Skip to main content Accessibility help

Criticizing another's child: How teachers evaluate students during parent-teacher conferences

  • Danielle Pillet-Shore (a1)


As the principal occasion for establishing cooperation between family and school, the parent-teacher conference is crucial to the social and educational lives of children. But there is a problem: reports of parent-teacher conflict pervade extant literature. Previous studies do not, however, explain how conflict emerges in real time or how conflict is often avoided during conferences. This article examines a diverse corpus of video-recorded naturally occurring conferences to elucidate a structural preference organization operative during parent-teacher interaction that enables participants to forestall conflict. Focusing on teachers' conduct around student-praise and student-criticism, this investigation demonstrates that teachers do extra interactional work when articulating student-criticism. This research explicates two of teachers' most regular actions constituting this extra work: obfuscating responsibility for student-troubles by omitting explicit reference to the student, and routinizing student-troubles by invoking other comparable cases of that same trouble. Analysis illuminates teachers' work to maintain solidarity with students, and thus parents. (Institutional interaction, parent-teacher conferences, conversation analysis, criticism, praise, evaluating students, assessments, preference organization)*



Hide All
Attanucci, Jane S. (2004). Questioning honor: A parent-teacher conflict over excellence and diversity in a USA urban high school. Journal of Moral Education 33(1):5769.
Baumeister, Roy; Bratslavsky, Ellen; Finkenauer, Catrin; & Vohs, Kathleen (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology 5(4):323–70.
Brown, Penelope, & Levinson, Stephen C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Drew, Paul, & Heritage, John (eds.) (1992). Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Driscoll, Gertrude (1944). The parent-teacher conference. Teachers College Record 45(7):463–70.
Erickson, Frederick, & Shultz, Jeffrey (1982). The counselor as gatekeeper: Social interactions in interviews. New York: Academic Press.
Goffman, Erving (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays in face-to-face behavior. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
Goffman, Erving (1981). Footing. In Goffman, Erving (ed.), Forms of talk, 124–59. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Goodwin, Charles (1979). The interactive construction of a sentence in natural conversation. In Psathas, George (ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology, 97121. New York: Irvington.
Harvard Family Research Project (2010). Parent-teacher conference tip sheets for principals, teachers, and parents. Online:; accessed June 7, 2012.
Heinemann, Trine, & Traverso, Veronique (2009). Complaining in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 41(12):2381–578.
Heritage, John (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Heritage, John (1997). Conversation analysis and institutional talk: Analyzing data. In Silverman, David (ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice, 161–82. London: Sage.
Heritage, John (2002). Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying agreement/disagreement. In Ford, Cecilia, Fox, Barbara, & Thompson, Sandra (eds.), The language of turn and sequence, 196224. New York: Oxford University Press.
Jefferson, Gail (1979). A technique for inviting laughter and its subsequent acceptance/declination. In Psathas, George (ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology, 7996. New York: Irvington.
Jefferson, Gail (1988). On the sequential organization of troubles talk in ordinary conversation. Social Problems 35(4):418–42.
Lawrence-Lightfoot, Sara (2003). The essential conversation: What parents and teachers can learn from each other. New York: Ballantine Books.
Lemmer, Eleanor (2012). Who's doing the talking? Teacher and parent experiences of parent- teacher conferences. South African Journal of Education 32(1):8396.
Lerner, Gene H. (2013). On the place of hesitating in delicate formulations: A turn- constructional infrastructure for collaborative indiscretion. In Sidnell, Jack, Hayashi, Makoto, & Raymond, Geoffrey (eds.), Conversational repair and human understanding, 95134. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Maynard, Douglas (1992). On clinicians’ co-implicating recipients’ perspective in the delivery of diagnostic news. In Drew, Paul & Heritage, John (eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings, 331–58. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Maynard, Douglas (2003). Bad news, good news: Conversational order in everyday talk and clinical settings. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Minke, Kathleen M., & Anderson, Kellie J. (2003). Restructuring routine parent-teacher conferences: The family-school conference model. The Elementary School Journal 104(1):4969.
Oh, Sun-Young (2006). English zero anaphora as an interactional resource II. Discourse Studies 8(6):817–46.
Pillet, Danielle (2001). ‘Doing pretty well’: How teachers manage the interactional environment of unfavorable student evaluation in parent-teacher conferences. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles M.A. thesis.
Pillet-Shore, Danielle (2006). Weighing in primary-care nurse-patient interactions. Social Science and Medicine 62(2):407–21.
Pillet-Shore, Danielle (2011). Doing introductions: The work involved in meeting someone new. Communication Monographs 78(1):7395.
Pillet-Shore, Danielle (2012). The problems with praise in parent-teacher interaction. Communication Monographs 79(2):181204.
Pillet-Shore, Danielle (2014). Criticizing another's child: How teachers evaluate students during parent-teacher conferences. Paper presented at the 100th Annual Convention of the National Communication Association, Chicago, Illinois.
Pillet-Shore, Danielle (2015a). Being a ‘good parent’ in parent-teacher conferences. Journal of Communication 65(2):373–95.
Pillet-Shore, Danielle (2015b). Complaints. In Tracy, Karen, Ilie, Cornelia, & Sandel, Todd (eds.), The international encyclopedia of language and social interaction. Boston: John Wiley & Sons.
Pillet-Shore, Danielle (2015c). Calling attention to mutually-perceivable features of the scene: How registering works when opening face-to-face interaction. Paper accepted for presentation at the International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis. Kolding, Denmark, August 4–7.
Pomerantz, Anita (1980). Telling my side: ‘Limited access’ as a ‘fishing’ device. Sociological Inquiry 50(3–4):186–98.
Rabbitt, James A. (1978). The parent/teacher conference: Trauma or teamwork? The Phi Delta Kappan 59(7):471–72.
Raymond, Geoffrey (2004). Prompting action: The stand-alone ‘so’ in ordinary conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction 37(2):185218.
Robinson, Jeffrey, & Bolden, Galina (2010). Preference organization of sequence-initiating actions: The case of explicit account solicitations. Discourse Studies 12(4):501–33.
Sacks, Harvey (1972). On the analyzability of stories by children. In Gumperz, John & Hymes, Dell (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication, 325–45. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Sacks, Harvey; Schegloff, Emanuel A.; & Jefferson, Gail (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50(4):696735.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (1992). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology 97(5):1295–345.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (1996). Some practices for referring to persons in talk-in-interaction: A partial sketch of a systematics. In Fox, Barbara (ed.), Studies in anaphora, 437–85. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (2007a). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis, vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (2007b). A tutorial on membership categorization. Journal of Pragmatics 39:462–82.
Starr, Paul (1982). The social transformation of American medicine. New York: Basic Books.
Tracy, Karen; van Dusen, Donna; & Robinson, Susan (1987). ‘Good’ and ‘bad’ criticism: A descriptive analysis. Communication 37(2):4659.
Tracy, Karen; van Dusen, Donna, & Eisenberg, Eric (1990). Giving criticism: A multiple goals case study. Research on Language and Social Interaction 24:3770.
Waller, Willard (1932). The sociology of teaching. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Language in Society
  • ISSN: 0047-4045
  • EISSN: 1469-8013
  • URL: /core/journals/language-in-society
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed