- ration of the literature have revealed that institutional support is critical to good advising and good advising is critical to student success. Administra- tors can provide support by doing the following: • Provide regular and effective professional development, and be sure that it includes learning about relational advising, in addition to the focus on registration and record-keeping. • Consider the unseen work (Schwartz and Holloway 2017) of faculty ad- visors in workload policies. For example, take into account the fact that a number of students (formal and informal advisees) will face crises or achieve successes that will require time interacting with their advisors, such as the student in my opening. Not all students will require hours of attention each week, but a few students will. Two or three such in- teractions can amount to a day’s work each week, on top of regular tasks of advising all our students. This unseen work may be particu- larly heavy for female faculty and all faculty of color (see chapter 7 by Linh Hua). • Recognize and reward good advising: In addition to awards and pub- lic announcements of appreciation—which are important—demonstrate commitment to good advising through adequate compensation, in- clusion in tenure and promotion criteria, and consideration in per- formance reviews. And further, evaluate good advising based on relational practice, not only administrative tasks, curriculum instruction, and registration. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl RELATIONAL ADVISING: ACKNOWLEDGING THE EMOTIONAL LIVES OF FACULTY ADVISORS 63 • Include students in decision-making about advising policies and prac- tices (Vianden 2016). Conclusion Being a good advisor is not about our “game face,” or feigning enthusiasm for our students’ interests and experiences. Relational advising is a way of being for many teachers and advisors. It is accepting and responsibly adapt- ing to the fact that the job of a teacher is fundamentally about our relation- ships with students, and this is especially true in the advising context. In the Higher Education Advocate, Harriet Schwartz and I argue that, “We (and our institutions) must avoid seeing ourselves solely or primarily as a con- tent expert and authority, or even as a coach or guide to academic success. Rather, we acknowledge our role in the relationship as collaborator and rec- ognize the significance of our relationship, not just our advice, in advisees’ college experience” (Snyder-Duch and Schwartz 2017). We can’t predict every circumstance that we may face when advising students on a daily basis, in formal and informal settings. However, by re- flecting on our experience as teachers and advisors, we can make ourselves aware of the emotional triggers and biases that present themselves in our own teacher–student/advisor–advisee relationships. This level of informed self-awareness will improve our performance as teachers and advisors. Logic would suggest and research supports the notion that teaching is an emo- tional endeavor and there are patterns to our emotional reactions. Circum- stances that cause us frustration, stress, fear, and anger are certainly worth our attention. In addition, acknowledging the types of interactions or stu- dent behaviors that bring us joy and satisfaction can improve our effective- ness as teachers and advisors. References Aiken-Wisniewski, S. A., Larson, J., Johnson, A., and Barkemeyer, J. 2015. “A Prelimi- nary Report of Advisor Perceptions of Advising and of A Profession.” NACADA Journal 35(2): 60–70. Berg, M. and Seeber, B. K. 2016. The Slow Professor: Challenging the Culture of Speed in the Academy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Constanti, P., and Gibbs, P. 2004. “Higher Education Teachers and Emotional Labour.” International Journal of Educational Management 18(4): 243–249. Crookston, B. B. 1994. “A Developmental View of Academic Advising as Teaching.” NACADA Journal 14(2): 5–9. (Reprinted from Journal of College Student Personnel, 1972, 13: 12–17). Drake, J. K. 2011. “The Role of Academic Advising in Student Retention and Persis- tence.” About Campus 16(3): 8–12. Ford, J., and Ford, S. S. 1989. “A Caring Attitude and Academic Advising.” National Academic Advising Journal 9(2): 43–48. Grites, T. J. 2013. “Developmental Academic Advising: A 40-Year Context.” NACADA Journal 33(1): 5–15. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 64 TEACHING AND EMOTION Hogan, K. 2017. “The Academic Slow Lane: Creating Alternative Professional Identi- ties.” In Staging Academic Women’s Lives, edited by M. Massé and N. Bauer-Maglin. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Hunter, M. S. and White, E. R. 2004. “Could Academic Advising Fix Higher Education?” About Campus 9(1): 20–25. Kramer, G. L. 2001. “The Light Within Us: Advising with Heart and Mind.” NACADA Journal 21(1&2): 5–7. Lahtinen, A. M. 2008. “University Teachers’ Views on the Distressing Elements of Ped- agogical Interaction.” Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 52(5): 481–493. Light, R. J. 2001. Making The Most of College: Students Speak Their Minds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. McLellan, J. L. 2014. “Developing Trusting Relationships in Academic Advising: A Review of the Literature with Recommendations for Practices.” The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal. Accessed June 28, 2016. https://dus.psu.edu/mentor/ 2014/11/developing-trusting-relationships-academic-advising-lit-review/. Miller, J. B., and Stiver, I. P. 1997. The Healing Connection: How Women Form Relationships in Therapy And In Life. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. NACADA. 2011. “National Survey on Academic Advising.” NACADA Clearinghouse of Academic Advising Resources. Retrieved July 2, 2016 from http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/ Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/2011-NACADA-National-Survey.aspx Palmer, P. J. 1998. The Courage to Teach: Exploring The Inner Landscape of a Teacher’s Life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Purgason, L. L., Avent, J. R., Cashwell, C. S., Jordan, M. E., and Reese, R. F. 2016. “Cul- turally Relevant Advising: Applying Relational-Cultural Theory in Counselor Educa- tion.” Journal of Counseling & Development 94(4): 429–36. Rawlins, W. K., and Rawlins, S. P. 2005. “Academic Advising as Friendship.” NACADA Journal 25(2): 10–19. Robertson, D. R. 2001. “Beyond Learner-Centeredness: Close Encounters of the Syste- mocentric Kind.” Journal of Staff, Program, & Organizational Development 18(1): 7–13. Ryan, C. C. 1995. “Professional Development and Training for Faculty Advisers.” New Directions for Teaching and Learning 62(1): 35–42. Schwartz, H. L. 2013. “Dinner at Fitzwilly’s: Intellectual Mattering in Developmental Re- lationships.” In Sixth Annual Mentoring Conference: Impact and Effectiveness of Devel- opmental Relationships N. Dominguez. and Y. Gandert. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico. Schwartz, H. L. and Holloway, E. L. 2014. “ ‘I Become a Part of the Learning Process:’ Mentoring Episodes and Individualized Attention in Graduate Education.” Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2014.882604. Schwartz, H. L., and Holloway, E. L. 2017. “Assessing Graduate Student Work: An Emo- tional Relational Perspective.” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching 28(2): 29–59. Sheridan, H. 1988. “The Compleat Professor.” AAHE Bulletin 41(4): 3–7. Slater, R., Veach, P. M., and Li, Z. 2012. “Recognizing and Managing Countertransference in the College Classroom: An Exploration of Expert Teachers’ Inner Experiences.” Innovative Higher Education 38: 3–17. Snyder-Duch, J., and Schwartz, H. L. “Relational Advising.” Higher Education Advocate, September 2017, pp. 8–11. Vianden, J. 2016. “The Ties That Bind: Academic Advisors as Agents of Student Relationship Management.” NACADA Journal 36(1): 19–29. Vianden, J., and Barlow, P. J. 2015. “Strengthen the Bond: Relationships Between Aca- demic Advising Quality and Undergraduate Student Loyalty.” NACADA Journal 35(2): 15–27. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl RELATIONAL ADVISING: ACKNOWLEDGING THE EMOTIONAL LIVES OF FACULTY ADVISORS 65 Yarbrough, D. 2002. “The Engagement Model for Effective Academic Advising with Undergraduate College Students and Student Organizations.” Journal of Humanistic Counseling, Education and Development 41(1): 61–68. Young-Jones, A. D., Burt, T. D., Dixon, S., and Hawthorne, M. J. 2013. “Academic Ad- vising: Does It Really Impact Student Success?” Quality Assurance in Education: An International Perspective 21(1): 7–19. JENNIFER SNYDER-DUCH, PhD, is an associate professor and chair of the commu- nication department at Carlow University in Pittsburgh, PA. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 6 This chapter examines the emotional experience of teachers who are designing courses for digital learning environments. Recommendations for gaining confidence and coping with the emotional stress of rethinking a course for online learning are addressed. Online Education and the Emotional Experience of the Teacher Judi Puritz Cook As someone who has been teaching online and blended courses for over 15 years, I’ve experienced my own emotional journey of highs and lows in the virtual classroom. In the beginning it was mostly lows (dissatisfaction, lack of confidence, frustration). I struggled to find a way to make the ex- perience satisfying for me and for my students. Eventually I learned to cre- ate online learning environments (OLEs) that elicited more positive emo- tions (rejuvenation, pride, and even joy). My early work in online teaching environments coincided with my first few years in the profession; I was one of the first faculty members at my institution to teach online. As my digital teaching skills evolved, so too did my career. I was promoted to associate and then full professor, teaching a mix of face-to-face, blended, and online courses. I found such satisfaction with the integration of digi- tal tools for teaching and learning that I began accepting alternate assign- ments to work with other faculty who were transforming their classes for online learning. Two years ago, I left my faculty position at Salem State University (Salem, MA) to work full-time helping others redesign their courses. In my position of Director of Instructional Design at The Col- lege of New Jersey (TCNJ in Ewing, NJ), I’ve guided over fifty faculty members through redesign and launch of courses for blended and online instruction. When working with faculty, my goal is to set them up for success and provide support that meets their specific needs. Some don’t ask for a lot of assistance, or require only skill-based help (How do I embed video? How do I use the grading tools?). Others have more pedagogical questions (How do I get students to engage more? How can I ask better discussion board questions? What assessments work best?). The majority of faculty seek a NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, no. 153, Spring 2018 © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/tl.20282 67 68 TEACHING AND EMOTION sounding board to discuss their challenges and concerns about the online teaching environment. I help them map out a plan for course redesign, and then I guide them through the process of building, launching, and assessing their blended or online courses. Our partnership spans several months and includes group meetings with others going through the same training. The product is never quite finished, in that the courses we develop evolve over time. In this chapter, I will highlight the early experiences of faculty navigat- ing online educational environments based on an exploratory survey that was administered to faculty at TCNJ who participated in a professional de- velopment program to redesign their face-to-face courses for blended and online learning. Recommendations for gaining confidence and coping with the emotional stress of rethinking a course for online learning will be ad- dressed at two main stages in the process: course planning and post-course reflection. Moving Beyond the Learner Early research on emotion and online learning tends to focus primarily on the emotional state of learners (See Artino 2009, 2012; Cleveland-Innes and Campbell 2012; Conrad 2002; Daniels and Stupnisky 2012; Kort, Reilly, and Picard 2001; Marchand and Guitierrez 2012; Meyer and Jones 2012; Noteborn et al. 2012; O’Regan 2003; Richardson and Swan 2003; Zemby- las 2008). The instructor experience is considered less frequently. A no- table exception comes from Regan et al. (2012), who examine the emotions of online instructors through a series of focus groups. Instructors experi- enced negative emotions (being restricted, stressed, undervalued) as well as positive emotions (feeling rejuvenated, proud, connected). Interestingly, teacher challenges were different based on the type of class as well as the instructor’s level of experience in online education. Those teaching asyn- chronous courses reported concerns with lack of student feedback, while faculty teaching synchronous courses had concerns on student learning and engagement. Faculty members with more experience in teaching OLEs found it more satisfying than those who were new to the process (Regan, et al. 2012). This finding is encouraging, as it suggests that instructors can develop ways to make the online teaching experience more satisfying just by going through the struggle. It is clear that faculty who step outside of their physical class- room and enter a digital one take a risk, and that risk can lead to negative emotions such as frustration and dissatisfaction. These feelings are unavoid- able and even required in order to foster innovation. Transitioning to more positive feelings begins with strong faculty sup- port at the institutional level. Wickersham and McElhany (2010) offer rec- ommendations to build institutional support for digital learning in the form of faculty training, student preparation, “just in time” course support, and NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl ONLINE EDUCATION AND THE EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCE OF THE TEACHER 69 other initiatives designed to set faculty and students up for success. When faculty feel supported, they can move “ . . . beyond the mechanics of online course development to a focus on the curriculum and quality instruction,” (p. 10). Finding a Digital Comfort Zone Though Course Planning In 2014, more than one in four U.S. college students took a distance ed- ucation course with some portion of the content delivered online (Allen and Seaman 2016). Understanding pathways to successful teaching and learning online is critical, even beyond consideration of courses specifi- cally identified as online or hybrid. According to a 2014 Educause study (Dahlstrom, Brooks and Bichsel), 99% of higher education institutions in the United States have a Learning Management System (LMS) in place. Sixty percent of faculty indicated that an LMS is “critical” to teaching. For all learning environments, instructors and students need to be able access, evaluate, and disseminate digital information. For some, this dig- ital literacy comes naturally. For others, the integration of technology into everyday teaching and learning scenarios can be fraught with fear and frustration. If something doesn’t go as planned in the traditional, face-to-face class- room (a network connection that fails, a web site that doesn’t load), an in- structor can switch gears and initiate plan B. But a backup plan is not as easy to implement in an online environment. The unique challenges of teach- ing an online course magnify the emotional responses—both positive and negative—that instructors experience. Minimizing the stress begins with allotting sufficient time for course planning. Best practices in the area of course planning stress that the redesign of a blended or online course requires adequate preparation time, and that one key to success is doing the course building several months ahead of course launch (Muramatsu and Ludgate et al. 2014; University of Central Florida, n.d.). There are several challenges to consider here, the first simply being the nature of academic course schedules. At many institutions, the schedule is set several semesters in advance. This may mean that a blended or online course will need to be scheduled before a faculty member has even started to plan—and then the clock starts ticking. In addition, faculty often develop a blended or online course while simultaneously tending to a number of other professional responsibilities. This adds to the challenge of providing time to build a course. That said, it becomes difficult to answer the question, “How much time?” as workload varies from person to person and institution to institution. Perhaps a better question is “How can I use course planning time to increase my satisfaction with teaching in a digital environment?” The ex- periences of TCNJ faculty may shed some light on what was perceived as valuable during the course planning process. Faculty who sign up for NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 70 TEACHING AND EMOTION blended and online course redesign at TCNJ begin the planning process many months in advance of course launch. The following findings are based on self-reports from twenty-three faculty members who participated in the training and went on to teach a blended or online course. All faculty took part in individual face-to-face meetings, group face-to-face meetings, and online work where the instructors became online students. All faculty were introduced to the Quality Matters Rubric (http://qualitymatters.org) as a tool for self-evaluation. When asked to evaluate the importance of specific training activi- ties, the individual face-to-face meetings earned the highest score. Nine- teen of the twenty-three faculty (86.36%) ranked the one-on-one consul- tations as “very important” to the course design process. One participant noted: "The individual mentoring which occurred was very valuable as it gave an opportunity for questions specific to designing a course for spe- cific disciplines specialized attention.” In addition to having a mentor as a critical element in the course planning process, two other factors stood out as highly important: (1) pedagogical rethinking of the course and (2) learning best practices in education. Both elements scored “very impor- tant” among 73.9% of the instructors who participated in the study: “I did not know what an online course ‘looked like’ before taking this training. Thus, I had no idea how to translate my lecture-bases class into an online setting.” Group meetings were less valued (only 27.6% reported this to be “very important,” with three respondents indicating they were “not at all im- portant”). One faculty member noted, “At the larger sessions, I felt very much behind the others.” Of least value to the participants was the Qual- ity Matters self-review conducted just prior to launch. Although deemed “very important” by six respondents (26.09%), it was not viewed to be vital to course planning for the majority of the participants. That said, none of the participants had specific complaints about the tool. At least one participant credited the Quality Matters rubric with helping to for- mulate course objectives in all courses, not just the blended or online ones. Similarly, almost all of the respondents indicated that the work of re- designing a course for digital learning had a positive impact on their face- to-face courses: “The training affirmed some pedagogical principles that I already value, and added new tools that I hope to incorporate more fully in the future.” For faculty teaching in a blended environment, many re- ported better utilization of all face-to-face time (i.e., flipped classroom mod- els). Similarly, some faculty indicated that they now offer additional options for students in their face-to-face courses to participate, such as online dis- cussions. For others, the influence came in the kinds of feedback they are able to provide for their face-to-face students. One participant wrote, “I’ve thought more about the kind of feedback I want to give to writing assign- ments in all of my classes.” NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl ONLINE EDUCATION AND THE EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCE OF THE TEACHER 71 Emotional Reactions to Teaching in a Digital Environment After going through the course redesign process, faculty who participated in the faculty development program went on to teach their newly designed blended or online courses for the first time. I asked them a series of ques- tions about their individual emotional experiences in the digital classroom. To my surprise, enjoyment was the highest reported emotion. Enjoyment was also the only emotion experienced at least “sometimes” by the entire group. In fact, more than half of the participants indicated that they fre- quently experienced this emotion in the online teaching environment. As one faculty member observed, “It was a new way of teaching for me, so it provided some excitement that is different from teaching in the same for- mat year after year.” Pride and hope were close for second and third place, suggesting that positive emotional responses were the dominant ones expe- rienced by the faculty most of the time. In considering less positive reactions such as frustration and disap- pointment, faculty reported “experienced sometimes” (73.91% and 60.87%, respectively). While not as frequent as the more positive emotional expe- riences, these were the emotions that respondents elaborated on the most in the open-ended questions of the survey. In fact, more than half of the open-ended comments on the subject of emotion included details about frustration: “Sadly, I would say that the emotion I experienced the most was frustration. When I needed to accomplish something and just couldn’t get it to work for one reason or another. I became frustrated with the amount of time it took to accomplish something that was seemingly simple.” This was sometimes contrasted with experiences in the face-to-face classroom, where challenges are easier to handle: “I felt that mistakes that I made were hard to fix easily and quickly. In a face-to-face environment there is always the next class to say, ‘here’s something we didn’t get to’, or ‘I’d like to follow up on a comment that someone made in the last class.’ I don’t know how you do this in an online environment.” For a number of faculty, the differences between the face-to-face class- room and the digital environment had to do with feeling a loss of control: “I know what I’m doing in a face-to-face environment, can think on my feet and change things if it isn’t working. I didn’t feel as if I have as much ‘in the moment control’ over the online environment.” Such a finding makes sense when we consider the shift in responsibility for both the teacher and the learner in the online environment. As Regan et al. (2012) note, the instruc- tor’s shift from “knowledge transmitter” to “knowledge facilitator” places more responsibility on students for their own learning. We do give up a certain degree of control on our way to building pathways that connect stu- dents to the course content and to each other. Knowing what faculty were feeling in OLEs is important, but so too is knowing what they were not feeling. In terms of emotions not experi- enced at all, faculty identified emotions such as loneliness (73.91%), anger NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 72 TEACHING AND EMOTION (60.87%), and fear (56.52%). Further, for this group, positive emotions by far outweighed negative ones: “Positive emotions dominated my experi- ence, despite the frustration and disappointment—mostly related to con- cern that some students’ failure to engage had to do with shortcomings in the design I had created. Positive effects mostly surrounded delight and surprise about the ways that students engaged with the course material and with each other, and pride that I had created a platform that allowed and encouraged them to do that.” It makes sense that faculty can experience pride and satisfaction after witnessing their work in action. Given the generally positive experience reported by the faculty who participated in this study, it is not surprising that almost all of the partici- pants indicated that they would teach in a digital environment again. For faculty teaching in the blended format, fourteen reported they would do it again, with only one indicating they would not. For those teaching online, seven would do it again, with one not answering the question. One faculty member found the online experience added an important dimension to class communication: “Students get to engage in the material in several different ways. They also take more responsibility for their learning and I think that process helps them in other aspects of life. Discussions were more fruitful because students had time to really think about and craft their responses, whereas sometimes in face-to-face classes, time and anxiety can get in the way of students fully expressing their views.” Such a perspective is in line with Gilmore and Warren’s ethnographic study of virtuality as a means of communicative exchange (Gilmore and Warren 2007, 24). As Gilmore and Warren explain, OLEs have “ . . . the potential to engage students and tutors in more creative, complex, and/or critical thinking than would otherwise be evident in the classroom setting.” Student engagement and interaction are key ingredients to learning (Dixson 2015; Fink 2013). In an editorial on distance education written in 1989, Moore delineated three categories for interaction: student to content, student to instructor, and student to student. Although he conceptualized this framework over 25 years ago, it still has value as a starting point in conversations about instructional design. Recommendations from the Faculty As a final survey question, faculty were asked to give advice to others who might be planning on teaching a blended or online course for the first time. More than half of the recommendations pointed to the need to bud- get significant time for course planning: “Plan ahead, take your estimated prep[aration] time and double it,” wrote one instructor. A similar com- ment suggested that the additional preparation time fades upon subsequent semesters, perhaps as the course evolves or as the faculty member becomes more confident. This person advises, “Plan well ahead and begin creating content long before. It takes a lot more planning and a lot more effort than NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl ONLINE EDUCATION AND THE EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCE OF THE TEACHER 73 teaching a regular class, at least at the beginning.” And for anyone who likes to procrastinate, don’t: “It’s a procrastinator’s dream, because unlike a face- to-face course, if you wait on the online course it’ll be a total disaster. This sounds negative, but I’m really thankful for the ‘deadline’ that the online course provides.” As mentioned earlier in this chapter, faculty who participated in the course development program came to the process with varying levels of comfort in using technology. A number of respondents addressed this is- sue in their final piece of advice, calling for the need to put the pedagogy ahead of the technology: “Use the tech[nology] to the extent that you feel comfortable. Don’t try something fancy but unnecessary.” Still others iden- tified the value of viewing the new course as a work in progress: “Start with a basic course and then add more sophisticated components in future iterations.” In summary, as you continue to build that work in progress, allow your- self to make mistakes. Find other people in your department, across your institution, or through your professional memberships who are willing to brainstorm with you about teaching and learning. Seek out training on soft- ware or hardware that could evolve your digital content. You may decide that teaching online is not right for you, but at least you’ll be making an informed decision. Conclusion Teaching in a digital environment is complicated by the fact that we are al- ways chasing a moving target. We can get to a place that feels comfortable, only to discover evolutions that require us to reevaluate—changes in soft- ware, hardware, and even laws and regulations. Viewing your adoption of digital technologies as a work in progress is key. There is always more to learn and more to try. At the start of the training process, my plan for helping faculty was largely based on my own experiences. The process has been a learning op- portunity for me, too. I’ve since revised the training to better meet the needs of disciplines that are not specifically in my wheelhouse. For example, I re- alized during my first training group that I needed to have a wider range of approaches for faculty working in the hard sciences as my background in so- cial sciences had not exposed me to some of the challenges unique to those teaching math or physics. I also discovered I have a lot in common with my colleagues in the education field—a development that has led to a number of rewarding collaborations with individual faculty members as well as the TCNJ Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning. My biggest “ah ha” moment came when I realized how energizing it is to engage in conversa- tions about teaching and learning. I am grateful for the opportunities for reflection that this work has provided. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 74 TEACHING AND EMOTION References Allen, I. E., Seaman, J., Poulin, R., and Straut, T. T. 2016. Online Report card: Tracking Online Education in the United States. Accessed December 19, 2016. https://onlinelearningconsortium.org/read/online-report-card-tracking-online- education-united-states-2015/. Artino, A. R. 2009. “Think, Feel, Act: Motivational and Emotional Influences on Military Students’ Online Academic Success.” Journal of Computing in Higher Education 21: 146–166. Artino, A. R. 2012. “Emotions in Online Learning Environments: Introduction to the Special Issue.” Internet and Higher Education 15(3): 137–140. Cleveland-Innes, M., and Campbell, P. 2012. “Emotional Presence, Learning, and the Online Learning Environment.” The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 13(4): 269–292. Accessed December 19, 2016. http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1234/2347. Conrad, D. 2002. “Engagement, Excitement, Anxiety, and Fear: Learners’ Experience of Starting an Online Course.” American Journal of Distance Education 16(4): 205–226. Dahlstrom, E., Brooks, D. C., and Bichsel, J. 2014. The Current Ecosystem of Learning Management Systems in Higher Education: Student, Faculty, and IT Perspectives. Accessed December 19, 2016. https://www.educause.edu/sites/default/ files/library/presentations/ELI16/MTG11/ECAR+LMS+report.pdf. Daniels, L. M., and Stupnisky, R. H. 2012. “Not That Different in Theory: Discussing the Control-Value Theory of Emotions in Online Learning Environments.” Internet and Higher Education 15(3): 222–226. Dixson, M. D. 2015. “Measuring Student Engagement in the Online Course: The Online Student Engagement Scale (OSE).” Online Learning 19(4): 1–15. Fink, L. D. Creating Significant Learning Experiences (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2013. Gilmore, S., and Warren, S. 2007. “Emotion Online: Experiences of Teaching in a Virtual Learning Environment.” Human Relations 60(4): 581–608. Kort, B., Reilly, R., and Picard, R. 2001. “An Affective Model of Interplay Between Emotions and Learning: Reengineering Educational Pedagogy—Building a Learning Companion.” Paper presented at the International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), Madison, WI, August. Marchand, G. C., and Gutierrez, A. P. 2012. “The Role of Emotion in the Learning Pro- cess: Comparisons Between Online and Face-To-Face Learning Settings.” Internet and Higher Education 15(3): 150–160. Meyer, K. A., and Jones, S. J. 2012. “Do Students Experience ‘Social Intelligence,’ Laugh- ter, and Other Emotions Online?” Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 16(4): 99–111. Moore, M. 1989. “Three Types of Interaction.” The American Journal of Distance Educa- tion 3(2): 1–6. Muramatsu, B., Ludgate, H., Adams Becker, S., Caswell, T., Jensen, M., Ulrich, G., and Wray, E. 2014. Online Course Design Guide. Accessed December 19, 2016. http://dltoolkit.mit.edu/. Noteborn, G., Carbonell, K. B., Dailey-Hebert, A., and Gijselaers, W. 2012. “The Role of Emotions and Task Significance in Virtual Education.” Internet and Higher Education 15(3): 176–183. O’Regan, K. 2003. “Emotion and e-Learning.” Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7(3): 78–92. Regan, K., Evmenova, A., Baker, P., Jerome, M. K., Spencer, V., Lawson, H., and Werner, T. 2012. “Experiences of Instructors in Online Learning Environments: Identifying and Regulating Emotions.” Internet and Higher Education 15(3): 204–212. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl ONLINE EDUCATION AND THE EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCE OF THE TEACHER 75 Richardson, J. C., and Swan, K. 2003. “Examining Social Presence in Online Courses in Relation to Students’ Perceived Learning and Satisfaction.” Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7(1): 68–88. University of Central Florida. Building Your Course, n.d. Accessed October 3, 2016. https://blended.online.ucf.edu/process/building-your-course/. Wickersham, L. E., and McElhany, J. A. 2010. “Bridging the Divide: Reconciling Ad- ministrator and Faculty Concerns Regarding Online Education.” Quarterly Review of Distance Education 11(1): 1–12. Zembylas, M. 2008. “Adult Learners’ Emotions in Online Learning.” Distance Education 29(1): 71–87. JUDI PURITZ COOK, PhD, is director of the Office of Instructional Design at The College of New Jersey. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 7 This chapter examines the affective lives of women of color faculty in university and classroom conditions that entail competing emotional labor. Slow Feeling and Quiet Being: Women of Color Teaching in Urgent Times Linh U. Hua Tuesday morning I’ve moved things around to make myself available for additional office hours. While I wait for students to arrive, I place Power Point slides of course lessons online, prepare a midterm study guide, and revise the reading questions because some students have complained that they “do not make sense.” The three students that I made a special effort to be available for do not show up. One student just emailed to ask if I could let him know ASAP if I could reschedule. When I leave for another obliga- tion, I run into a colleague who tells me that she makes the same effort but students still comment on teaching evaluations that she is unavailable, not caring, and puts little effort into teaching. I tell her about revising the read- ing questions, and she is surprised. Her students in the math department complain that she makes the math confusing. The next day, I begin class and in the middle of my first sentence, a stu- dent raises her hand to ask an off-topic question: what’s on the midterm? It is the same student that asked at the beginning of the last class meeting, “What are we doing today?” A student stays after class to say that we are talking too much activism and she wants to learn more about the experience of women of color. She wants to know what it’s like to be an immigrant, but she feels that the readings and lectures on women immigrants organizing for better pay is more about politics than about the women’s lives. At my office, I receive an email from a student who feels that course content is biased and she feels she cannot relate to the content because it is too an- tagonistic. She doesn’t know anyone who believes that immigrant women should be exploited for their labor. She asks whether these ideas will be on the midterm, because she doesn’t agree with them. I get another email from a student who says he is enjoying the class, but he thinks it focuses too much on negative elements and is producing a stereotype of immigrant women as downtrodden. He wants to know if I have read essay X because NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, no. 153, Spring 2018 © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/tl.20283 77 78 TEACHING AND EMOTION he thinks it would be useful to me. I respond to tell him that essay X is already on the syllabus, please see week 7. The scenario above is a composite of the daily experiences of many women of color faculty, some of whom have published analyses of these in- teractions from the framework of intersectional theory (Crenshaw 1991), a perspective that argues that multiple elements of our identity combine to create complex forms of oppression and discrimination. In cases where the identity factors on their own already sustain unequal treatment (race and gender, for instance), the presence of both factors (such as the case for women of color) combine to qualitatively change the experience of each of the separate categories. This qualitative shift has been theorized as “com- pounded” oppression (Crenshaw 1991) and as a “matrix of domination” (Collins 2000), concepts that insist on the intricate relationship between different identity factors. In fact, the experience of women of color cannot be understood as simply an issue of gender or race, but must be under- stood as the collective pressures—as the intersection—of both. Addition- ally, class and sexuality can function as markers of privilege for heterosex- ual and middle-class women of color, dividing those with class and sexual privilege from working class and non-heterosexual women of color. The composite narrative illustrates the ways that women of color fac- ulty experience structural and cultural biases in the mundane business of work in the academy. These biases manifest as inappropriate interpersonal dynamics that are isolated incidents, but they make up a large part of day- to-day interaction for women of color faculty. Even more, these interactions with students are exacerbated by direct and indirect antagonism from col- leagues, as this chapter explains. The upshot of the constant demands on our time, our patience, and our professionalism without regard to our wel- fare is that the health and success of women of color in the academy suffers. This essay identifies two aspects of that day-to-day experience as the prac- tice and habit of pacing grace and the outcome and effect of vibrancy fatigue. In the compulsory habit to pace grace, women of color are responding to a host of contrary pressures. Their research, teaching, and activism have few boundaries and are seen as less valuable to the academy and to their respective disciplines. This is exacerbated by the fact that scholarship that interrogates the biases women of color face is assessed as extended “service” rather than as serious scholarship. The affective lives of women faculty of color in the university class- room and in academia weighs heavily in the assessment of these faculty qualitatively and quantitatively. Holding this part of academia as tangential to the life of the university obscures the fact that women of color faculty over-function without compensation, and contribute to university opera- tions. Given the extent to which affective presentation factors into their professional evaluation by students, colleagues, and administrators, this chapter explores grace as material scaffolding for a critical “redistribution of affective labor” (Maese-Cohen 2017) in diversity work that supports the NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl SLOW FEELING AND QUIET BEING: WOMEN OF COLOR TEACHING IN URGENT TIMES 79 retention of women of color faculty as whole and valuable members of the university community. In the professional lives of women of color, grace is a vital reframing of slow feeling and quiet being—a state of affective rest and authentic expression—that preserves the self in response to a simul- taneity of competing emotions and obligations and to a state of constant scrutiny. The definition draws on Audre Lorde’s 1984 formulation of the erotic, which emphasizes authenticity to ourselves and our desires, “a re- source within each of us that lies in a deeply female and spiritual plane, firmly rooted in the power of our unexpressed or unrecognized feeling” (Lorde 1984). “The erotic is not a question of what we do,” writes Lorde, “It is a question of how acutely and fully we can feel in the doing.” As a starting point for understanding grace as a state of authentic af- fect or expression, Lorde’s concept of the erotic emphasizes the importance of vulnerability to the self. Yet, grace is not a state or practice available to women of color given the myriad demands and resistance they face daily. Women of color faculty meet or exceed teaching, publishing, and service demands while they also manage the cumulative impact of professional vi- brancy in ways not explicitly or implicitly required of others (Gutiérrez, et al. 2012; Mountz et al. 2015). This chapter centers their scholarship and experiences to demonstrate that grace for women faculty of color is far from a state of immunity or mercy, but instead a necessary orientation account- able to structural and cultural pressures that are uniquely theirs (Gutiérrez et al. 2012). As women of color faculty struggle to inhabit and practice some semblance of intentional health, the university would do well to reorganize its structural mandate to not only include women faculty of color but to take care that they stay, in order that their necessary contributions amass. Pacing Grace Re-assessment of the relationship between passion and urgency is required as we deliberate the value of slow feeling and quiet being to the affective lives of women of color faculty in their attempts to negotiate vastly con- trary expectations, find a comfortable center, and effectively pace grace—a practice referred to by academic feminists as “resilience” (Beetham 2013). As university faculty, women of color occupy the affective nexus of a lived contradiction, where their status in the university classroom as professor implies social and cultural power, while their identity in the classroom as woman of color leaves them vulnerable to existing cultural biases. Embody- ing both race and gender transgression, women of color faculty in a class- room feels dangerous, despite the lack of cultural power that they possess as a group. University culture requires women of color to make constant negotiations that contribute to feelings of (un)belonging and conditional belonging that have negative effects on physical and psychological health. As the persistent “new” on campus despite the duration of their status as academic faculty, or even, as is the case in Engineering, when the number NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 80 TEACHING AND EMOTION of African American and Latina women professors has increased (Decuir- Gunby, Long-Mitchell, and Grant 2009), women of color faculty continue to experience isolation and un-belonging palpable enough for students of color to register. As institutional allies to social minorities, women of color occupy a unique affective bind when expectations of semblance are disappointed to meet the goals of transformative teaching and learning (hooks 1994), a ped- agogical philosophy that encourages students to transgress the boundaries of dominant paradigms in their thinking and practice. Use of a pedagogy of discomfort (Boler 1999) that forces students to reflect on their personal attachments to privileges and outcomes, leaves these same faculty open to charges of poor or biased lesson-planning, incoherence, antagonism, and disrespect, charges that are symptomatic of a deep cultural distrust of women of color. “[I]t seemed pointless and not relevant,” shares a student. “I hope Chang realizes how much of a turn off her teaching style is for the open minded and liberal student” (Chang 2012, 198). These charges can have material effect on the job security and promotion of women of color faculty, where slippage between reality and performance in the minds of stu- dents results in statements of irresponsible, hostile, or “random” teaching, while white male professors employing the same pedagogical strategies are likely to be recognized as courageous, innovative, and “radical” (Zembylas and McGlynn 2012). Power and authority for women of color is elusive and not entirely gained through professional competence or faculty status. Frequently, help- ing students to develop critical tools to identify systemic inequities does not translate to students’ consciousness of their own hegemonic biases. Stu- dents, in fact, are not shy about asking other faculty to validate what women of color faculty teach (de la Riva-Holly 2012; Harlow 2003; Williams 1991). While interactions between women of color faculty and white, often male, students and colleagues have been studied, fraught scenarios also emerge within the intricacies of expectant similarity between women of color fac- ulty and students of color, an expectation intensifies for faculty teaching in disciplines and classrooms where social justice content and approaches foreground their “outsider-within” status (Collins 2000, 11). The shared or perceived alienation of women of color faculty draws similarly marginal- ized students as mentees, just as the shared or hoped for opportunity for so- cial, economic, and political mobility establishes commonality (Acker and Feuerverger 1996; Bellas 1999; Constanti and Gibbs 2013). The combined conflicting pressures of expectant race, gender, and class identification with women of color faculty by students in these contexts generates abundant additional labor for women faculty of color who already must perform col- legiality and professionalism more enthusiastically to meet unstated affec- tive requirements (Bellas 1999). Additionally, as reflects heterogeneous and ambivalent positions, contrary emotional needs and the desire for contrary performances from professors exist from students of color as from white NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl SLOW FEELING AND QUIET BEING: WOMEN OF COLOR TEACHING IN URGENT TIMES 81 students. Students of color, indeed, may test the authority and boundaries of women of color professors more than white students because of assump- tions of class identity or political leanings (Niemann 2012). The experience of women of color faculty teaching in the U.S. inter- rupts universalizing presumptions that high identity correspondence be- tween teacher and student can pre-establish authority to lay groundwork for other dynamic pedagogical strategies. In fact, the literature suggests that cultural and social attitudes toward women of color impact the U.S. univer- sity classroom regardless of the level of race, gender, class, or sexual ori- entation identification presumed between students and faculty. Students of color, whether women or men, have displayed biased assessments toward women of color faculty, just as white peer counterparts do. Johnson-Bailey and Lee (2005) observed in their research that, “Most students in the study could not reach beyond their idea of the teacher’s position in the larger soci- etal context” (p. 116). Perhaps striking, considering that not much analysis centers student harassment by students of color toward women faculty of color, the reality is that students of color are not immune to the cultural so- cialization that devalues the authority and contributions of women of color, a manifestation of internalized racism and sexism being one possible expla- nation. Students of color may articulate or express such devaluing and resis- tance differently than their white peers, but the effect of the disconnect registers clearly. “At best,” write Johnson-Bailey and Lee (2005), “Student resistance is operationalized as apathy, and in the extreme, as open hostility” (emphasis added; 117). Attempting student-centered, student-led learning in a university classroom that at best brings with it apathy instead of hos- tility, places inordinate pressure on women of color faculty to implement damage control as part of their pedagogical strategy, and as part of their at- tempt to pace grace—to occupy the as-yet-unrecognized necessity for slow feeling and quiet being as a critical response to the simultaneity of compet- ing emotions and obligations. Vibrancy Fatigue The most commonly cited reason for the departure of women of color from their academic positions is physical and mental exhaustion that results from ignoring their affective lives to prioritize emotional labor that benefits orga- nizational mission—labors of concern, diligence, compassion, for example, without proper attention to legitimate labors of frustration, disappointment, or anger (Acker and Feuerverger 1996; Bellas 1999; Constanti and Gibbs 2013; Cross and Hong 2012). The emotional labor and affective lives of women of color faculty carries the mission of the university, though this fact is often disavowed. Acker and Feuerverger (1996) and Constanti and Gibbs (2013) report that women’s hyper-performance of care, passion, and friendliness is obligatory as a measure of competence, professionalism, and NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 82 TEACHING AND EMOTION collegiality. In cases where the teaching evaluations of female professors “appear to be, or are close to being, on par with [those of] male professors, a more careful examination shows that women have to labor harder to sat- isfy student expectations” (Laube, Massoni, and Sprague in Lazos 2012, 177; emphasis added). Acker and Feuerverger observed in 1996 of university teaching that “the fact that women have been seen as ‘naturally’ suited to the work has served to disguise its potential for exploitation and to discourage women from expressing ‘outlaw emotions’, such as envy or resentment, that might be at odds with the caring script” (p. 402). For women of color in the uni- versity, “the interests, values and knowledge of minority faculty can work against them as they pursue tenure and promotion” (Diggs et al. 2009, 314). Women of color are praised for their investment in their students and their ability to draw from what appears to be a morally abiding love or a sense of social obligation to “give back.” Yet, the rigor and passion that is obligatory for women of color faculty can harm their professional status if the work is recognized as a reflection of personality or ethical calling rather than labor born of specialized knowledge and structural obligation. Students penalize women for not meeting the gendered expectation of care in personal con- tact, despite evidence that women professors spend more time meeting with students in office hours than male professors (Bennet in Bellas 1999, 101). Universities penalize women of color because their work with students and in the university is presumed to be heart-driven, rather than research-based. The fact that scholarship by women of color documenting these complex dynamics is delegitimized is part of the same problem. The phrase “to teach with emotion” produces multiple possible mean- ings, including to embed and foreground emotions in one’s pedagogical ap- proach, to use emotions in the live act of teaching, to use emotions as a theoretical framing for an approach to a lesson. More commonly, it is used to denote the passion or investment that an educator conveys about her subject, often in or during the act of teaching. As a gauge of an educator’s interest or expertise on a topic, her passion presumably reflects her level of conviction, as well as her ability to “inspire” or incite change by moving students toward excitement, awe, or outburst. Bellas (1999) reminds us, “Award-winning teacher and former editor of Teaching Sociology, sociologist Kathleen McKinney (1988) . . . advises professors to ‘show your enjoyment and entertain your students through impression management techniques.’ (300). In other words, put on a show. Being knowledgeable about one’s sub- ject matter is not enough; professors must convey that knowledge” (p. 98). Bellas is clear that all professors are on stage, but she agrees with Acker and Feuerverger (1996) and Constanti and Gibbs (2013) that women’s hyper- performance of care, passion, and friendliness is obligatory as a measure of their competence, professionalism, and collegiality. Vibrancy is now too often equated with passion, expertise, and dedica- tion to career and topic. More accurately, it speaks to a compulsory need to NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl SLOW FEELING AND QUIET BEING: WOMEN OF COLOR TEACHING IN URGENT TIMES 83 entertain students who the university prizes as paying clients. For women of color faculty, passion and emotion become synonymous with a morally abiding love, excusing others from challenging the injustice of the uni- versity’s reward and promotion structure that praises “passion” instead of compensating for it in salary increases and promotion, while also deny- ing its compulsory element. Sandra Acker and Grace Feuerverger observe that “[i]n popular conceptions . . . the work component becomes natural- ized, automatic, habitual, inherent, essentialised and freely chosen, rather than required, learned, or performed” (Acker and Feuerverger 1996, 402). The idea that women of color faculty teach or “serve” because of a moral calling establishes teaching as a service rather than a skilled labor; and be- cause it is service that presumably draws from personal moral responsibility, such passion is fulfilled by women of color as society’s presumptive care- givers, excusing others from the same naturalized expectations, and, in fact, compensating others for caring where women of color are assumed to care innately. Bellas (1999) emphasizes the gendered ideology that underlies this pro- fessional inequity, observing that all work, including administrative work and university leadership, requires emotional labor, though our reward and promotion rules insist that love as labor is not a measurable skill. Women of color are not alone in this labor, but they are critiqued, mis-read, under- valued, underpaid, and considered less graceful by students and colleagues in the face of power than their counterparts. Women faculty of color are pushed out by a state of unwell that manifests as fatigue, but that reflects a matrix of constant negotiation of competing emotions and pressures. Unac- knowledged by professional reward, promotion, or remuneration, women of color are rarely compensated for their work in a way that makes material difference, adding to their physical, emotional, and spiritual exhaustion. In light of this state of affairs, the absence of explicit passion or vibrancy from women of color might be re-read as a way of pacing grace, if not as a kind of grace itself in the face of constant hostility and critique. The Uses of Comfort in Living and Teaching Amidst a bounty of statements on the differing feeling rules that govern non-white affect in white spaces (Gutiérrez et al. 2012), two women of color professionals identify the clear stakes of affective negotiation in or- ganizational culture. Sherrie says plainly, “What I’m mostly trying to do is feel comfortable” (Wingfield 2010, 257); and Gabrielle agrees, “I think [whites] get away with far more of their authenticity” (p. 257). If bell hooks (2000) teaches us that being a woman does not make us intuitively, automatically, or naturally feminists, experiencing fatigue, bigotry, and psy- chological acts of aggression as women of color does not make us intuitively expert in compassion or social justice intervention. However, first-hand ex- perience provides vital insider knowledge of the unique double bind of NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 84 TEACHING AND EMOTION racial and sex discrimination, the labors it creates, and the grace that it begs. Patricia Hill Collins (2000) calls this unique knowledge “subjugated knowledge,” emphasizing lived experience as an important analytical per- spective born of a matrix of class, gender, and race oppression (p. 252). University leadership can do well to center an initiative toward grace in its recognition of the structural, cultural, and political factors that in- ordinately impact the affective lives of women of color faculty. Suggested in Harlow (2003), centers for teaching are a viable resource and university leadership can contribute by diligently selecting a director for these centers to lead critical conversation about teaching that includes a consideration of hostility as discussed in this chapter. Supported participation of women of color faculty in these centers can create specialized communities. How- ever, care must be taken to prevent these centers from becoming yet an- other ghettoized silo and a site of more affective management and labor for women of color. Investment in professional development works as an ori- entation toward grace if the investments themselves are a part of a larger strategy to re-distribute affective labor. Professional development will not transform or decrease racism and sexism from students and colleagues, nor are those failings the responsibility of women of color faculty. University centers for teaching can be important places to meet colleagues outside of one’s immediate campus vicinity to develop professional relationships that foreground skills development and teaching rather than field and discipline as common denominator; meeting others who genuinely struggle with or who simply desire to refine their teaching skills provides some temporary respite from the more exhausting work of arguing one’s legitimacy. Simi- larly, a well-developed teaching portfolio will serve women of color faculty by providing some distance from the personalizing nature of student hostil- ity. Participation in center programming places women of color faculty on the radar of the field of teaching and learning as scholars and as profession- als; reframing controversial issues from a teaching and learning dynamic provides language to redirect the onus back on students to choose to learn. While not always straightforwardly successful with students, the reframing at least provides a layer of psychic protection as well as a set of vocabulary that is recognizable to educators and administrators. The recommendations above are not solutions, however, as solutions are in fact beyond the power of individual women of color faculty; solutions require others to take on the onus of the difficult labor thus far fulfilled by women of color. To understand that women of color are materially valued by the university, and that their value is reflected in a concerted reformula- tion of instruments of evaluation, promotion, and reward, women of color may come to trust a system that has for decades provided only a semblance of authentic community. The emotion work and affective management re- quired of women of color in the classroom and in the hallways is indeed a heavy kind of labor and one that should be recognized and counted by an initiative that is responsive and responsible, namely one that works to NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl SLOW FEELING AND QUIET BEING: WOMEN OF COLOR TEACHING IN URGENT TIMES 85 redistribute the responsibilities of that labor and compensates those who already fulfill it (Wingfield 2010, 257). I am reminded of law professor Pa- tricia Williams’s (1991) deliberate use of dreams and memory sequences alongside legal criticism to capture the at-once messy and banal spaces of day-to-day racial and gendered encounters missed in conventional systems analysis. Williams reports that in her last moments with her godmother, she “spun tales about blue-sky laws,” talked about “market norms and gift econ- omy,” and weaved in a story that functioned as memory, wish, prescription, and analysis. “Once upon a time,” she writes, “some neighbors included me in their circle of barter . . . . These people included me because they wanted me to be part of their circle; they valued my participation apart from the material things I could offer. So I gave of myself to them, and they gave me fruitcakes and dandelion wine and smoked salmon, and, in their giving, their goods became provisions. Cradled in this community whose currency was a relational ethic, my stock in myself soared. My value depended on the glorious intangibility, the eloquent invis- ibility, of my just being part of the collective—and in direct response I grew spacious and happy and gentle. (p. 230) References Acker, S., and Feuerverger, G. 1996. “Doing Good and Feeling Bad: the Work of Women University Teachers.” Cambridge Journal of Education 26(3): 401–422. Beetham, G. 2013. “The Academic Feminist: Women of Color, Racism, and Re- silience in Academia.” Feministing. http://feministing.com/2013/05/13/the-academic- feminist-women-of-color-racism-and-resilience-in-academia/. Bellas, M. L. 1999. “Emotional Labor in Academia: The Case of Professors.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 561(1): 96–110. Boler, M. 1999. Feeling Power: Emotions and Education. New York, NY: Routledge. Chang, G. 2012. “Where’s the Violence? The Promise and Peril of Teaching Women of Color Studies.” In Presumed Incompetent: The Intersections of Race and Class for Women in Academia, edited by M. G. Gutiérrez, Y. F. Neimann, C. G. González, and A. P. Harris. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press. Collins, P. H. 2000. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. Second edition. New York, NY: Routledge. Constanti, P., and Gibbs, P. 2013. “Higher Education Teachers and Emotional Labour.” International Journal of Educational Management 18(4): 243–249. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540410538822. Crenshaw, K. 1991. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Vio- lence Against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review 43(6): 1241–1299. Cross, D. I., and Hong, J. Y. 2012. “An Ecological Examination of Teachers’ Emotions in the School Context.” Teaching and Teacher Education 28(7): 957–67. DeCuir-Gunby, J. T., Long-Mitchell, L. A., and Grant, C. 2009. “The Emotionality of Women Professors of Color in Engineering: A Critical Race Theory and Critical Race Feminism Perspective.” In Advances in Teacher Emotion Research, edited by P. A. Schutz, and M. Zembylas. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 86 TEACHING AND EMOTION de la Riva-Holly, F. 2012. “Igualadas.” In Presumed Incompetent: The Intersections of Race and Class for Women in Academia, edited by M. G. Gutiérrez, Y. F. Neimann, C. G. González, and A.P. Harris. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press. Diggs, G. A., Garrison-Wade, D. F., Estrada, D., and Galindo, R. 2009. “Smiling Faces and Colored Spaces: The Experiences of Faculty of Color Pursuing Tenure in the Academy.” The Urban Review 41(4): 312–333. Gutiérrez, M. G., Neimann, Y. F., González, C. G., and Harris, A.P., eds. 2012. Presumed Incompetent: The Intersections of Race and Class for Women in Academia. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press. Harlow, R. 2003. “‘Race Doesn’t Matter, But . . . ’: The Effect of Race on Professors’ Expe- riences and Emotion Management in the Undergraduate College Classroom.” Social Psychology Quarterly 66(4): 348–63. hooks, b. 1994. Teaching to Transgress. New York, NY: Routledge. hooks, b. 2000. Feminism is for Everybody. Cambridge, MA: South End Press. Johnson-Bailey, J. and Lee, M. 2005. “Women of Color in the Academy: Where’s Our Authority in the Classroom?” Feminist Teacher 15(2): 111–122. Lazos, S. R. 2012. “Are Student Teaching Evaluations Holding Back Women and Mi- norities? The Perils of ‘Doing’ Gender and Race in the Classroom.” In Presumed In- competent: The Intersections of Race and Class for Women in Academia, edited by M. G. Gutiérrez, Y. F. Neimann, C. G. González, and A. P. Harris. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press. Lorde, A. 1984. “The Uses of the Erotic.” Sister Outsider. Berkeley, CA: The Crossing Press. Maese-Cohen, M. 2017. Private correspondence with author. February 11. Mountz, A., Bonds, A., Mansfield, B., Loyd, J., Hyndman, J., Walton-Roberts, M., Basu, R., Whitson, R., Hawkins, R., Hamilton, T. and Curran, W. 2015. “For Slow Schol- arship: A Feminist Politics of Resistance through Collective Action in the Neolib- eral University.” ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies 14(1): 1235– 1259. Niemann, Y. F. 2012. “Lessons from the Experiences of Women of Color Working in Academia.” In Presumed Incompetent: The Intersections of Race and Class for Women in Academia, edited by M. G. Gutiérrez, Y. F. Neimann, C. G. González, and A. P. Harris. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press. Wingfield, A. H. 2010. “Are Some Emotions Marked ‘Whites Only’? Racialized Feeling Rules in Professional Workplaces.” Social Problems, 57(2): 251–68. Williams, P. J. 1991. The Alchemy of Race and Rights: Diary of a Law Professor. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Zembylas, M. and McGlynn, C. 2012. “Discomforting Pedagogies: Emotional Tensions, Ethical Dilemmas and the Transformative Possibilities.” British Educational Research Journal 38(1): 41–59. DR. LINH HUA served on the Modern Language Association’s committee on the Status of Women in the Profession from 2002 to 2005. She joined the National Women’s Studies Association’s Women of Color Leadership Project in 2014 and remains a participating member in the initiative. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 8 This chapter explores the institutional context of higher education and its impact on faculty and professional staff’s well-being, functioning, and emotions. Suggestions for dealing with academic workplace violations or betrayals are offered. When it Hurts to Work: Organizational Violations and Betrayals Lisa L. Frey As many faculty members and other professionals working in higher ed- ucation may recall, accepting the first job offer in academia is a time of excitement and expectation regarding the unfolding of an academic career. We anticipate the joy in sharing knowledge with future generations of pro- fessionals, witnessing the growth and development of students, and having the autonomy and academic freedom to make decisions about teaching, ser- vice, and research. Yet colleges and universities are also organizations and, as any organization, are subject to external pressures and internal strife that impact both the institution and the employees. Thus, this chapter will ex- plore the institutional context as it impacts faculty and professional staff’s well-being, functioning, and emotions. In addition, this chapter will pro- vide suggestions for dealing with adverse experiences within the university setting. The Relational Workplace Fletcher (2001) describes traditional organizational structure as oriented toward hierarchy, rationality, linear decision-making, autonomy, and indi- viduality, characteristics stereotypically ascribed to traditional or idealized masculinity, and institutions of higher education are no exception. The ef- fectiveness of this organizational structure, however, has been challenged as researchers have begun to examine the contributions of more affectively and interpersonally oriented factors to workplace functioning and produc- tion. For instance, Carmeli and Spreitzer (2009) explored the influence of thriving, defined as the experience of growing and learning and the sense of work-related zest and energy, on innovative work behaviors. They con- cluded that trust and connectivity (i.e., open relationships that promote NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, no. 153, Spring 2018 © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/tl.20284 87 88 TEACHING AND EMOTION movement and growth) increased thriving, which allowed workers to “get their job done well but also increases their capacity to display innovative work behaviors—bringing new ideas to the table, gaining buy-in for these ideas, and creating momentum for implementation” (p. 184). Similarly, Carmeli, Brueller, and Dutton (2009) found that positive interpersonal re- lationships in the workplace facilitated psychological safety and learning. While the importance of innovative thinking and continual learning are core to the mission of many organizations, they seem particularly relevant to the academic environment. Relational Cultural Theory (RCT) (Miller 1984; Miller and Stiver 1997) has been identified as a framework compatible with movement to- ward a more relational workplace (e.g., Fletcher 2001, Carmeli et al. 2009; Carmeli and Spreitzer 2009). RCT proposes that personal growth and devel- opment evolve through meaningful connections with others rather than as a result of the separation-individuation process, as proposed by traditional models. This principle seems especially crucial considering the increasingly global perspective and diverse workforce in current organizational culture. As noted by Walker (2004), when separation and individuation are accepted as the mandatory developmental standard for psychological health and ma- turity, differing beliefs and cultural worldviews of many groups and indi- viduals (e.g., those with collectivistic orientations) are marginalized and pathologized. According to RCT, the outcome of growth-enhancing relationships is a bidirectional process of mutuality—that is, the empathic understanding of another’s experience from the perspective of the other (Miller and Stiver 1997). This process requires the openness to represent oneself authentically in the relationship and the valuing of similarities and differences between the self and another person. The affective responses to growth-enhancing relationships include zest, a sense of worth, clarity, productivity, and a desire for more connection, all of which are conducive to flourishing in the work- place. In fact, Carmeli and Spreitzer (2009) emphasized the contributions of zest or vitality, relational resources, trust, and connection, to employee innovation and learning in the workplace. As Fletcher (2001) found in her qualitative study of a large organiza- tion in the United States, attempts to bring a more relational model into the traditional organizational structure violate the norms of autonomy, individ- uality, and hierarchy. Consequently, relational practices are devalued and ultimately rendered invisible, and individuals who engage in these prac- tices in the workplace are disadvantaged or negatively evaluated. In di- rect contradiction to these established norms, Carmeli and Spreitzer (2009) highlight the need for trust and relational connection in an organization in order for employees to thrive and, in the absence of these qualities, the tendency of employees to withdraw and lose motivation: “Trust cul- tivates an open space where people can exchange ideas, accept the differ- ent, as well as a space where they can generate and implement new ideas” NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl WHEN IT HURTS TO WORK: ORGANIZATIONAL VIOLATIONS AND BETRAYALS 89 (p. 177). Thus, they assert, the expectation of trust and connectivity creates a psychological contract (Rousseau 1989) between the organization and the employee. Psychological Contracts. Definitions of a psychological contract vary slightly from source to source, but there is general agreement that it refers to “perceptions of and expectations about the reciprocal obligations held by the two parties in the employment relationship—the employee and the organization” (Kidd 1998, 280). The contract is subjective in that it is operationalized through the degree of match between what each party owes the other and what each party will receive in return (Dabos and Rosseau 2004). Psychological contracts can be transactional (i.e., instrumental or functional exchanges), such as the promise to provide supplemental pay when a 9-month faculty member teaches a summer class, or relational (i.e., aimed toward preserving the long-term relationship between the employer and employee) (Jensen and Ryan 2010; Kidd 1998). The relational contract relies on the perception of an underlying foundation of reciprocal respect, beliefs, values, and social support. As a result of this perception, the affec- tive consequences of relational psychological contract violations tend to be intense and may involve feelings of anger, disappointment, betrayal, and mistrust. Rosseau (1989) pointed out that the etiology of the emotional re- sponse to relational contract violations goes beyond unmet rewards to over- arching beliefs about respect, trust, and justice in organizational relation- ships. In contrast, inequities emerging from transactional contracts can be more easily resolved through instrumental actions such as increasing wages or changing job conditions. The focus of this chapter will be on relational psychological contracts. Relational contract violations can be conceptualized on two intersect- ing continuums (Hershcovis 2011; Reina and Reina 2015). The first con- tinuum is that of intent, with anchors ranging from intentional to uninten- tional; the second is that of intensity, from minor to major. For instance, a minor unintentional violation might be experienced when a colleague simply forgets to include one faculty member in an email to the department chair regarding an important programmatic course-scheduling problem. A major unintentional violation might occur when an administrative announcement is made to structurally reorganize a program before any planning discus- sions take place with the program’s faculty members (that is, assuming the announcement strategy is simply insensitive, not intentionally secretive). A minor intentional violation might entail a faculty member divulging relatively insignificant private information about a colleague, whereas a major inten- tional violation might include a faculty member (or members) deliberately sabotaging or being verbally abusive toward colleagues. It is important to recognize, however, that although major violations may intuitively appear to be the most likely to cause significant harm, minor but consistent vio- lations are cumulative and, over time, are likely to be as harmful as major violations (Reina and Reina 2015). NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 90 TEACHING AND EMOTION Chan (2009) substitutes the word betrayal as a synonym for viola- tion, and these terms will be used interchangeably in this chapter. Chan asserts that psychological contract violations can be regarded as organi- zational betrayals given the breach of trust, voluntary nature, and poten- tial for harm. Regarding the dimension of intent, Chan contrasts inciden- tal (i.e., nonintentional) with intentional betrayal as related to differential harm to the victim(s); that is, in incidental betrayal, the goal is not to specif- ically target the victim, who is often just an obstacle to goal achievement, while in intentional betrayal the goal is to violate fundamental trust ex- pectations in order to cause harm to a specific individual(s). Because the affective consequences of both incidental and intentional betrayals can be intense, however, the organizational climate is impacted. Carmeli and Spre- itzer (2009) report that such breaches in trust decrease employee open- ness, productivity, and innovation, and drain employee resources. There- fore, organizational response is also relevant to the impact of contract violations. A lack of organizational responsiveness to persistent psychological contract betrayals eventually constitutes a systemic pattern of organiza- tional betrayal. Organizational responses to or interventions in incidents of betrayal range from engaging in sincere reparative actions to right the wrong and assist the injured individual(s), to complacency, to a focus on or- ganizational self-interest, lack of accountability, damage control, and even retaliation. For instance, and specific to universities, in a qualitative study of ninety-two female faculty at the University of California-Irvine, Monroe et al. (2008) found persistent gender equity violations. The respondents consistently voiced their experience of the university avoiding rather than dealing directly with violations, and of the tendency for the university to “blame the victim.” Notably, many of the participants reported similar expe- riences at other universities. Monroe et al. asserted that this type of systemic betrayal is maintained “through the subtle closing of ranks to safeguard the institution . . . It illustrates how entrenched bureaucracies shield an in-group rather than protecting the victims of overt discrimination” (p. 221). Fur- thermore, they noted that pursuing administrative (e.g., grievances based on university equity policies and procedures) or legal interventions comes at a high cost to faculty members. Smith and Freyd (2014) recently intro- duced the construct of institutional betrayal to describe the damage that can occur when an institution causes harm to an individual(s) by violating the trust in, expectations of, and reliance on the institution (i.e., the psycho- logical contract). Institutional Betrayal. It is important to again underscore that there is a connection between individual psychological contract violations and the larger systemic problem of institutional betrayal. A violation may ap- pear to be isolated but, when the lens is widened, it becomes apparent that the incident is part of broader organizational practices. Chan (2009) de- scribes organizational egoistic betrayal—that is, when the self-interests of NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl WHEN IT HURTS TO WORK: ORGANIZATIONAL VIOLATIONS AND BETRAYALS 91 the organization are consistently placed above that of employees. In some situations, egoistic betrayal may occur when an administrative decision is made that impacts the overall university, or entire programs or departments. For instance, a policy freezing faculty hires to “control costs” that is dis- proportionately applied across academic units, the elimination of programs within a department in order to “realign and increase efficiency” with no discussion or advance notice, or an administrative decision to implement an employee benefit package that excludes particular groups of employees (e.g., excluding health insurance benefits for families of lesbian, gay, bisex- ual, transgender, or queer employees) represent institutional betrayals. The end result is trauma to employees and damage to employee trust in the or- ganization. An alternative scenario occurs when a systemic pattern develops over time via, for example, institutional denial of a problem (Smith and Freyd 2014). For example, a faculty member engaged in sabotaging, undermin- ing, and verbally abusing another faculty member may actually mirror a larger pattern of institutional betrayal that has developed as a result of persistent organizational minimization of such behaviors. This mini- mization can take many forms, including attempting to normalize viola- tions (e.g., “It’s just faculty conflict”), the offering of platitudes (e.g., “It’s freedom of speech”), the avoidance of responsibility (e.g., “We can’t do anything because [the offender] is tenured”), and victim blaming (e.g., “They just need to learn to get along and deal with [the offender’s] behavior”). Smith and Freyd (2014) outline several organizational characteristics that lend themselves to institutional betrayals, including inequities in power distribution due to the status of the institution or administrators, the pres- ence of rigid standards in order to be considered a “good” member of the organization, and the prioritizing of the organization and its reputation over the welfare of its members. Congruent with these characteristics is Pope’s (2016) description of professional versus guild ethics in organizations: “Pro- fessional ethics protect the public against abuse of professional power, ex- pertise, and practice, and hold members accountable to values beyond self- interest. Guild ethics place members’ interests above public interest, edge away from accountability, and tend to masquerade as professional ethics” (pp. 53–54). An organizational “culture of silence” (Pope 2016, 56) pro- tects the organization by conveying that those who openly disagree will be targeted. The concepts of institutional betrayal and guild ethics are being in- creasingly applied in a range of organizational settings, including the Ameri- can Psychological Association actions related to psychologists’ involvement in “enhanced interrogations” (Gomez et al. 2016; Thomas 2016), mental health systems in regard to racial disparities in mental health care (Gomez 2015), and university and military responses to sexual assault (Smith and Freyd 2014). NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 92 TEACHING AND EMOTION Workplace Bullying: A Snapshot of the Costs of a Betrayal Although, as noted previously, psychological contract violations can range from major to minor and from intentional to unintentional, the potential impact of violations on employees and organizational functioning is per- haps most easily illustrated through discussion of the relatively common behavior of workplace bullying. Namie and Namie (2009) define bullying as repetitive, nonphysical mistreatment of an individual(s) in the workplace, including behaviors such as ridiculing, insulting, social exclusion, slander- ing, devaluation of work, sabotaging, and verbal abuse, by one or multiple perpetrators. A conservative estimate of the extent of bullying in workplaces in the United States is approximately 13% of workers at any given time (Namie and Namie 2009), with women and ethnic/racial minorities more likely to be targets (Martin and LeVan 2010). The 2014 U.S. Workplace Bul- lying Survey (Workplace Bullying Institute [WBI] 2014) found that 27% of U.S. adult workers indicated having directly experienced abuse at work, and 21% reported witnessing abuse in the workplace. Overall, about 66 million workers are affected by workplace bullying, either as direct victims or as witnesses (WBI 2014). Regarding witnesses of bullying, Namie (2008) found that, among 400 self-identified victims of workplace bullying, almost half (i.e., 46%) re- ported their colleagues deserted them, with 15% stating colleagues joined in the bullying. Within academe, the latter “ganging up” phenomenon has been referred to as academic mobbing, although Namie and Namie (2009) consider academic mobbing and bullying to be interchangeable terms. Simola (2016), in an exploration of workplace moral courage (i.e., express- ing ethical concerns in order to prevent harm or resist the lack of integrity in business practices), also noted the “critical paradox” (p. 2) of social rejec- tion and disapproval often directed by colleagues toward the individual(s) pointing out unethical or harmful acts. As might be expected, workplace bullying has a negative impact on em- ployees. Martin and LeVan (2010) reviewed the literature on workplace bul- lying and identified a host of psychological, physiological, and interpersonal consequences to victims, including depression, posttraumatic stress disor- der, substance abuse, suicide, general stress, and family problems. Namie and Namie (2009) emphasized the significant impact of bullying on the victim’s overall safety, health, and emotional well-being. The organizational cost of bullying is similarly high, including decreased productivity, absen- teeism, recruitment and retention problems, burnout, and low morale, as well as legal costs to the institution (Martin and LeVan 2010; Namie and Namie 2009). Despite this individual and organizational impact, Martin and LeVan’s analysis of forty-five randomly selected litigated cases of work- place bullying between 2003 and 2007 found no administrative response to the bullying in four out of ten cases, and in only one out of ten cases the perpetrator was reprimanded. In response to the prevalence of workplace NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl WHEN IT HURTS TO WORK: ORGANIZATIONAL VIOLATIONS AND BETRAYALS 93 bullying in the United States, The Healthy Workplace Bill was developed in the early 2000s; however, despite being introduced as proposed legislation in multiple states, no state has yet passed the legislation. Dealing with Organizational Betrayals and Violations: How Do I Move On? Given the reticence of many organizational leaders to analyze the human costs related to psychological contract violations and institutional betrayals, victims are often left to deal with the ramifications on their own. However, the degree of individual betrayal and trauma will vary based on the type, intent, and pervasiveness of violations, thus the relevance of the coping strategies discussed below must be individually determined. First, it should be underscored that the experience of workplace vi- olation can lead to a disconnection from the sense of self and one’s own needs (Reina and Reina 2015). Complacency, refusal to intervene, or retal- iation on the part of the organization reinforce the victim’s internalization of responsibility for violations. Consequently, there is a sense of profound powerlessness and loss of voice. Monroe et al. (2008) labeled this as “Work- ing Harder and the Cult of Individual Responsibility” (p. 224), explaining that many of the faculty women in their study interpreted discriminatory experiences in ways that placed the responsibility on themselves versus the institution. Therefore, if you have experienced workplace violations, initial steps toward healing involve self-reflection, accurate assignment of respon- sibility, identification of options, and reaching out to trusted others. Decision-Making and Choices. A crucial issue to consider in mov- ing toward decision-making relates to whether you believe that it is possible to repair the relationship between yourself and the wrongdoer, whether that be a colleague, the university as a whole, or both. In the midst of emotional upheaval and distress, it can be difficult to reflect upon this question, but the answer will be a guide to decision-making. As difficult as it is, making the decision to take action instead of denying, suppressing, or internalizing the violations, which only result in continuing disempowerment and isola- tion, is critical. Seek out a trusted colleague, mentor, or friend, or a coun- selor or psychologist, to provide support in processing your experiences and options. A pertinent question on which to reflect is whether the wrongdoer is willing to engage in reparative actions, such as apology, restitution, ex- pression of remorse, and/or renegotiation of values (Chan 2009). On the organizational level, this involves a willingness to develop or change or- ganizational policies and practices or to develop new prevention or inter- vention programs. For instance, the university might agree to develop an anti-bullying policy and prevention program or a faculty advisory board to review organizational policy changes, evaluate the potential impact on em- ployees, and propose a plan to minimize any adverse impacts. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 94 TEACHING AND EMOTION If there is a willingness to engage in reparative action on the part of the wrongdoer, however, there is not an obligation on the victim’s part to agree to engage in the process of repair. Chan (2009) offers some helpful guidance when processing the likelihood of rebuilding trust and determining your willingness to engage in the repair process. Specifically, it is crucial to reflect on the history of the betrayal or violation and, based on that history, to self- assess the scale and extent of the betrayal, including the negative impact and the harm caused, and the sincerity of the wrongdoer’s efforts to engage in repair. The critical points are whether you believe the organization will fully commit to follow-through on the reparative process and, if so, whether you are willing to engage in the process—a decision which is entirely yours to make. Organizationally, three strategies have been delineated that support the reparative process in betrayals related to bullying or abuse (Namie and Namie 2009): coaching (i.e., supportive and individually based solutions), mediation/moderation (i.e., a mutual clarification process among parties to a conflict), and organization development (i.e., systemic organizational change). In evaluating these options, it is important to consider the intensity and intent of the betrayal. For instance, supportive coaching will likely be insufficient in situations of major intentional violations if it places respon- sibility for change on the victim(s). Similarly, use of mediation/moderation is only appropriate when betrayal has not escalated to the level of a major betrayal (Namie and Namie 2009). Unfortunately, mediation/moderation is sometimes used by organizations to avoid dealing with broader systemic patterns and as a mechanism for placing blame and responsibility for change on the victim(s). In addition, if these organizational strategies are mandated rather than collaboratively discussed among the parties as possible options, it conveys a strong message about the organizational intent. In time, after a consideration of these factors, a decision will need to be made about your future with the organization. Explore your options with friends and trusted colleagues—Is there a possibility of transfer within the university and would that be a satisfactory solution? Is it time to go on the job market and see what is available? Is it possible to give the repara- tive process a chance and to engage that process from a stance of regained empowerment and voice? Are you able to institute changes in your own re- sponses to violations (e.g., increased assertiveness, firm boundary setting) that will allow you to remain at the university? What is the lingering impact of the betrayal on your collegial relationships and career trajectory? Do the advantages of remaining in the organization outweigh the risks? Individual Coping Strategies. Although the pain and pressure of dealing with workplace betrayal may lend itself to a default position of sim- ply trying to survive within a persistently hostile or damaging work en- vironment, this position will not be healing or growth-enhancing in the long term. Instead, it is essential that individual coping target the process- ing of affective responses and the rebuilding of trust, while simultaneously NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl WHEN IT HURTS TO WORK: ORGANIZATIONAL VIOLATIONS AND BETRAYALS 95 resisting the internalization of blame and responsibility for harmful organi- zational actions. That said, the issue of privilege must be acknowledged as pertinent to situations of workplace violation—that is, there are contextual factors (e.g., subsistence needs of one’s family) and disadvantages due to identity or positionality (e.g., race/ethnicity, class, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, class, religious or spiritual identity, and so on) that may serve to limit workplace decisions and choices. In this case, it is especially important to seek out a trusted colleague, mentor, friend, or counselor who has an understanding of your situation, and can provide realistic guidance as you process your experiences and identify your options. Reina and Reina (2015) outline strategies that can be helpful in rebuild- ing trust following workplace violations, including identifying and verbal- izing feelings, finding support, and shifting your focus from the wrongdoer to your “wounded self” (p. 158). Maureen Walker (2014) describes the pro- cess of support building as finding “an intentional community of mentors, allies, and compassionate witnesses” who are internal and external to the organization. For instance, it may be helpful to work on developing col- laborative and supportive relationships with faculty in other colleges who have similar interests or increase community engagement with individuals and agencies focusing on issues relevant to your research or service. Becom- ing more selective about university service work and aiming for committee work that involves opportunities to advocate for institutional change, such as faculty committees targeting policy building regarding organizational eq- uity, may be an option,. Of course, promoting organizational climate change is a long and arduous process, but engaging with this work may have the added benefit of providing a relational connection to like-minded faculty members. Fletcher (2001) offers a number of coping and change strategies that are oriented toward impacting organizational climate through individual relational practice. One is what Fletcher terms naming strategies, such as shifting the labeling of a relational strength from a personality attribute to a competency. For instance, if a faculty member is asked to talk to a stu- dent about a sensitive subject because of the faculty’s “warm approach,” the faculty member could respond that the approach is actually a relationally skilled and effective approach. Similarly, service work done at a community agency can be reframed as functioning as an agency consultant and a liaison between the university and agency. Fletcher also discusses strategies aimed at identifying the costs and consequences of organizational norms of effec- tiveness, including relational alternatives. Requesting a shift in the process of proposal review meetings from initially offering critical feedback to first focusing on the potentially effective, positive aspects of the proposal is an example (Fletcher 2001). The purpose of engaging these strategies in the aftermath of a violation is the opportunity to experience empowerment— that is, actively engaging in strategies that impact the organizational climate, even if change is slow. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 96 TEACHING AND EMOTION Advocating for Organizational Change. Engagement in institu- tional change efforts can provide an opportunity for you to apply insights and lessons from your experience and be a part of the change process. Of course, those who have experienced betrayals within an organizational con- text where there is a willingness to engage in reparative action will find this process to be much easier. In an organizational climate of resistance, the reality will be markedly different, and the decision to leave the organiza- tion, to remain and work toward institutional change, or to choose another option is an individual one. There is abundant literature providing guidance in change strategies that is available to organizations. For instance, Gomez (2015) recommends the Inclusive Excellence Model of the Association of American Colleges and Universities as a tool for universities in building an inclusive, welcom- ing, and caring climate. Smith and Freyd (2014) discuss the importance of working toward organizational transparency, establishing employee train- ing related to developing a workplace culture that prevents violations, and implementing policies that protect employees. Top down executive level de- velopment programs that include discussion of relational practice, gender roles, and power dynamics are recommended by Fletcher (2001). Overall, organizations that are genuinely willing to engage in change processes do not have to look far for guidance on policy development, identification of program evaluation criteria, and training materials. Conclusion The personal and professional costs to individual employees when persis- tent workplace betrayals take place and are organizationally denied, sup- pressed, or rendered invisible, are profound and indefensible. Institutional betrayals go to the very heart of what it means to lack organizational in- tegrity, principle, and courage. If you are someone for whom it “hurts to go to work,” it is important to realize that workplace betrayals occur in the lives of too many individuals. Do not endure it alone. Reach out to others and begin the movement from internalization and suppression to action and healing. References Carmeli, A., Brueller, D., and Dutton, J. E. 2009. “Learning Behaviours in the Workplace: The Role of High-Quality Interpersonal Relationships and Psychological Safety.” Sys- tems Research and Behavioral Science 26: 81–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.932. Carmeli, A., and Spreitzer, G. M. 2009. “Trust, Connectivity, and Thriving: Implica- tions for Innovative Behaviors at Work.” Journal of Creative Behavior 43(3): 169–191. http://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2009.tb01313.x. Chan, M. E. 2009. “’Why Did You Hurt Me?’ Victim’s Interpersonal Betrayal At- tribution and Trust Implications.” Review of General Psychology 13: 262–274. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017138. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl WHEN IT HURTS TO WORK: ORGANIZATIONAL VIOLATIONS AND BETRAYALS 97 Dabos, G. E., and Rousseau, D. M. 2004. “Mutuality and Reciprocity in the Psychological Contracts of Employees and Employers.” Journal of Applied Psychology 89: 52–72. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.52. Fletcher, J. K. 2001. Disappearing Acts: Gender, Power, and Relational Practice at Work. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Gomez, J. M. 2015. “Microaggressions and the Enduring Mental Health Disparity: Black Americans at Risk for Institutional Betrayal.” Journal of Black Psychology 41: 121–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/00957984413514608. Gomez, J. M., Smith, C. P., Gobin, R. L., Tang, S. S., and Freyd, J. J. 2016. “Col- lusion, Torture, and Inequality: Understanding the Actions of the American Psy- chological Association as Institutional Betrayal.” Journal of Trauma & Dissociation. https://doi.org/10.1080/15299732.2016.1214436. Hershcovis, M. S. 2011. “’Incivility, Social Undermining, Bullying . . . Oh My!’ A Call to Reconcile Constructs Within Workplace Aggression Research.” Journal of Organiza- tional Behavior 32: 499–519. https://doi.org/10.1022/job.689. Jensen, J. M., and Ryan, A. M. 2010. “Psychological Contracts and Counterpro- ductive Work Behaviors: Employee Responses to Transactional and Relational Breach.” Journal of Business and Psychology 25: 555–568. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10869-009-9148-7 Kidd, J. M. 1998. “Emotion: An Absent Presence in Career Theory.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 52: 275–288. doi: 10.1006/jvbe.1997.1629 Martin, W., and LeVan, H. 2010. “Workplace Bullying: A Review of Litigated Cases.” Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 22: 175–194. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10672-009-9140-4. Miller, J. B. 1984. The Development of Women’s Sense of Self (Work in Progress No. 12). Wellesley, MA: Wellesley College, Stone Center. Miller, J. B., and Stiver, I. P. 1997. The Healing Connection: How Women form Relationships in Therapy and in Life. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Monroe, K., Ozyurt, S., Wrigley, T., and Alexander, A. 2008. “Gender Equality in Academia: Bad News From the Trenches, and Some Possible Solutions.” Perspectives on Politics 6: 215–233. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592708080572. Namie, G. 2008. How Employers and Co-Workers Respond to Workplace Bullying. http://www.workplacebullying.org/multi/pdf/N-N-2008A.pdf. Namie, G., and Namie, R. 2009. “U.S. Workplace Bullying: Some Basic Considerations and Consultation Interventions.” Counseling Psychology Journal: Practice and Research 61: 202–219. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016670. Pope, K. S. 2016. “The Code Not Taken: The Path from Guild Ethics to Torture and Our Continuing Choices.” Canadian Psychology 57: 51–59. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/cap0000043. Reina, D., and Reina, M. 2015. Trust and Betrayal in the Workplace: Building Effective Relationships in Your Organization (3rd ed.). Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler. Rousseau, D. M. 1989. “Psychological and Implied Contracts in Organizations.” Em- ployee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 2: 121–139. doi: 10.1007/BF01384942 Simola, S. 2016. “Fostering Collective Growth and Vitality Following Acts of Moral Courage: A General System, Relational Psychodynamic Perspective.” Journal of Busi- ness Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3014-0. Smith, C. P., and Freyd, J. J. 2014. “Institutional Betrayal.” American Psychologist 69: 575–587. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037564. Thomas, N. K. 2016. “‘We Didn’t Know:’ Silence and Silencing in Organi- zations.” International Journal of Group Psychotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00207284.2016.1176489. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 98 TEACHING AND EMOTION Walker, M. 2004. “How Relationships Heal.” In How Connections Heal: Stories from Relational-Cultural Therapy, edited by M. Walker and W. B. Rosen, 3–19. New York, NY: Guilford. Walker, M. 2014. “It’s Not About Checking a Box: Critical Competencies for Confronting the Claims of Post-racialism.” Paper presented at the Summer Training Institute of the Jean Baker Miller Training Institute. Workplace Bullying Institute. 2014 WBI Workplace Bullying Survey: National Preva- lence & U.S. Workforce Affected. 2014. http://workplacebullying.org. LISA L. FREY, PhD, is a licensed psychologist and the owner of Frey Psychological and Consulting Services PLLC. She is also a Professor Emerita in the Depart- ment of Educational Psychology at the University of Oklahoma (OU). Dr. Frey was also a core faculty member in African and African American Studies and Women’s and Gender Studies at OU. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 9 This chapter integrates two of the most influential authorities on teaching, Robert Boice and Parker Palmer, into the system’s approach to teaching articulated by Douglas Robertson in order to help college teachers find sustainable balance by acknowledging and managing emotions in the classroom. The Emotional Balancing Act of Teaching: A Burnout Recovery Plan Karyn Z. Sproles “ . . . learning is a process involving the whole person including emotions.” —Douglas L. Robertson (1999, 281) “Active learning strategies help me avoid burnout because I teach students— not calculus. So it’s a different class every time.” —Sommer Gentry (2016, personal communication), Many of my colleagues tell me that they value the way in which academia is an integral part of their lives. So do I. The interrelationship between the personal and professional is part and parcel of an academic life in which our scholarship and teaching are not just what we do but who we are. Balancing teaching, research, and service with the rest of our lives is a challenge academics grapple with openly. In my experience as a director of a center for teaching and learning, I have found that faculty rarely talk about how difficult it can be to find a balance within teaching itself. Because our work is central to our identities, it can feel natural when teaching becomes all-consuming. It can be dev- astating when it does not go well. All it takes is one mean-spirited student evaluation to create an earworm of self-doubt or defensive irritation. Faculty members frequently share their distress over incidents of academic dishon- esty that feel like personal violations. These feelings throw us off-balance when an overinvestment in teaching gives rise to extreme emotions. I am not suggesting that we repress our emotional responses; on the contrary, I believe that a greater awareness of the emotions we feel as teachers both in and out of the classroom can lead us to find the emotional balance that will NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, no. 153, Spring 2018 © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/tl.20285 99 100 TEACHING AND EMOTION allow for a sustainable teaching career. During the last thirty years of teach- ing in higher education, I have had to learn how to recover from burnout by rebalancing my emotional responses to teaching. Burnout I recently returned to the classroom after many years in administration. I was surprised to discover how much I had missed teaching. I was also surprised by the way, in which my relationship to teaching and students has shifted. I care just as much about what I am teaching and who I am teaching, but neither the content nor the students pull on me emotionally as‘ they once did. This emotional tug is, now that I reflect on it, what drove me out of the classroom and into administration in the first place. Teaching was exhausting. After more than twenty-five years of giving it my all, I was burned out. There are lots of reasons for burnout. No matter our teaching style or educational philosophy, preparing and grading can expand to fill every minute of every day. For this reason, the most committed teachers are also most at risk for burnout. Burnout is the reward of overwork. Burnout also comes from work that is burdensome rather than energizing. Sports psy- chologist Keith Kaufman’s description of burnout in elite athletes strikes me as remarkably descriptive of academics. According to Kaufman, burnout starts with “a sense of staleness,” which often leads to overwork, and ulti- mately “complete physical and emotional exhaustion” (cited in Plunkett [2016, 13]). The first two stages are easily ignored. Overwork leads to de- pletion, as does work that is stressful, emotionally taxing, or unfulfilling. As we advance in our careers, administrative expectations increase. We are asked to serve on more committees and to take on more of the work of run- ning the institution. Advising, hiring, assessment, curriculum development, and reaccreditation are just a few of the responsibilities that continue to ac- crue. Many faculty members find administrative work to be more stressful and less fulfilling than teaching, but it is difficult to back out of it. A lead- ership role that initially seems like an honor can quickly become a burden. Service pressures are especially keen for men of color and all women, who report greater service loads along with higher expectations for availability (Massé and Hogan 2012; see chapter 7 of this volume). Simultaneously, life can become more demanding as we make connections in our communities, our parents age, and, for those of us with children, all hell breaks loose. All of these experiences create an excess of emotion that can become difficult to manage. Change and instability also lead to burnout. The current climate in higher education has increased the sense of insecurity and frustration for many of us. Messages from an uncertain administration can produce a rash of tea-leaf reading that does nothing to reassure us that our contributions are valued. Reduced institutional and collegial support put an extra strain NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl THE EMOTIONAL BALANCING ACT OF TEACHING: A BURNOUT RECOVERY PLAN 101 on our own inner resources. For adjunct faculty members the situation is even worse. Since salary is low and colleagues are largely absent, attachment to students and course content are often the only satisfying parts of the job, which puts the most vulnerable faculty members especially at risk for burnout, if the indignity of exploitation does not get them first. It is a challenge to balance being available to students while set- ting reasonable limits both in class and online. I often think that we un- deremphasize the stress of face-to-face teaching’s regular public speaking commitments—something many people fear more than death. Technology relieves some of the stress of public speaking and increases our options for teaching and communicating with students in and out of the classroom. In- creased expectations for online offerings can also increase our vulnerability as we take our ambition to be successful into a realm that is unfamiliar to many of us. Faculty members frequently tell me that on-line teaching is a lonely place. It can be surprising how much pleasure we receive from the community of the classroom. However, students’ growing expectation that faculty will be available 24/7 can be overwhelming if we do not set limits. It is particularly tempting for those of us teaching distance or hybrid courses to substitute face-to-face interaction with electronic over-availability, re- sulting in endless emails. This is another instance of the vicious cycle in which our desire to succeed makes us emotionally vulnerable and at risk of burnout. Online communication may not include the demands of public performance, but its potential to live forever and to be forwarded without the writer’s knowledge means that it requires a great deal of attention. At the end of the day, communicating with students in person or online is fre- quently stressful. It is, however, an aspect of teaching that is highly visible. What we as teachers do not usually make visible is the stress of manag- ing our emotions. The challenges, as well as the satisfactions, of academic life produce an excess of emotion we are hard pressed to manage or express; even when we do not feel burned out, we frequently feel off balance. Emotional Balance I find the work of Robert Boice (2000), Parker Palmer (1998), and Douglas Robertson (1999, 2001) helpful in thinking about this problem. My go-to book for help balancing my academic life is Boice’s justly popular Advice for New Faculty Members. Boice’s advice is to do “nothing in excess”(Boice 2000, 15). He urges us to stop the binge writing that got us through grad- uate school and instead prepare for class and conduct our scholarship in “brief regular sessions” that are ultimately both more productive and sus- tainable (p. 39). His work is prescient in recommending “mindfulness,” a current buzzword that Boice notes was explored by Ellen Langer in 1989 as a strategy for avoiding burnout (pp. 163–164). Boice makes an eloquent, research-based case for moderating attachment to lesson plans and scholar- ship, arguing that striving for perfection leads to over-preparation and thus NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 102 TEACHING AND EMOTION over-attachment: “over identification with our work is a means of feeling in control of it” (p. 56). He warns us to recognize and manage our attachment to content. He also cautions us to be on the lookout for oversensitivity to criticism, especially self-criticism, which is even more dangerous because it is internalized and thus difficult to notice and address (p. 65). Boice fo- cuses on practicing mindfulness and moderating emotion while preparing to teach. But he does not have much to say about the emotional roller coaster that occurs in the classroom itself beyond the high emotion that passes for passionate engagement with content: “standard teaching evaluation de- vices often count enthusiasm as desirable, apparently implying that more is better. But in fact, too much emotion, even positive emotion, interferes with effective teaching and learning” (p. 70). Boice recommends begin- ning the moderation of our expression of emotion in the classroom during preparation, where we can engage mindfully with our subject and our own responses. Boice’s examples suggest that his research on undergraduate teaching uses the large lecture as standard, and his discussion of the potentially charged relationship between student and teacher is focused on the man- agement of student incivilities (Boice 2000, 81–98). But he says little of our emotional engagement with students. Parker Palmer’s (1998) influen- tial The Courage to Teach is more attuned to the emotional life of teachers in the classroom, particularly the omnipresent fear shared by teacher and student alike that we will be unmasked as the imposters we always sus- pected ourselves to be. He urges us to face our fears—and help students face theirs—so that we can connect with one another (Palmer 1998, 40). Palmer tells a personal anecdote in which he becomes obsessed with the “student from hell” skulking under the baseball cap in the back of the room: “For a long and anguished hour I aimed everything I had at this young man, try- ing desperately to awaken him from his dogmatic slumbers, but the harder I tried, the more he seemed to recede . . . I left the class with a powerful com- bination of feelings: self-pity, fraudulence, and rage” (p. 43). Palmer later discovers that the student is not disengaged but distraught because his al- coholic father is actively discouraging him from continuing his education (pp. 40–47). Palmer’s point is well taken: it is not always about us. Palmer’s parable illustrates the ways in which students struggle with their own emotions during class, and I appreciate his willingness to recognize that both students and teachers frequently feel fear that may or may not have to do with what is actually happening in class. Nevertheless, classroom dynamics feel more complicated than that to me. I know that my students have more going on in their lives than my class. I also know there is as much affection as fear, as much pride as insecurity, and as much concentration as distraction. At any moment, I can take on the role of mother, mentor, role model, or alter ego. Douglas Robertson recognizes the complex interpersonal dynamic that includes the inner ex- perience of teachers and students in the context of learner-centered NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl THE EMOTIONAL BALANCING ACT OF TEACHING: A BURNOUT RECOVERY PLAN 103 classrooms. Robertson’s name for this is “systemocentrism or “teacher/learner-centeredness” (Robertson 2001, 11). The first sen- tence of Robertson’s essay “Beyond Learner-Centeredness” made me sit up and take notice: “I question the superiority of learner-centered teaching” he writes, going on to say that “Learner-centeredness idealizes learning facilitators [aka, instructors] by neglecting their inner experience” (pp. 7–8). Putting Robertson’s work together with Boice and Palmer helps me understand the shifts I have experienced over my career and suggests a way toward a balanced and sustainable life in the classroom. When I started teaching British literature, I hid behind the podium physically and emotionally. An introvert like many academics, I played the role of “lecturer” with intense passion and secret detachment. Students saw only my admiration for writers whom I privately found irritating. Certainly, I cared about student learning, but what I tended to measure at the end of class was my own performance. The more energetic I was, the more I assumed students had learned. Impassioned lectures did not feel like rote learning, but that was precisely what I expected students to do when I as- sumed that they would remember every word that came out of my mouth. Despite the drummed up enthusiasm I used to stimulate student engage- ment, my true passion for literature came through, and students appreci- ated my energy. Unfortunately, my enthusiasm did not necessarily create students who read carefully and thought critically. Plus, it was exhausting. The shift from teaching to learning heralded twenty-one years ago by Robert Barr and John Tagg (1995) both demands and assists teachers in moderating our emotional investment and responses in the classroom and thus creates a potential balance of sustainable work and appropriate am- bition. Learner-centered pedagogy moved me from behind the lectern to working behind the scenes to create experiences designed to engage stu- dents in the work of learning. I embraced this change in large part because my long experience in first-year composition classes showed me that active learning increased student learning. I did not mind that learner-centered pedagogy reduced the amount of material I could cover or the level of con- trol I had in the classroom because I could see for myself that my students were more engaged, worked harder, and learned more. I was embarrassed to admit, however, that student-centered classrooms were neither intellec- tually nor emotionally satisfying for me. I used active learning to deflect attention from me onto the material, but, as Robertson notes, this also re- duced my own engagement because it repressed my inner experiences. I was bored because I wasn’t learning anything new about the subject. Robertson’s solution to the disengagement of the learner-centered model is to recog- nize “the teacher and learners as fully human participants in interaction” (1999, 281, emphasis original). Robertson’s systems approach allows for a both/and perspective: teachers and learners are recognized as participants in a structure that we all contribute to creating. Being able to understand NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 104 TEACHING AND EMOTION this structure in an objective and subjective manner enables the teacher to be both participant and meta-analyzer. In my years as an administrator, one of the things I missed most about teaching was the tremendous comfort in always having something to think about that I could actually influence. I could always make class better by creating what L. Dee Fink (2003) calls “significant learning experiences,” offering praise and encouragement along with serious analysis of the stu- dents’ work. I had forgotten the immense emotional satisfaction that comes when a class clicks. The energy, goodwill, and humor in the room is emo- tionally fulfilling. As energizing as this is, it is also dangerous. It is unfair to expect students to make up for the gaps in one’s personal and intellectual life. It is easy to forget the need for clear boundaries. But repressing emotions is not an effective strategy. I was acutely aware of this recently when a move took me away from social support, my children were both out of the house for the first time in 22 years, and, just before the semester began, my father died. I found myself providing emotional support to my mother without ready resources for myself. Happily, I have a wide and supportive network of friends as well as compassionate new colleagues, but it was my students who were “there for me”—literally—every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. As we prepared to begin peer-reviewing their final essays, I reminded the class that we only had a few more meetings before the semester was over. The point I thought I was making was that they needed to get to work. I was surprised when someone asked, “Are you sad, Professor Sproles?” I was even more surprised when I said, “Yes, I am. I’m going to miss you all. Let’s get to work.” At that moment, I felt a genuine wave of affection for these students, now busy forming groups and exchanging papers. It was a rare moment in which I not only felt but also expressed emotion in the classroom. Until that moment, I had not realized just how much my engagement with teaching had been keeping my emotions in check. Teaching was the reason I got up in the morning. Teaching helped me manage my emotions by redirecting them to something external: literature and writing. I felt con- fident in the classroom where I had a sense of myself as an adult who was in control rather than a grieving daughter. Teaching was and is my safe space, not only when I am in the classroom but also during prep, grading, and (the most fun of all) creating new courses. As the director of a teaching and learning center, my role is to champion teaching and teachers. It comes naturally to me because it is in teaching that I feel like my best self because I have learned not to acknowledge the messy, conflicted emotional part of myself when I am in the classroom. I now realize that this also meant that I was not always fully present in the classroom. This anecdote offers a mini-case study in the way in which repressing emotions in the classroom fails as an effective strategy for maintaining con- trol, promoting learning, and achieving a sustainable emotional balance. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl THE EMOTIONAL BALANCING ACT OF TEACHING: A BURNOUT RECOVERY PLAN 105 Because I ignored my emotional responses, I had not noticed how attached I had become to my students, but they had. They sensed my sadness at the approach of the end of the semester before I was aware of it myself. I im- mediately worried that my evaluation of their work had been compromised (thank you, rubric, for saving the day here). More than objectivity is lost when a teacher over-attaches to a student or a class. I have a responsibility to manage my own emotional responses in order to help students man- age theirs. The class loses the perspective required to keep refocusing on the material rather than the personality of the instructor. Over-investment in teaching also put me at risk for burnout—the very problem that drove me from the classroom in the first place. I need to manage my emotions throughout the class period, and that means I need to be aware of them. My matter of fact acknowledgement that I was sad that the semester was almost over made me fully present. Teaching instantly became more sustainable. Students bring a lot of emotional baggage into the classroom. In the past, I struggled to check my bags at the door in order to avoid displaced emotions, confusion, and potentially inappropriate feelings. Not only is it impossible to leave the emotional part of me in the hall, but trying to do so came at a stiff price. I need to be aware of my emotional responses—rather than ignoring them–in order to establish clear boundaries and moderate my emotions so that I can avoid burnout and promote student learning. Robertson’s “systemocentric” model parallels the systems models of family therapy, so it is no surprise that he recognizes the transference be- tween students and teachers that can lead to powerful learning—as well as anger and despair. In Robertson’s definition: “Transference is an uncon- scious displacement of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors from a previous significant relationship onto a current relationship, and teachers and stu- dents manifest transference regularly in their relationships, whether or not either teachers or students are aware of these enactments” (Robertson 2001, 10). Robertson uses transference to refer to the emotional engagement of students and instructors alike, and while it is accurate to say that students and instructors both have displaced emotional responses, there is a second layer to the responses instructors have that I think it is important to rec- ognize. In addition to responding to the class, we must also recognize the responses we have regarding the students’ responses to us. This extra layer of emotional dynamic was noticed by Freud as both necessary for—and dangerous to—therapy. Freud trained analysts to be able to recognize and manage their own emotional responses to the responses clients have toward them as material emerges during a session; writing in 1910, Freud called this second layer of responses “countertransference” (1910, 141–151). In addition to managing their clients’ emotional transference, analysts must manage their reactions to that transference. Unchecked, countertransfer- ence leads the client away from the analysis and toward acting out. This is also the delicate but necessary job instructors take on when we recog- nize the emotional system of the classroom. If we put Robertson’s systems NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl 106 TEACHING AND EMOTION thinking together with Boice’s advice for mindfully modulating our emo- tions and Palmer’s fearless reflective confrontation of emotions, we begin to see a way to engage the emotional dynamics of the classroom productively. We can imagine a teacher/learner-centered classroom in which we are all fully present. Appropriate Ambition I think we often tend to hide how much success in the classroom means to us because it is so personal, so emotional, that public yearning for suc- cess increases our vulnerability. It is easy to imagine myself as an ambitious scholar, but what does it mean to be ambitious in the classroom? My old self is livid at the thought that I am not “all in” when teaching. I have al- ways been driven by a commitment to leveling the playing field by giving students access to literacy in first-year composition and access to culture in literature classes. When I first started teaching, I saw that it was my passion for literature that pulled students in. I tried to redirect their response to my enthusiasm onto what we were reading. My student evaluations praised my enthusiasm and my passion for the subject just as Boice predicts, but at the end of every semester, I was left exhausted and gasping for breath. For me, burnout was the result of a cycle of over-attachment to the course content and to the students that necessitated creating boundaries that took an im- mense amount of energy to maintain—and that I would not have needed if I had moderated my emotional attachment in the first place. Regardless of whether emotions are absent or extreme, they can unbalance a classroom. Acknowledging the emotions we bring into the classroom, as well as those generated by the class itself, allows us to moderate our responses and be fully present when we teach. I learned a lot in my own classes by asking questions I could not answer and finding a way toward new insight. I still do this—but now I focus on my students’ insights rather than my own. Recognizing and accepting my emo- tional engagement with students frees up the energy I had previously used to be overenthusiastic or friendly but distant. After a break from teaching, my position has shifted to one that feels more sustainable. As a lecturer, I had performed enthusiasm; in learner-centered classes, I had withdrawn to the point of invisibility. Both of these postures forced me to assume an in- authentic persona. I reengaged with teaching when I stopped repressing my own emotions and allowed myself to engage in content, pedagogy, and the multiple and multi-layered dynamics in a classroom that also included me: how I feel and how I represent myself are now more aligned. In the student- centered classroom I felt, as Robertson notes, as though I was just an ob- server. Now I feel like the conductor. I am “all in” but in a completely differ- ent and sustainable way. I strive for balance by recognizing and regulating— rather than repressing or eliminating—my emotional responses; this is an ambitious goal. I’m not always going to be successful, but because of this NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl THE EMOTIONAL BALANCING ACT OF TEACHING: A BURNOUT RECOVERY PLAN 107 goal, the classroom experience feels richer and more deeply engaged with student learning. That feels like an appropriate ambition—one that offers hope for keeping my balance. References Barr, R. B., and Tagg, J. 1995. “From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm For Undergraduate Education.” Change (November/December): 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.1995.10544672 Boice, R. 2000. Advice for New Faculty Members: Nihil Nimus. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Fink, L. D. 2003. Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Freud, S. 1910. “The future prospects of psycho-analytic theory.” In The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological works of Sigmund Freud. vol. 11. London: Hogarth Press. Massé, M. A. & Hogan, K. J. 2012. Over A Million Served: Gendered Service in Language And Literature Workplaces. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. Palmer, P. 1998. The Courage To Teach: Exploring The Inner Landscape Of A Teacher’s Life. San Francisco, CA: Jossy-Bass. Plunkett, M. 2016. “How Two of The World’s Top Athletes Battled Burnout.” Washington Post (Aug, 18): 13. Robertson, D. L. 1999. “Professors’ Perspectives On Their Teaching.” Innovative Higher Education 33(4): 271–294. Robertson, D. R. 2001. “Beyond Learner-Centeredness: Close Encounters of the Syste- mocentric Kind.” Journal of Staff, Program, & Organizational Development 18(1): 7–13. KARYN Z. SPROLES is director of the Center for Teaching & Learning at the United States Naval Academy. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • DOI: 10.1002/tl