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

Necati Cobanoglu, Oguz Kaya, Abdurrahman Angay


APA 6th edition
Cobanoglu, N., Kaya, O., & Angay, A. (2015). The Effects of Pupil Control Ideology of Teachers on their Conflict Management Strategies. IJEM - International Journal of Educational Methodology, 1(1), 35-41. doi:10.12973/ijem.1.1.35

Harvard
Cobanoglu N., Kaya O., and Angay A. 2015 'The Effects of Pupil Control Ideology of Teachers on their Conflict Management Strategies', IJEM - International Journal of Educational Methodology , vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 35-41. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.12973/ijem.1.1.35

Chicago 16th edition
Cobanoglu, Necati , Kaya, Oguz and Angay, Abdurrahman . "The Effects of Pupil Control Ideology of Teachers on their Conflict Management Strategies". (2015)IJEM - International Journal of Educational Methodology 1, no. 1(2015): 35-41. doi:10.12973/ijem.1.1.35

Abstract

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.

Keywords: Pupil control ideology, teachers, conflict management strategies


References

 

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

Bas, G., & Beyhan, O. (2013). Ogretmen Adaylarinin Ogretme-Ogrenme Anlayislari ile Ogrenci Kontrol Ideolojileri Arasindaki Iliski. Hacettepe Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 1, 14-26

Bayram, F., & Aypay, A. (2012). Ilkogretim Okullarinda Mudur Etkililigi, Okul Iklimi & Ogrenci Kontrol Ideolojileri Arasindaki Iliski. Egitimde Politika Analizi Dergisi, 1(1), 49-63.

Buyukozturk, S., Cakmak, E.K., Akgun, O.E., Karadeniz, S. & Demirel, F. (2008). Bilimsel Arastirma Yontemleri. 2.Baski, Ankara: Pegem Akademi.

Caglayan, O. A. (2006). Orgutsel Catisma Yonetimi & Bir Arastirma. Yuksek Lisans Tezi. Pamukkale Universitesi, Denizli.

Celik, V. (2005). Sinif yonetimi. 3. Baski, Ankara. Nobel

Durukan, H. (2004). Egitimde Catisma & Yonetimi. Turkiye Sosyal Arastirma Dergisi, 2, 193-198.

Fraenkel, J.R., & Norman, E.W. (2008). How to design and evaluate research in education. 7th Edition, Boston: McGraw-Hill.

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.

Gunbayi, I. & Karahan, I. (2006). Ilkogretim Okulu Ogretmenlerinin Kurum Ici Catismalari Yonetim Bicemleri. Afyon Kocatepe Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 1, 209-230.

Hoy, W. K. (2001). The Pupil control Studies A Historical, Theoretical and Ampirical Analysis. Journal of Educational Administration, 39(5), 424-441

Hoy, W. K., & C. G. Miskel. (2010). Egitim Yonetimi. Teori, Arastirma & Uygulama (Cev. Ed. Selahattin Turan). Ankara. Nobel Yayincilik

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.

Karakus, M., & Cankaya, I. H., (2009). Okul Yoneticilerinin Kisilik Ozelliklerinin Catisma Cozme Stratejileri Uzerindeki Etkisi. Adiyaman Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi, 3, 111-118

Karasar, N. (1998). Bilimsel arastirma yontemi. 8. Basim, Ankara: Nobel.

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

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.

Karip. E. (2003). Catisma Yonetimi. 3. Baski. Ankara: Pegem A.

Kocel, T. (2010). Isletme yoneticiligi. Istanbul: Beta Basim Yayim Dagitim

Ozdemir, A. A. (2012). Catisma & Stres Yonetimi I. Ceyhan, E. (Ed.). Eskisehir: Anadolu Universitesi.

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

Ozgan, H. (2006). Ilkogretim Okulu Ogretmenlerinin Catisma Yonetimi Stratejilerinin Incelenmesi (Gaziantep Ornegi). (Unpublished Doctorate Thesis). Gaziantep Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu, Gaziantep.

Polat, S., & Arslan, H. (2004). Yuksek Ogretim Orgutunde Gorev Yapan Yoneticilerin Catisma Yonetimi Stratejilerini Kullanma Duzeyleri. Kuram & Uygulamada Egitim Yonetimi, 10(3), 430-457

Rahim, M. A., & Bonoma, T. V. (1979). Menaging Organizational Conflict: A Model for Diagnosis and Intervention. Psychological Reports, 44, 1323-1343

Rahim, M. A. (1983). A Measure of Handling Interpersonal Conflict. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 368-376

Rahim, M. A. (2001) Managing Conflict in Organizations. Third Edition, Quorum Books Westport, Connecticut. London: Greenwood Publishing Group.

Rahim, M. A. (2002). Toward a theory of managing organizational conflict. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 13(3),  206−235.

Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2013). Orgutsel davranis. (14.Basimdan Cev. I. Erdem). Ankara: Nobel

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.

Sarpkaya, R. (2002). Egitim Orgutlerinde Catisma Yonetimi & Bir Ornek Olay. Kuram & Uygulamada Egitim Yonetimi, 31, 414-429

Sahin, A., Emini, F. T., & Unsal, O.(2006). Catisma Yonetimi Yontemleri & Hastane Orgutlerinde Bir Uygulama. Selcuk Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi, 15, 553-568

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.

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).

Turan, S., & Altug, S. C. (2008). Ogretmenlerin Ogrenci Kontrol Ideolojileri. Usak Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 1(1), 95-113

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.

Yilmaz, K. (2007). Ilkogretim Okulu Ogretmenlerinin Okul Yoneticilerinin Liderlik Davranislari & Ogrenci Kontrol Ideolojilerine Iliskin Gorusleri. Egitim & Bilim, 32(146), 12-23

Yilmaz, K. (2009). Primary school teachers’ views about pupil control ideologies and classroom management styles. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 4, 157-167.