The Effects of Pupil Control Ideology of Teachers on their Conflict Management Strategies

Öz

The aim of this study was to determine teachers' perspectives on conflict management strategies and further to determine the effects of pupil control ideologies on their conflict management strategies. 120 primary and secondary school teachers were administered a Likert type questionnaire. The data collected were analyzed through multiple regression analyses and the teachers’ perspectives on conflict management strategies were determined. Moreover, the effects of pupil control ideology of teachers on their conflict management strategies were revealed. The results of this study suggested that teachers preferred integration reconciliation strategy in conflict resolution the most, and domination strategy the least. It was observed that, among the conflict management strategies, teachers’ pupil control ideologies predicted domination strategy positively and integration-reconciliation negatively. Certain suggestions were made based on the findings of the study.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Pupil control ideology, teachers, conflict management strategies

Kaynakça

1. Akgun, N., Yildiz, K., & Celik, D. (2009). Ortaogretim Okulu Yoneticilerinin Ogretmenlerle Aralarindaki Catismalari Yonetme Yontemleri. Abant Izzet Baysal Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 9(1), 89-101
2. Bas, G., & Beyhan, O. (2013). Ogretmen Adaylarinin Ogretme-Ogrenme Anlayislari ile Ogrenci Kontrol Ideolojileri Arasindaki Iliski. Hacettepe Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 1, 14-26
3. Bayram, F., & Aypay, A. (2012). Ilkogretim Okullarinda Mudur Etkililigi, Okul Iklimi & Ogrenci Kontrol Ideolojileri Arasindaki Iliski. Egitimde Politika Analizi Dergisi, 1(1), 49-63.
4. Buyukozturk, S., Cakmak, E.K., Akgun, O.E., Karadeniz, S. & Demirel, F. (2008). Bilimsel Arastirma Yontemleri. 2.Baski, Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
5. Caglayan, O. A. (2006). Orgutsel Catisma Yonetimi & Bir Arastirma. Yuksek Lisans Tezi. Pamukkale Universitesi, Denizli.
6. Celik, V. (2005). Sinif yonetimi. 3. Baski, Ankara. Nobel
7. Durukan, H. (2004). Egitimde Catisma & Yonetimi. Turkiye Sosyal Arastirma Dergisi, 2, 193-198.
8. Fraenkel, J.R., & Norman, E.W. (2008). How to design and evaluate research in education. 7th Edition, Boston: McGraw-Hill.

9. Friedman, R.A., Tidd, S.T., Currall, S.C., & Tsai, J.C. (2000). What Goes Around Comes Around: The Impact of Personal Conflict Style on Work Conflict and Stress. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 11(1), 32-55.
10. Gunbayi, I. & Karahan, I. (2006). Ilkogretim Okulu Ogretmenlerinin Kurum Ici Catismalari Yonetim Bicemleri. Afyon Kocatepe Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 1, 209-230.
11. Hoy, W. K. (2001). The Pupil control Studies A Historical, Theoretical and Ampirical Analysis. Journal of Educational Administration, 39(5), 424-441
12. Hoy, W. K., & C. G. Miskel. (2010). Egitim Yonetimi. Teori, Arastirma & Uygulama (Cev. Ed. Selahattin Turan). Ankara. Nobel Yayincilik
13. Inandi, Y., Tunc, B., & Gunduz, B. (2013). Okul Yoneticilerinin Ozyeterlik Algilari ile Catismayi Cozme Stratejileri Arasindaki Iliski. Kuram & Uygulamada Egitim Yonetimi, 19(2),275-294.
14. Karakus, M., & Cankaya, I. H., (2009). Okul Yoneticilerinin Kisilik Ozelliklerinin Catisma Cozme Stratejileri Uzerindeki Etkisi. Adiyaman Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi, 3, 111-118
15. Karasar, N. (1998). Bilimsel arastirma yontemi. 8. Basim, Ankara: Nobel.
16. Karatas, S. (2007). Afyonkarahisar Ili Merkez Ilkogretim Okullarinda Gorev Yapan Sinif & Brans Ogretmenlerinin Kurumici Catismalari Yonetim Bicemine Iliskin Gorusleri, Bilim Egitim Dusunce Dergisi, Cilt: 7, sayi. 2. http://www.universite-toplum.org/pdf/pdf_UT_321.pdf
17. Karcioglu, F., Kahya, C., & Buzkan, K. (2012). Catisma Yonetim Stratejisinin Tahmin Edicileri Olarak Orgutsel Kultur Tipleri. Ataturk Universitesi Iktisadi & Idari Bilimler Dergisi, 26(1), 77-91.
18. Karip. E. (2003). Catisma Yonetimi. 3. Baski. Ankara: Pegem A.
19. Kocel, T. (2010). Isletme yoneticiligi. Istanbul: Beta Basim Yayim Dagitim
20. Ozdemir, A. A. (2012). Catisma & Stres Yonetimi I. Ceyhan, E. (Ed.). Eskisehir: Anadolu Universitesi.
21. Ozdemir, A. Y., & Ozdemir, A. (2007). Duygusal Zeka & Catisma Yonetimi Stratejileri Arasindaki Iliskilerin Incelenmesi: Universitede Calisan Akademik & Idari Personel Uzerine Uygulama. Selcuk Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi, 18, 393-410
22. Ozgan, H. (2006). Ilkogretim Okulu Ogretmenlerinin Catisma Yonetimi Stratejilerinin Incelenmesi (Gaziantep Ornegi). (Unpublished Doctorate Thesis). Gaziantep Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu, Gaziantep.
23. Polat, S., & Arslan, H. (2004). Yuksek Ogretim Orgutunde Gorev Yapan Yoneticilerin Catisma Yonetimi Stratejilerini Kullanma Duzeyleri. Kuram & Uygulamada Egitim Yonetimi, 10(3), 430-457
24. Rahim, M. A., & Bonoma, T. V. (1979). Menaging Organizational Conflict: A Model for Diagnosis and Intervention. Psychological Reports, 44, 1323-1343
25. Rahim, M. A. (1983). A Measure of Handling Interpersonal Conflict. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 368-376
26. Rahim, M. A. (2001) Managing Conflict in Organizations. Third Edition, Quorum Books Westport, Connecticut. London: Greenwood Publishing Group.
27. Rahim, M. A. (2002). Toward a theory of managing organizational conflict. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 13(3), 206−235.
28. Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2013). Orgutsel davranis. (14.Basimdan Cev. I. Erdem). Ankara: Nobel
29. Sari, S. (2005). Ilkogretim 5. Sinif Ogrencilerine Catisma Cozumu Becerilerinin Kazandirilmasinda Akademik Celiski, Deger Celiskisi & Gudumlu Tartisma Yontemlerinin Etkisi (Unpublished Master Thesis). Cukurova Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu, Adana, Turkey.
30. Sarpkaya, R. (2002). Egitim Orgutlerinde Catisma Yonetimi & Bir Ornek Olay. Kuram & Uygulamada Egitim Yonetimi, 31, 414-429
31. Sahin, A., Emini, F. T., & Unsal, O.(2006). Catisma Yonetimi Yontemleri & Hastane Orgutlerinde Bir Uygulama. Selcuk Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi, 15, 553-568
32. Sirin, E. F., & Yetim, A. A. (2009). Beden Egitimi & Spor Yuksekokulu Yoneticilerinin Catisma Yonetimi Stratejilerini Kullanma Duzeylerinin Yonetici & Akademisyen Algilarina Gore Incelenmesi. Celal Bayar Universitesi Beden Egitimi & Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(4), 186-198.
33. Thomas, K. W., & Kilmann, R. H. (2010). Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument. Report Prepared for Jane Sample, https://www.cpp.com/pdfs/smp248248.pdf (Acces date: 05.02.2014).
34. Turan, S., & Altug, S. C. (2008). Ogretmenlerin Ogrenci Kontrol Ideolojileri. Usak Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 1(1), 95-113
35. Willover, D. J., Eidell, T. L., & Hoy, W. K. (1967). The School and Pupil Control Ideology. (Pennslivania State Studies Monograph, No:24), University Park: Pennslivania State University Press.
36. Yilmaz, K. (2007). Ilkogretim Okulu Ogretmenlerinin Okul Yoneticilerinin Liderlik Davranislari & Ogrenci Kontrol Ideolojilerine Iliskin Gorusleri. Egitim & Bilim, 32(146), 12-23
37. Yilmaz, K. (2009). Primary school teachers’ views about pupil control ideologies and classroom management styles. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 4, 157-167.