A Study of Approaches to Developing Conflict Management Among School Administrators Under the Kalasin Secondary Educational Service Area Office

Abstract

The purposes of this research were 1. study the current and desirable states of conflict management among school administrators 2. identify the priority needs for conflict management and 3. determine approaches for developing conflict management among school administrators under the Kalasin Secondary Educational Service Area Office. This study employed a mixed-methods research design integrating both quantitative and qualitative approaches. The research instruments consisted of a questionnaire and a semi-structured interview form. The sample comprised 350 school administrators and teachers under the Secondary Educational Service Area Office Kalasin, determined using the Krejcie and Morgan (1970) sample size table at a 0.05 margin of error. The participants were selected through stratified random sampling. The target group for the qualitative component included educational administrators and school administrators, selected through purposive sampling. Quantitative data collected from the questionnaires were analyzed using descriptive statistics, including percentage, mean, standard deviation, and the Priority Needs Index (PNI). Qualitative data obtained from the interviews were analyzed using content analysis. The research findings revealed that 1) The current state of conflict management among school administrators was overall at a high level (x̅ = 3.58, S.D. = 0.13). When considering each dimension, the collaborative style obtained the highest mean score, followed by the compromising style and the accommodating style, respectively. The desirable state of conflict management among school administrators was also overall at a high level (x̅ = 3.91, S.D. = 0.12). When examined by dimension, the collaborative style ranked highest, followed by the compromising style and the accommodating style, respectively 2) The priority needs for conflict management among school administrators, ranked from highest to lowest, were as follows: collaborative style (0.20), compromising style (0.19), accommodating style (0.19), competing style (–0.08), and avoiding style (–0.10) and 3) A total of 20 development guidelines for conflict management were proposed. The evaluation results indicated that both the appropriateness and feasibility of these guidelines were at the highest level.