European Journal of Education Studies
ISSN: 2501 - 1111
ISSN-L: 2501 - 1111
Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu
10.5281/zenodo.167866 Volume 2│Issue 9│2016
TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES OF
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
Secil Eda Kartal1, Ramazan Yirci2, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir3i
Bartin University, Faculty of Education, Bartin, Turkey
1
2Sutcu Imam University, Faculty of Education, Kahramanmaras, Turkey
Firat University, Faculty of Education, Elazig, Turkey
3
Abstract:
The purpose of this study is to determine conflict management styles of school
administrators with regards to teacher perceptions. With this respect, 300 high school
teachers working in Bartin constituted the study sample. The scale consisting of five
dimensions and adapted into Turkish by Gumuseli (1994) was used as the data
collection instrument. The dimensions of the scale are Integrating Style, Compromising
Style, Accommodating Style, Dominating Style and Avoiding Style. The scale consists
of a total of 28 items. According to the data of the study, teacher opinions about school
administrators’ conflict resolution styles are at Sometimes level. Whether or not there
are differences between the genders, educational status, year of service and professional
duration in the school variables was examined. While there were no significant
differences between groups concerning the gender and professional duration variables,
there were significant differences for the educational status and years of service
variables.
Keywords: conflict management, school principal, teacher
1. Introduction
Workers enter in mutual interactions in educational organizations which are among
social organizations. It is crucial to manage the communication and interaction between
the workers according to organizational goals so as to achieve administrative
Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved 136
Published by Open Access Publishing Group ©2015.
Secil Eda Kartal, Ramazan Yirci, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir -
TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
effectiveness. Conflicts can arise due to the differences in the educational status or
mental-social structures of the workers. Administrators have a key responsibility in
resolving these probable conflicts and they are obliged to be able to manage these
problems that occur within their organizations. This is inevitable for administrative
effectiveness.
It is difficult to define the term conflict with only one sentence (Rahim, Magner &
Shapiro, 2000). Conflict can be defined as an outcome of the disagreement that takes
place between the goals, behaviours and values of an individual and other individuals.
Through abstract terms, conflict can be defined as power struggle (Rahim, Magner &
Shapiro, 2000), opposition, incompatibility and the cross-purposes among individuals
(Dokur & Profeta, 2006). No matter how conflict is defined, there is disagreement,
opposition, incompatibility and cross-purposes among individuals in conflicting cases
(Rowden, 2000).
The term conflict, which has no direct equivalent in Turkish, is referred to as
contradiction, disagreement, incompatibility, dispute and debate (Gumuseli, 1994). Like
force and obstruction, conflict is a negative term which destabilizes the order workers
create with the organization and forces them to stabilize again (Basaran, 1982). Conflict
is; the disagreement between two or more people or groups that occurs due to various
reasons. No matter how conflict is defined, disagreement, incompatibility and cross-
purposes among individuals is the main components of conflicts (Steyn, & Van
Niekerk, 2007; Folger, Pool & Stutman, 2005; Koçel, 2005).
Conflicts are probable experiences that humans, who are social beings, can
encounter (Uline, Tschannen-Moran and Perez; 2003: 783; Slabbert, 2004; Daft, 2010).
Schools, which are sub-systems of the educational system, are social systems whose
inputs and outputs are humans. Conflicts among workers are inevitable in educational
organizations whose input and outputs are humans (Durukan, 2004). Collaborative
efforts in resolving conflicts within organizations will be effective in attaining
organizational goals Goh, . Conflicts don’t only have negative outcomes for
organizations. When the literature is considered various researchers have underlines
that conflicts have negative outcomes for organizations as well positive outcomes
(Genc, 2005; Bayar, 2015). A good administrator will not only resolve conflicts but also
take lessons from these conflict experiences to better manage the organization.
Educational institutions are among the organizations in which conflicts occur
frequently. Thus, it is crucial for school administrators to accurately analyse conflicts, to
successfully manage them and to be aware of the personal characteristics that shape
humans and their behaviours. In cases of conflicts, the conflict management style
preferences of administrators can differ among administrators and among the
conditions (Yildizoglu & Burgaz, 2014). Studies have emphasized that the amount of
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 137
Secil Eda Kartal, Ramazan Yirci, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir -
TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
time administrators spend in resolving conflicts has doubled since the mid ’s. ıt is
evident that this issue is becoming more significant. Thus, in order to manage conflicts
in accordance with organizational goals, administrators should have necessary
knowledge and experience (Kocel, 2005).
Conflict management consists of acquiring necessary skills related to conflict
resolution, the self-awareness related to conflict models, effective communication skills
and creating a structure for conflict resolutions. Conflict resolution is crucial for a better
working environment and healthier workers (Rahim, 1992). In school settings,
principals are expected to undertake the key role in resolving conflicts. According to
Steyn and Van Niekerk (2007:76), school administrators need to struggle with the
following four types of conflicts. These are:
1. Intrapersonal conflict (within an individual)
2. Interpersonal conflict (between individuals)
3. Intergroup conflict (between groups)
4. School-community conflicts (within the community)
Various styles have been suggested for resolving conflicts in studies about
conflict management. The most prominent example is the classification of five styles
made by Rahim et al. (2002). The five styles of conflict management are:
1. Integration: In this style, the individual has high level of concern for both himself
and others. This is a win-win style which requires collaboration, openness,
knowledge sharing among parties and examining differences together so as to
reach a solution that both parties will accept. The integration approach requires
active collaboration such as openness and knowledge transfer among the parties
(Rahim, Magner & Shapiro, 2000).
2. Compromising: It refers to the low concern for the self but the high concern for
others. This style, which emphasizes common features so as to downplay
differences and to satisfy the interests of the other party, is defined as the
compatibility, lack of confrontation, compliance or lose-win style (Rahim, 1992).
3. Dominating: It refers to the individual having high concern for the self and low
concern for others. In the Dominating approach administrators or individuals
avoid other people’s desires, expectations and needs so as to protect their own
interests and attain their own goals. While administrators or individuals have
high concerns for themselves, they have low concerns others. Administrators or
individuals use their own power and authorities to solve conflicts and dominate
against conflicts (Kocel, 2005).
4. Avoiding: It refers to the low concern towards the self and others. This style is
related to regression, avoiding responsibility, sidestepping or no see, hear and
talking the problem Ozkalp & Kirel, .
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 138
Secil Eda Kartal, Ramazan Yirci, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir -
TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
5. Accommodating: It refers to the intermediate concern for the self and for others.
This style involves common sharing among parties as both parties give up on
certain things to come to an acceptable decision and it refers to seeking a middle
point. Differences among parties are a subsidiarity issue (Kocel, 2005; Rahim,
1992).
2. Method
This study was design according to the quantitative research method and conducted
through the screening model. Screening models are research approaches that aim at
describing past or present events as they are and also revealing what the truth is
(Karasar, 2012:77). By conducting analyses on the sample selected from the population,
screening models help numerically describing the attitudes, tendencies or opinions
within the population (Creswell, 2013). Studies conducted through the screening model
facilitate collecting information and examining the relationships with the variables
(Kaptan, 1998: 62).
Population Sample
High school teachers working in the center of Bartin constituted the study population.
The study sample consisted of a total of 300 teachers selected through the simple
random sampling method. According to Buyukozturk (2010: 84), simple random
sampling is the method in which each unit has the equal chance of being selected in the
sample during the sampling process.
Data Collection Instrument
The Determining Teacher Perceptions Related to Conflict Management Styles of School
Principals Scale was used in the study so as to determine participant opinions on
conflict management styles. This scale was developed by Rahim (1983) and adapted
into Turkish by (Gumuseli, 1994). The scale has the feature to measure five different
conflict management styles. In the scale consisting of 28 items, there are 6 items on the
Integrating Style, 5 items on the Compromising Style, 5 items on the Dominating Style,
6 items on the Avoiding Style and 6 items on the Accommodating Style. The highest
score that can be obtained from the scale is 140 and the lowest is 28. The Cronbach
alpha reliability coefficient for the overall scale is .90; and the reliability coefficients for
each sub-dimension are .90, .87, .89, .91 and .90 respectively. Because the Cronbach
Alpha value is >0.70 (Buyukozturk, 2010), the scale was considered reliable.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 139
Secil Eda Kartal, Ramazan Yirci, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir -
TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
Data Analysis
In the 5 point Likert type scale, participant opinions were transformed into quantitative
data as Lather less , Less , Sometimes , Mostly and “lways . The
score intervals of participant agreement on the items of the scale are given on the Table
1.
Table 1: Score Intervals of the Level of Agreements
Score Interval Level of Participation
1.00-1.79 Lather less
1.80-2.59 Less
2.60-3.39 Sometimes
3.40-4.19 Mostly
4.20-5.00 Always
The data were transcribed to the computer and analysed through statistical processes.
Once the data collection instruments were collected the data were transcribed to the
computer and analysed with statistical software. Descriptive statistics were carried out
initially based on the aims of the study. Frequency, percentage, arithmetic mean values
were calculated during the analysis process. An Independent Samples T-Test was
conducted to determine whether or not there is a significant difference between the
gender, duty and educational status variables; a one way variance analysis (ANOVA)
was conducted to determine whether or not there is a significant difference between the
year of service and professional duration.
3. Findings
The demographic features of the participants are given on Table 2.
Table 2: Demographic Features of the Participants
Değişkenler f %
Female 126 42,0
Gender
Male 174 58,0
1-5 Years 61 20,3
6-10 Years 52 17,3
Year of Service 11-15 Years 51 17,0
16-20 Years 45 15,0
21 Years + 91 30,3
1-5 Years 149 49,7
6-10 Years 91 30,3
Professional Duration Variable 11-15 Years 21 7,0
16-20 Years 16 5,3
21 Years + 23 7,7
Postgraduate degrees 252 84,0
Educational Status
Graduate degrees 48 16,0
Total 300 100
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 140
Secil Eda Kartal, Ramazan Yirci, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir -
TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
It is evident on Table 2 that 42.0% of the participants are female and 58.0% are male;
with regards to the year of service variable 20.3% have 1-5 years, 17.3% have 6-10 years,
17.0% have 11-15 years, 15.0% have 16-20 years and 30.3% have 21 years and above
seniority. When the professional duration of teachers in the schools they currently work
in is considered, it is evident that 49.7% have spent 1-5 years, 30.3% have spent 6-10
years, 7.0% have spent 11-15 years, 5.3% have spent 16-20 years and 7.7% have spent 21
years and more. When the educational statuses of the participants are considered, it is
evident that 84.0% of the teachers have a graduate and 16 % have a postgraduate
degree.
Table 3: Results of the Descriptive Analysis Regarding Teacher Perceptions on
Conflict Management Styles of School Administrators
Scale and Sub-Factors N Min Max SS
Integrating Style 300 1,00 5,00 3,21 1,147
Compromising Style 300 1,00 5,00 2,88 1,046
Dominating Style 300 1,00 5,00 2,94 ,946
Avoiding Style 300 1,00 5,00 3,03 ,867
Accommodating Style 300 1,00 5,00 3,09 ,991
Total 300 1,00 5,00 3,04 ,757
Table 3 displays the arithmetic means and standard deviation values of school
administrators’ conflict management styles and the sub-dimensions with regards to
teacher opinions. When the arithmetic means are considered, opinions are observed to
be at Sometimes level. The Integrating Style has the highest average while the
Table 4: Conflict Management Styles According to the Gender Variable -
Results of the Independent Samples T-Test
Gender n SS sd t p
Female 126 3,25 1,07
Integrating Style 298 ,46 ,65
Male 174 3,19 1,20
Female 126 2,88 ,99
Compromising Style 298 ,02 ,98
Male 174 2,88 1,09
Female 126 2,87 ,99
Dominating Style 298 -1,05 ,30
Male 174 2,99 ,92
Female 126 3,01 ,80
Avoiding Style 298 -,47 ,64
Male 174 3,05 ,91
Female 126 3,09 ,95
Accommodating Style 298 ,07 ,94
Male 174 3,08 1,03
Female 126 3,03 ,72
Total 298 -,17 ,86
Male 174 3,05 ,79
*p < .05
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 141
Secil Eda Kartal, Ramazan Yirci, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir -
TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
Table 4 displays the t-test which indicates whether or not there is a significant
difference between female and male teachers’ opinions. “ccording to the table, female
teachers have higher averages than male teachers concerning the Integrating Style and
the Accommodating Style; and male teachers have higher averages than female teachers
considering the Dominating Style, Avoiding Style and the overall scale. For the
When teacher opinions are considered, it is evident that there are no significant
differences (p>.05).
Table 5: Conflict Management Styles According to the Educational Status Variable -
Results of the Independent Samples T-Test
Educational Status n SS sd t p
Postgraduate degrees 252 3,21 1,16
Integrating Style 298 -,016 ,99
Graduate degrees 48 3,22 1,09
Postgraduate degrees 252 2,92 1,08
Compromising Style 298 1,63 ,10
Graduate degrees 48 2,65 ,85
Postgraduate degrees 252 2,96 ,98
Dominating Style 298 ,73 ,46
Graduate degrees 48 2,85 ,76
Postgraduate degrees 252 3,09 ,88
Avoiding Style 298 2,67 ,01*
Graduate degrees 48 2,73 ,72
Postgraduate degrees 252 3,09 ,99
Accommodating Style 298 ,33 ,74
Graduate degrees 48 3,04 ,97
Postgraduate degrees 252 3,06 ,78
Total 298 1,31 ,19
Graduate degrees 48 2,91 ,63
*p < .05
The table displays the data indicating whether or not there is a significant difference
between the opinions concerning the educational status of teachers. In general, teachers
with graduate degrees have more positive opinions than teachers with postgraduate
degrees. Teachers receiving post graduate education were observed to have higher
-
the Integrating style. According to the table, there is a significant difference in favour of
the participants receiving undergraduate education at the Avoiding Style (p<.05).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 142
Secil Eda Kartal, Ramazan Yirci, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir -
TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
Table 6: Conflict Management Styles according to the Year of Service Variable -
Results ANOVA Test
Year of Variance Sum of Squares Significant
n ss sd F p
Service Source Squares Average Difference
1-5 Years 61 3,15 ,98
6-10 Years 52 3,61 ,97 Intergroup 10,607 4 2,652 2,042 ,09
Integrating
Groups
Style
11-15 Years 51 3,04 1,28 383,061 295 1,299
within
16-20 Years 45 3,18 1,13 Total 393,668 299
21 Years and
Above
91 3,14 1,25
1-5 Years 61 2,87 ,93
Compromising
6-10 Years 52 3,34 ,95 Intergroup 16,319 4 4,080 3,872 ,00*
Groups
Style
11-15 Years 51 2,88 1,20 310,793 295 1,054 3,5>4
within 2>3>1>5
16-20 Years 45 2,57 ,83 Total 327,112 299
21 Years and
Above
91 2,77 1,11
1-5 Years 61 3,20 ,84
6-10 Years 52 3,37 ,88 Intergroup 42,713 4 10,678 14,003 ,00*
Dominating
Groups
Style
11-15 Years 51 2,55 ,73 224,958 295 ,763 5>3
within
16-20 Years 45 2,28 ,82 Total 267,671 299
21 Years and
Above
91 3,07 ,99
1-5 Years 61 2,95 ,72
Avoiding Style
6-10 Years 52 3,26 ,88 Intergroup 20,572 4 5,143 7,424 ,00* 2,3>4
Groups 2,3>5
11-15 Years 51 2,80 1,22 204,355 295 ,693
within 1,2>3
16-20 Years 45 2,60 ,61 Total 224,928 299 2>1
21 Years and
Above
91 3,30 ,69
1-5 Years 61 3,05 ,83
Accommodatin
6-10 Years 52 3,43 ,81 Intergroup 7,755 4 1,939 2,000 ,10
g Style
Groups
11-15 Years 51 3,01 1,21 286,049 295 ,970
within
16-20 Years 45 3,02 ,92 Total 293,805 299
21 Years and
Above
91 2,99 1,06
1-5 Years 61 3,04 ,60
6-10 Years 52 3,41 ,68 Intergroup 12,304 4 3,076 5,712 ,00*
TOTAL
Groups 1,2,5>3
11-15 Years 51 2,87 1,01 158,880 295 ,539
within 3>4
16-20 Years 45 2,75 ,63 Total 171,184 299
21 Years and
Above
91 3,06 ,71
Table 6 displays the ANOVA test result which was conducted to determine whether or
not there is a difference between conflict management styles of school administrators
based on the year of service variable. The data indicate that there are significant
differences for all the dimensions and the scale except the Integrating and
Accommodating Styles. Results of the analyses conducted to determine between which
groups the difference occurred indicate that teachers with 6-10 years of service have the
highest average for the Compromising Style and Avoiding Style; however, the
difference at the Dominating Style occurred for teachers with 11-15 years and 21 years
and over of service. For the Accommodating Style, teachers with 1-5 years, 6-10 years
and 21 years and over service have significant differences from teachers with 11-15
years of service; in addition, there is a significant difference between teachers 11-15
years and teachers with 16-20 years of service.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 143
Secil Eda Kartal, Ramazan Yirci, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir -
TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
Table 7: Conflict Management Styles according to the Professional Duration Variable -
Results ANOVA Test
Professional Variance Sum of Squares
n ss sd F p
Duration Source Squares average
1-5 Years 149 3,38 1,05
Integrating
6-10 Years 91 3,10 1,14 Intergroup 9,406 4 2,351 1,805 ,128
Style
11-15 Years 21 3,11 1,33 Groups within 384,262 295 1,303
16-20 Years 16 2,89 1,59 Total 393,668 299
21 Years and Above 23 2,91 1,17
1-5 Years 149 2,95 ,96
Compromisin
6-10 Years 91 2,78 1,11 Intergroup 3,800 4 ,950 ,867 ,484
g Style
11-15 Years 21 3,10 1,15 Groups within 323,311 295 1,096
16-20 Years 16 2,60 1,30 Total 327,112 299
21 Years and Above 23 2,82 1,09
1-5 Years 149 2,97 1,04
Dominating
6-10 Years 91 2,82 ,89 Intergroup 4,517 4 1,129 1,266 ,283
Style
11-15 Years 21 2,81 ,68 Groups within 263,154 295 ,892
16-20 Years 16 3,01 ,85 Total 267,671 299
21 Years and Above 23 3,28 ,79
1-5 Years 149 3,09 ,74
91 2,87 1,02
Avoiding
6-10 Years Intergroup 5,507 4 1,377 1,851 ,119
Style
11-15 Years 21 3,12 1,06 Groups within 219,421 295 ,744
16-20 Years 16 3,42 ,53 Total 224,928 299
21 Years and Above 23 2,94 ,91
1-5 Years 149 3,22 ,90
Accommodat
91 2,95 1,02
ing Style
6-10 Years Intergroup 5,986 4 1,497 1,534 ,192
11-15 Years 21 2,90 1,29 Groups within 287,818 295 ,976
16-20 Years 16 3,07 1,03 Total 293,805 299
21 Years and Above 23 2,89 1,06
1-5 Years 149 3,13 ,61
6-10 Years 91 2,91 ,88 Intergroup 2,941 4 ,735 1,289 ,274
TOTAL
11-15 Years 21 3,01 ,99 Groups within 168,243 295 ,570
16-20 Years 16 3,01 ,75 Total 171,184 299
21 Years and Above 23 2,96 ,81
Table 7 displays the ANOVA test results, which was conducted to determine whether
or not there is a difference between conflict management styles of school administrators
based on the professional duration variable. According to the analysis results, teacher
opinions are at Sometimes level for all dimensions and intervals except the “voiding
Style and 16-20 years of service. It is remarkable that the majority of the opinions from
the Avoidant Style 16-
ANOVA test, which was indicated to determine whether or not there are significant
differences between groups, indicated that there are no differences.
4. Conclusion, Discussion and Suggestions
The purpose of this study was to determine conflict management styles of school
administrators based on the perceptions of teachers. With this respect, the scale
consisting of five dimensions was used as the data collection instrument. 300 high
school teachers working in the center of Bartin participated in the study. Participant
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 144
Secil Eda Kartal, Ramazan Yirci, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir -
TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
opinions were compared according to the gender, educational status, year of service
and professional duration in the school variables.
According to teacher opinions, teachers stated that they agreed with the items
concerning conflict management styles at sometimes level. When the arithmetic means
of the opinions are considered, the Integrating Style obtained the highest average and
the Accommodating Style, Avoiding Style, Dominating Style and Compromising Style
followed it respectively. Studies conducted by Toytok and Acikgoz (2013), Sendur
(2006) and Sahan (2006) suggest that school administrators resort to the Integrating
Style the most. This finding is in line with this study. The main logic in the Integrating
Style is that both parties meet at a common point without compromising on their
interests and needs. With this respect, it is expected to have the highest average.
According to the t-test results conducted based on the gender variable, there are
no significant differences among groups. The result of the study conducted by Otrar
and Ovun (2007) stating that there are no significant differences for any of the styles
concerning the gender variable is similar with the results of this study. When the
arithmetic mean values are considered, it is evident that female participants expressed
positive opinions more than the male participants for the Integrating and
Accommodating Style dimensions. In addition, male participants were observed to
express positive opinions more than female participants for the Dominating Style,
Avoiding Style and the overall scale. The reason for this is thought to be because
females have more tendencies to accommodation and that male’s priorities issue on
dominating.
When teacher opinions are considered according to the educational degree, there
was only a significant difference at the Avoiding Style dimension. This difference is in
favor of the teachers receiving undergraduate education. The study conducted by Tunc
and Kutanis (2013) indicates that there is a significant difference between teacher
perceptions on school principals’ conflict management styles concerning the
educational status variable for the compromising and accommodating styles. This
result in not similar with the results of the study. However, when the group related to
the difference is considered, it is evident in both studies that participants receiving
under-graduate education are more positive then the participants receiving post-
graduate education. Similarly, although there are no significant differences, when the
arithmetic means are considered, participants receiving under-graduate education are
observed to have higher averages for all the dimensions and the overall scale except for
the Integrating dimension.
Results of the ANOVA tests, which were conducted according to the year of
service and professional duration in schools, indicate that there are significant
differences in years of service but there are no significant differences for the
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 145
Secil Eda Kartal, Ramazan Yirci, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir -
TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
professional duration variable. A significant difference can be observed between
Integrating Style, Accommodating Style and the Compromising Style in the study
conducted by Acikgoz (2009). When the year of service variable is considered, there are
significant differences for all the dimensions and the overall scale except for the
Integrating Style and Accommodating style. Although there are no significant
differences between the dimensions for the professional duration variable, teachers
with 1-5 years duration in their schools have the highest averages for the Integrating
Style, the Accommodating Style and the overall scale. The reason for this can be because
teachers who are new with system consider the events and people with a more positive
perspective. This interval is at 11-15 years for the Compromising Style. The highest
average for the Dominating Style was observed to be for teachers with 21 years and
above professional duration. The reason for this is thought to be because experienced
teachers can observe and learn how to dominate even more. The highest average for the
Avoiding Style dimension was obtained by teachers who have 16-20 years of seniority.
Findings of this study suggest that school administrators of teachers who participated
in the study are not at a desired levels concerning conflict resolution. This indicates
that school administrators fail to follow specific principles, goals and strategies while
resolving conflicts.
Thus, steps should be taken in Turkey to enable school administrators to become
more effective in conflict resolution. The primary step can be implementing skills and
competency oriented criteria in selecting and appointing school administrators more
strictly. Effective principals in conflict resolution and management will have crucial
roles in creating effective schools. It is accepted that effective management of conflicts
will help resolving problems and decrease the tension between the teacher and students
an eventually improve interpersonal relationships.
References
1. Acikgoz A., 2009. Conflict management styles of school, administrators and the
relationship between organizational justice. Unpublished M.S. thesis, Abant Izzet
Baysal University.
2. Bayar A., 2015. The reasons of conflicts in school as an organization and finding
some potential solutions in terms of school principals’ perspective. Sakarya
University Journal of Education, 5(3), 130-141.
3. Buyukozturk S., 2010. Sosyal bilimler icin veri analizi el kitabi (11. Baski).
Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 146
Secil Eda Kartal, Ramazan Yirci, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir -
TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
4. Creswell J. W, 2013. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. London: Sage publications.
5. Daft R. L., 2010. Organizational theory and design. Mason, OH: South-Western.
6. Dokur M. & Profeta Y, 2006. Aile ve cift terapisi. Istanbul: Morpa Kultur
Yayinlari.
7. Durukan, H., 2004. Egitimde catisma ve yonetimi. Turkiye Sosyal Arastirma
Dergisi, 2, 193-198.
8. Folger J. P., Pool M. S. & Stutman R. K, 2005. Working through conflict: strategies
for relationships, groups, and organizations.(5th ed.). NY: Person Education, Inc.
9. Genc N., 2005. Yonetim ve organizasyon. Ankara: Seckin Yayincilik.
10. Goh S. C., 2002. Managing effective knowledge transfer: an integrative
framework and some practice implications. Journal of Knowledge Management,
6, 23-30. doi: 10.1108/13673270210417664.
11. Gumuseli “. İ, . Izmir ortaogretim okullari yoneticilerinin ogretmenler ile
aralarindaki catismalari yonetme bicimleri. Unpublished Ph.D., Ankara
University, Ankara, Turkey.
12. Kaptan S., 1998. Bilimsel arastirma ve istatistik teknikleri. Ankara: Tekisik Web
Ofset.
13. Karasar N., 2012. Bilimsel arastirma yontemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayinlari.
14. Kocel T., . İsletme yoneticiligi . ”s. . Istanbul “rikan ”asim Yayim
Dagitim.
15. Otrar M. and Ozun Y., 2007. The relationship between teachers’ perception of
their principals’ conflict management styles and their stress levels. Marmara
Üniversitesi Ataturk Egitim Fakultesi Egitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 26 (26), 95-110.
16. Ozkalp E. ve Kirel C., 2005. Orgutsel davranis. Eskisehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi
Yayinlari.
17. Rahim M. “, . “ measure of styles of handling ınterpersonal conflict. The
Academy of Management Journal, 26(2):368-376.
18. Rahim M. A., 1992. Managing conflict in organizations. (2nd. Ed.); Westport, CT:
Praeger Publishers.
19. Rahim M. A, Magner N. R. & Shapiro D. L, 2000. Do justice perceptions influence
styles of handling conflict with supervisors?: What justice perceptions,
precisely?. International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 11, Iss: 1, pp.9 - 31.
20. Rahim M. A., Psenicka C. and Alves M. G., 2002. A model of emotional
intelligence and conflict management strategies: a study in seven countries. The
International Journal of Conflict Management, 10(4):302-326.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 147
Secil Eda Kartal, Ramazan Yirci, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir -
TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
21. Rowden R. W., 2000. The relationship between charismatic leadership
behaviours and organizational commitment. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, Vol: 21, No:1.
22. Sahan I., 2000. The conflict management styles of directors and its impact on
teachers stress level. Unpublished M.S. thesis, Yeditepe University, Istanbul,
Turkey.
23. Sendur, E. F. (2006). Organizational conflict and conflict management.
Unpublished M.S. thesis, Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey.
24. Slabbert A. D., 2004. Conflict management styles in traditional organizations. The
45 Social Science Journals, 41, 83-92. doi: 10.1016/j.soscij.2003.10.007.
25. Steyn G. M. and Niekerk E. J, 2007. Human Resource Management In Education;
2nd edition. Unisa Press: Pretoria.
26. Toytok E. H., Acikgoz A, 2013. The relation between the conflict management
styles and organizational justice perceptions of school administrators in terms of
teacher’s opinions. Anatolian Journal of Educational Leadership and Instruction,
1 (2), 24-36.
27. Yildizoglu H. & Burgaz B., . The relationship between school administrators’
five factor personality traits and their conflict management style preferences.
Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 29(29-2).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 148
Secil Eda Kartal, Ramazan Yirci, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir -
TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON CONFLICT RESOLUTION STYLES OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
Creative Commons licensing terms
Author(s) will retain the copyright of their published articles agreeing that a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms
will be applied to their work. Under the terms of this license, no permission is required from the author(s) or publisher for members of the community
to copy, distribute, transmit or adapt the article content, providing a proper, prominent and unambiguous attribution to the authors in a manner that
makes clear that the materials are being reused under permission of a Creative Commons License. Views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this
research article are views, opinions and conclusions of the author(s). Open Access Publishing Group and European Journal of Education Studies shall
not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability caused in relation to/arising out of conflicts of interest, copyright violations and
inappropriate or inaccurate use of any kind content related or integrated into the research work. All the published works are meeting the Open Access
Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes
under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 149