My name is Sophie Mansuri, and I am a recent graduate of The George Washington University. I earned my B.A. in Political Communication with a minor in International Affairs this past spring, and throughout my time at GW, I was also a student in the Persian program under Professor Valamotamed.

I am writing because I am profoundly disappointed by the decision not to renew Professor Valamotamed’s contract for the upcoming school year. To my knowledge, his record as an educator has been nothing short of exemplary over the past eleven years. As such, us students struggle to understand what other basis there could be for this decision beyond the altercation that occurred this past April preceding an Elliott School event. I am writing independently after speaking with many of my fellow classmates and Persian students—both current students and alumni—who share similar concerns about what this decision means for our community and for the future of Persian at GW.

For us, Professor Valamotamed—or simply Ostad, as we say in Persian—was never just a language instructor. He was a mentor, a role model, and one of the few faculty members who made Iranian students like myself feel truly seen on campus.

As an Iranian American, finding spaces where I felt understood was not always easy. During periods of political upheaval affecting Iran and heightened tensions both nationally and on our own campus, Ostad never shied away from difficult conversations. He understood that teaching Persian meant more than teaching grammar and vocabulary—it meant acknowledging the history, culture, and lived experiences of the people who speak the language. His classroom was one of the few places where I never felt that I had to defend my identity. Instead, I felt encouraged to explore it with curiosity, pride, and understanding. For myself and many of my classmates, Persian became more than a language course; it became a community.

Many students in the International Affairs major had already fulfilled the Elliott School’s language requirement, yet continued taking Persian because of Professor Valamotamed and the community he fostered. I experienced that pull myself. I was not required to begin taking a language course until my junior year, but Ostad’s infectious energy and genuine passion for teaching drew me to begin Persian during my sophomore year and continue taking it for the remainder of my time at GW. I did so not because I needed the credits or was fulfilling a requirement, but because I genuinely wanted to be in his classroom.

I saw that same effect on the students around me. Some entered the program incredibly quiet and hesitant to participate; over time, we watched them become confident, outspoken, and fully themselves. Many of those same students are now among my closest friends. That transformation did not happen by accident. Ostad cultivated a classroom where students felt respected, encouraged, and valued, giving us a reason to return semester after semester even when we were no longer required to do so. That kind of impact cannot be measured by enrollment statistics alone.

This past March, following the escalation of conflict involving Iran, the university wrote to students:

“As events continue to unfold, you might feel overwhelmed by a variety of emotions related to these conflicts… Please know that our thoughts are with you and your loved ones, and that the GW CARE team is here to provide support in any way we can.”

I appreciated receiving that message. It acknowledged that Iranian students were hurting and assured us that GW stood with us during a frightening and deeply personal moment. That is why this decision has been so difficult to reconcile, even as an alum.

For eleven years, Professor Valamotamed embodied that same commitment through his actions. Long before statements of support were issued, he had built a classroom where Iranian students felt welcome, where non-Iranian students learned about our language and culture with curiosity rather than stereotypes, and where everyone was treated with patience and dignity.

I fully recognize that the university has an obligation to take reports of physical altercations seriously. Violence should never be the preferred outcome. However, I am disappointed that such a consequential decision appears to have been made without meaningful consideration of the perspectives of the students who know Professor Valamotamed best, including those who personally witnessed the events surrounding the incident.

The individual involved had, over time, become known within the D.C. community for repeatedly confronting and provoking Iranian faculty and students at university events. Several students witnessed these interactions firsthand. That context does not excuse what occurred, but it is relevant to understanding the circumstances and should not be ignored when evaluating a professor whose eleven-year record of service has otherwise been exemplary.

Equally concerning is the broader pattern many of us observed during our time at GW. The Persian program repeatedly faced uncertainty, with discussions about reducing or canceling course offerings despite enrollment levels comparable to other language programs. Professor Valamotamed consistently advocated for the program and its students, often in the face of obstacles beyond his control.

As someone who spent four years at GW, I can say that Professor Valamotamed had a greater direct impact on my university experience than almost any other faculty member. During difficult semesters, his classroom was a place of respite—free of judgment or hostility and full of wisdom, compassion, and an unwavering passion for teaching. I know I am far from alone in feeling this way.

Removing someone who has served as a pillar of the Iranian community at GW for more than a decade is not simply a personnel decision. It fundamentally alters a program and community that students have relied upon.

The university told us that its thoughts were with Iranian students. Professor Valamotamed showed us what that support could look like in practice. That is the difference between words and action, and it is why this decision has been so painful for so many of us.

I respectfully ask that the university reconsider its decision. At the very least, I ask that the administration genuinely listen to the students whose educational and personal lives have been shaped by Professor Valamotamed. We are among the people most directly affected by his absence, and our experiences deserve to be part of this conversation.

Thank you for your time and consideration.