Principals' responses to interpersonal conflict occurring in secondary schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interpersonal conflicts occurred in all secondary schools that participated in the study. Three categories of conflict emerged: interpersonal conflicts between teachers, interpersonal conflicts between school principals and teachers, and interpersonal conflicts between teachers and students. This study examines how principals deal with interpersonal conflicts occurring in secondary schools. The impetus for the study was based on the researcher's own experiences as a secondary school principal. In my experience as a school principal, it became evident that a considerable portion of my time and energy was devoted to managing interpersonal conflict among stakeholders. For this reason, I believe that the management of interpersonal conflict is an essential component of school leadership in secondary schools. Participants were selected from 6 secondary schools located in a single school district in Eastern Canada. A qualitative research methodology was employed to investigate two social constructs: school leadership, and interpersonal conflict found in those secondary schools. A total of nineteen interviews are conducted with school principals and secondary teachers. Implications for practice focus on the nature of conflict found in secondary schools, sources of those conflicts, strategies for resolving interpersonal conflict, and approaches to leadership in managing interpersonal conflict. Implications for future research are also suggested. It is evident that interpersonal conflict pervades the cultural landscape of secondary schools. The results of the study suggest that school principals varied their style of school leadership depending on the nature and frequency of the interpersonal conflict encountered amongst stakeholders. It appears that principals typically adhere to aspects of participative leadership in the early stages of interpersonal conflict; however, if resolution to conflict is not achievable in this way then school principals become managerial in their approach to school leadership.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".