Managing agency and urgency: Student injury incident reports in Chinese teacher-parent communication

Student injury incidents serve as institutional nexuses where health emergencies intersect with peer conflicts, requiring teachers to negotiate the competing demands of medical immediacy and moral culpability. Drawing on conversation analysis of audio-recorded student incident calls between teachers and parents, this study investigates how teachers navigate these challenging scenarios through the systematic management of agency and urgency. Analysis reveals two distinct yet interrelated patterns in teachers’ reporting practices. First, teachers treat agency (injurer) and urgency (injured student) as discrete components linked to responsibility attribution; they systematically background both elements when reporting to injured students’ parents while foregrounding them in communications with injurers’ parents. Second, the initial attenuation of urgency, while serving to mitigate conflict, necessitates subsequent upgrades to secure immediate involvement from injured students’ parents. These findings illuminate how teachers’ institutional practices systematically prioritize conflict mediation over medical urgency.

Publication history
Table of contents

In Chinese secondary schools, homeroom teachers (banzhuren) occupy a distinctive and demanding position that significantly differs from their western counterparts (Gu et al. 2015). These teachers serve as primary caretakers and managers of their assigned classes, with responsibilities encompassing attendance monitoring, classroom discipline, parent communication, and student incident response. Among these duties, the management of student health incidents emerges as a particularly significant professional obligation. These incidents range from severe medical emergencies to minor ailments, with response protocols calibrated to the immediacy of medical needs. For severe incidents, institutional protocols prioritize immediate medical intervention, with schools coordinating hospital transport prior to parental notification. The majority of incidents, however, involve moderate or mild conditions, necessitating communication with parents to determine appropriate medical intervention, typically comprising either parent-accompanied hospital visits or supervised home recuperation. The institutional emphasis on parental involvement stems from two social-cultural factors: (1) the legal requirement for parental consent in minors’ medical treatment and (2) the institutional mandate to balance student wellbeing with professional liability considerations.

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price. Direct PDF access to this article can be purchased through our e-platform.

References

Alshammari, Basim, and Michael Haugh
2024 “Troubles-Complaints and the Overall Structural Organization of Troubles-Remedy Sequences.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 57: 215–234. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Attanucci, Jane Susan
2004 “Questioning Honor: A Parent-Teacher Conflict over Excellence and Diversity in a USA Urban High School.” Journal of Moral Education 33: 57–69. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bilton, Richard, Alan Jackson, and Bob Hymer
2018 “Cooperation, Conflict and Control: Parent-Teacher Relationships in an English Secondary School.” Educational Review 70: 510–526. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caronia, Letizia, and Chiara Dalledonne Vandini
2019 “Assessing a (Gifted) Child in Parent-Teacher Conference: Participants’ Resources to Pursue (and Resist) a No-Problem Trajectory.” Language and Dialogue 9 (1): 125–148. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard, Martin Haspelmath, and Balthasar Bickel
2015 “Leipzig Glossing Rules.” Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dor, Asnat
2024 “Exploring Parent-Teacher Communication: Understanding Mutual Perspectives and Support During the Transition to First Grade.” Journal of Education and Developmental Psychology 14 (2): 29–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drew, Paul
2013 “Turn Design.” In Handbook of Conversation Analysis, edited by Jack Sidnell, and Tanya Stivers, 131–149. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2022 “The Micro-Politics of Social Actions.” In Action Ascription in Interaction, ed. by Arnulf Deppermann, and Michael Haugh, 57–80. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drew, Paul, and Elizabeth Holt
1988 “Complainable Matters: The Use of Idiomatic Expressions in Making Complaints.” Social Problems 35 (4): 398–417. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drew, Paul, and John Heritage
1992 “Analyzing Talk at Work: An Introduction.” In Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. by Paul Drew, and John Heritage, 3–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drew, Paul, Traci Walker, and Richard Ogden
2013 “Self-Repair and Action Construction.” In Conversational Repair and Human Understanding, ed. by Makoto Hayashi, Geoffrey Raymond, and Jack Sidnell, 71–94. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Enfield, Nick J.
2013Relationship Thinking: Agency, Enchrony, and Human Sociality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman
1989Language and Power. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fekkes, Minne, Frans Pijpers, and S. Pauline Verloove-Vanhorick
2005 “Bullying: Who Does What, When and Where? Involvement of Children, Teachers and Parents in Bullying Behavior.” Health Education Research 20 (1): 81–91. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fox, Barbara A., and Trine Heinemann
2021 “Are They Requests? An Exploration of Declaratives of Trouble in Service Encounters.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 54 (1): 20–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving
1974Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Boston: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gu, Lingyan, Jing Chen, and Jun Li
2015 “The Leadership of Banzhuren in Chinese School: Based on the Sample Survey in Changzhou City of China.” Journal of Education and Human Development 4 (4): 102–114.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heinemann, Trine, and Véronique Traverso
2009 “Complaining in Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 41 (12): 2381–2384. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hepburn, Alexa, and Galina Bolden
2017Transcribing for Social Research. London: Sage. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John
1984Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2015 “Well-Prefaced Turns in English Conversation: A Conversation Analytic Perspective.” Journal of Pragmatics 88: 88–104. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and Steven Clayman
2010Talk in Action: Interactions, Identities, and Institutions. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holt, Elizabeth
1996 “Reporting on Talk: The Use of Direct Reported Speech in Conversation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 29 (3): 219–245. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jing-Schmidt, Zhuo
2005Dramatized Discourse: The Mandarin Chinese Ba-Construction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kendrick, Kobin H.
2018 “Adjusting Epistemic Gradients: The Final Particle Ba in Mandarin Chinese Conversation.” East Asian Pragmatics 3 (1): 5–26. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kendrick, Kobin H., and Francisco Torreira
2015 “The Timing and Construction of Preference: A Quantitative Study.” Discourse Processes 52 (4): 255–289. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kendrick, Kobin H., and Paul Drew
2016 “Recruitment: Offers, Requests, and the Organization of Assistance in Interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 49 (1): 1–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kraft, Matthew A., and Todd Rogers
2015 “The Underutilized Potential of Teacher-to-Parent Communication: Evidence from a Field Experiment.” Economics of Education Review 47: 49–63. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lemmer, Eleanor M.
2012 “Who’s Doing the Talking? Teacher and Parent Experiences of Parent-Teacher Conferences.” South African Journal of Education 32 (1): 83–96. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C.
2013 “Action Formation and Ascription.” In Handbook of Conversation Analysis, edited by Jack Sidnell, and Tanya Stivers, 103–130. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, Charles N., and Sandra A. Thompson
1981Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, Guirong, Millie Lin, Chengfang Liu, Angela Johnson, Yanyan Li, and Prashant Loyalka
2019 “The Prevalence of Parent-Teacher Interaction in Developing Countries and Its Effect on Student Outcomes.” Teaching and Teacher Education 86: 102878. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mandelbaum, Jenny
1993 “Assigning Responsibility in Conversational Story-Telling: The Interactional Construction of Reality.” Text 13 (2): 247–266.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Major, Eliza
2023 “Parent-Teacher Communication from the Perspective of the Educator.” Central European Journal of Educational Research 5 (2): 13–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pillet-Shore, Danielle
2012 “The Problems with Praise in Parent-Teacher Interaction.” Communication Monographs 79 (2): 181–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2015 “Being a ‘Good Parent’ in Parent-Teacher Conferences.” Journal of Communication 65 (2): 373–395. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2016 “Criticizing Another’s Child: How Teachers Evaluate Students During Parent-Teacher Conferences.” Language in Society 45 (1): 33–58. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pino, Marco
2022 “Hurting and Blaming: Two Components in the Action Formation of Complaints About Absent Parties.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 55 (3): 260–278. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita
1978 “Attributions of Responsibility: Blamings.” Sociology 12 (2): 115–121. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey, and Don Zimmerman
2007 “Rights and Responsibilities in Calls for Help: The Case of the Mountain Glade Fire.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 40 (1): 33–61. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rigby, Ken
2008Children and Bullying: How Parents and Educators Can Reduce Bullying at School. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rossi, Giovanni
2018 “Composite Social Actions: The Use of Factual Declaratives in Everyday Interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 51 (4): 379–397. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1986 “The Routine as Achievement.” Human Studies 9 (2–3): 111–151. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2007Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2013 “Ten Operations in Self-Initiated, Same-Turn Repair.” In Conversational Repair and Human Understanding, ed. by Makoto Hayashi, Geoffrey Raymond, and Jack Sidnell, 41–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shao, Jinmin, and Chunli Zhao
2005 “Cognitive Interpretation of ba-Construction and bei-Construction.” Chinese Language Learning 4: 11–18.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sidnell, Jack, and Tanya Stivers
eds. 2013The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa, and Anssi Peräkylä
2012 “Deontic Authority in Interaction: The Right to Announce, Propose, and Decide.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (3): 297–321. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yu, Guodong, and Chaoqiang Wang
2023 “Teacher as Mediator: How Teacher Interacts with Parents of the Victim and Agent in School Conflict.” Contrastive Pragmatics 4 (1): 88–117. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2024 “A Study on the Dependency between Epistemic Status and Deontic Right in Teacher-Parent Communication.” Modern Foreign Languages 1: 26–37.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zinken, Jörg, and Giovanni Rossi
2016 “Assistance and Other Forms of Cooperative Engagement.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 49 (1): 20–26. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
 
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue