CENTRO EDUCATIVO RURAL

67

administrator by teachers, school staff, social service agencies and parents. The foregoing illustrations clearly depict the school as a conflict raddled arena. This is because conflict can occur at anytime and any moment in the school system. Therefore, when emerging conflicts are constructively managed, it will make the system to be conducive for meaningful educational activities to take place. Where the reverse is the case, the school will suffer greatly.

Ikoya and Akinseinde (2009) pointed out that delay in resolution of school conflict has resulted in disruptions of academic calendars leading to economic as well as psychological exertion. This development will render the school highly unproductive. The frequent occurrence of conflict in the school has the tendency to make the school climate unstable, especially when such conflicts are poorly managed, exposing school personnel to hostile interaction and even with the students. School personnel, most especially, teachers are at the centre of most conflicts, and when they are constructively contained, teachers will be stimulated and energised to discharge their responsibilities effectively and efficiently.

Therefore, teachers‟ productivity, as well as students‟ academic performance and school quality will diminish sharply when teachers are overshadowed by conflicts frequently occurring in their schools.

68

and grand tactics. Minor tactics is basically tactics at lower levels of command, i.e. sub-unit and below levels. Grand tactics, on the other hand, begins at the operational level, which basically means corps level and above. This latter explanation of tactics is oriented towards military formations and operations. An idea that can be deduced from the above analysis, is that tactics is an action exhibited at the micro-level of operations and it is instantaneous in orientation, directed towards overcoming a perceived problem. Straus (1979) posited that an overt actions used in response to a conflict situation is referred to as conflict resolution tactic.

Spicer (1989) defined conflict tactics as overt actions a person takes when he/she has a conflict of interest with another person. Straus (1979) indicated that these tactics vary in degree of coerciveness ranging from the use of verbal reasoning and discussion to gestures and the threats to actual physical contact.

Conflict tactics is an immediate overt response to a conflict situation. The response can be verbal attacks, physical assaults, discussion, name calling, calm down the other party, verbal reasoning, e.t.c. Francesco and Gold (1997) differentiated between verbal and non-verbal conflict tactics. The non-verbal conflict tactics are: (i) promise (ii) threat (iii) recommendation (iv) warning (v) reward (vi) punishment (vii) normative appeal (viii) commitment (ix) self-disclosure (x) question (xi) command. The non-verbal conflict tactics are: (i) silence (ii) conversational overlaps (iii) facial glazing (iv) touching. The nature of responses adopted by conflicting parties can either lower the intensity of a conflict, and promote easy management or can make it to escalate to unimaginable proportion, making it difficult to manage. It is imperative to note that conflict is not a static phenomenon, rather it is highly dynamic in nature. The immediate reactions to a conflict at the early stage will determine its flow pattern. The graduation of conflict from one level to the other is determined by the immediate overt responses employed by the parties concerned. If the tactics adopted is positive, the conflict will naturally subside and become much easier to

69

manage, while the employment of negative tactics will make conflict to escalate. When conflict intensity is too high to easily control, it may deteriorate into a violent conflict, resulting in the destruction of lives and properties. Therefore, an early positive reaction to conflict is highly imperative in mitigating it. Straus, Hamby, Boney-McCoy and Sugarman (1996) asserted that people respond to conflict in various ways which include: agreed to try partner‟s situation, said could work out problem, showed partner care, suggested compromise to an argument, insulted or swore at partner, shouted at partner, threatened to hit or throw something at partner, called partner fat or ugly, kicked, bite or punch partner, slapped partner, beat up partner, e.t.c. The responses range from negotiation, psychological aggression to physical assault. Spicer (1989) reported that research finding shows that conflict tactics scales measure three factorially separate tactics used in inter-personal conflict, which are:

(i) the use of rational discussion and agreement,

(ii) the use of verbal and non-verbal expressions of anger, and (iii) the use of physical force or violence.

According to Folger, Poole, and Stutman (1997) conflict tactics is characterised by moves and counter moves which are themselves determined by the power of the parties involved. It involves:

(i) patterns of behaviours that tend to be sustained;

(ii) steps taken in the course of such interactions are products of the larger environment in which they take place;

(iii) a general understanding of the direction of such interactions; and

(iv) such interaction which impacts on relations between the parties involved (Folger, et al, 1997).

Conflict tactics can impact on the collective behaviour of the conflicting parties. This depends on its usage. The nature and ways conflict tactics are employed can either exacerbate

70

conflict or prevent conflict. When conflict escalates beyond the acceptable limit, it will adversely affect the parties concerned. Hall (2003) explained that under the emotional pressure of interpersonal conflict teachers may find themselves reverting, often uncharacteristically, to instincts ranging from passive avoidance to aggressive fighting that move the conflict further from effective resolution. When faced with conflict, teachers and administrators may attempt to “hide it, quash it, control it, fight it, deny it, or avoid it, but whatever they do, they cannot make it disappear” (Hall, 2003).

Gray, Miller and Noakes (1994) indicated that destructive behaviour as verbal abuse, temper burst in class and violence to teachers and other pupils which also have different disruptive values depending upon the strategy of the teacher managing the class.

Apart from the fact that conflict tactics, when wrongly utilised, can jeopardise teachers‟ job performance, it can also paralyse classroom interaction. Studies in Germany indicated that there is a rise in verbal aggression with only a low rate of physical violence against school teachers (Schwind, Roitsch and Gielen, 1999; Fuchs, Lamnek and Luedtke, 1996 as cited in steffgen and Ewen, 2007). Johnson (2003) posited that tactics and strategies include attacking others‟ ideas and beliefs, offering derogatory remarks and demanding concessions from others. Non-verbal behaviours include glaring or condescending eye contact, an attacking or threatening of body posture and hostile facial expressions (Johnson, 2003).

He added that “intense and tenacious enemies often emerge as an aftermath to this response”. Teachers are sometimes harassed by students, fellow teachers, principal or parents through the use of violent tactics, if they should adopt a “fire for fire” approach, possibly the conflict may escalate culminating in the formation of unnecessary enemies which may negatively affect their productivity. The adoption of a constructive conflict tactics by teachers and principals will help to create a conducive atmosphere for effective operations in the school. When teachers‟ conflict tactics are positive in orientation, it will help to

71

increase creativity by acting as a stimulus for developing new ideas or identifying methods for solving problems (Fakhry and Abou El Hassan, 2011).It can also help them to recognise legitimate difference within the organisation or profession and serves as a powerful motivator to improve performance and satisfaction (Hagel and Brown, 2005). Conflict tactics employed by teachers, as an immediate response to the actions of the other parties, can make conflict to escalate into violence action, or can make conflict to become a constructive element that will improve the existing level of relationship and interaction among teachers.