Advertisement

Anger Management at the Edge of Chaos

  • Hazal Takmak
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Complexity book series (SPCOM)

Abstract

Behaviors exhibited by school managers in schools that are at the center of social change and have complex system characteristics can cause unexpected large changes in any unexpected area. In this context, the strategies that school administrators use to manage their anger are crucial so that schools can continue their existence effectively. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to determine the school managers’ anger management strategies according to the perceptions of school managers. Also, it has been tried to determine whether there is a meaningful difference between school managers’ opinions according to gender, school type, seniority, and educational status variables. In order to collect the data for the study, “The Perceptions of Teachers on Anger Management Strategies Scale” which is a subscale of “Anger Sources, Forms of Expressing Anger and Anger Management Strategies of Teachers and Administrators in Elementary Schools Scale” developed by Demirkasımoğlu (The opinions of elementary schools administrators and teachers in Ankara province in relation to their causes of anger, anger expression styles and anger management strategies. Masters’ Thesis, Ankara University, Institute of Education Science, Department of Education Science, 2007) was used. The questionnaire was administrated to 79 school managers working in Uşak Province in the 2017–2018 academic year. The data were analyzed by SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) program. In the analyses of the study, the t-test and one-way ANOVA test were used. According to the findings obtained from the research, strategies that school managers often use are using empathic methods and trying to be calm instead of telling the first thing that comes to their minds when they are angered. It was found that they never use relaxation methods such as yoga and meditation. In addition it was found that school managers’ opinions about anger management strategies that they used didn’t differ according to the gender, school type, seniority, and educational status variables.

Keywords

Complexity theory Anger management strategies School managers 

References

  1. Akmaz, N. (2009). Search in the relationship between the attachment styles of the education directors, and the permanent anger and anger explanation styles. Masters’ Thesis. Yeditepe University, Institute of Social Science, Department of Educational Management and Inspection.Google Scholar
  2. Allcorn, S. (1994). Anger in the workplace: Understanding the causes of aggression and violence. Westport: Quorum Books.Google Scholar
  3. Avcı, N. (2014). The examination of school principals’ emotional management according to different variables and its relationship with types of character. Masters’ Thesis. Kocaeli University, Institute of Social Science, Department of Educational Science.Google Scholar
  4. Averill, J. A. (1982). Anger and aggression. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Averill, J. A. (1993). Putting the social in social cognition, with special reference to emotion. In R. S. Wyer & T. K. Srull (Eds.), Perspectives on anger and emotion: Advances in social cognition (Vol. 6, pp. 47–56). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  6. Baker, S. B. (1995). Chaos theory in educational systems: principals’ perceptions of sensitive dependence on initial conditions. Doctoral Thesis. East Tennessee State University.Google Scholar
  7. Baltaş, Z., & Baltaş, A. (1997). Body language: The key to our communication skills. Remzi Press. İstanbul.Google Scholar
  8. Barutçugil, İ. (2004). Management of emotions in organizations (2nd ed.). İstanbul: Kariyer Press.Google Scholar
  9. Baydilli, Z. (2015). Examination of relationship of between teachers’ conflict management styles and anger management levels. Masters’ Thesis. Zirve University, Institute of Social Science, Educational Administration, Inspection, Planning and Economics Department.Google Scholar
  10. Bayramoğlu, G. (2016). Re-evaluation of organization theories in light of paradigm of complexity. The Journal of Selçuk University Social Science Institute, 35, 49–63.Google Scholar
  11. Çobanoğlu, F. (2008). Understanding the logic of changing: The organization as succession and transformation. The Journal of Pamukkale University Education Faculty, 23(23), 110–119.Google Scholar
  12. Demirkasımoğlu, N. (2007). The opinions of elementary schools administrators and teachers in Ankara province in relation to their causes of anger, anger expression styles and anger management strategies. Masters’ Thesis, Ankara University, Institute of Education Science, Department of Education Science.Google Scholar
  13. Erçetin, Ş. Ş., Bisaso, S. M., & Saeed, F. (2015). Understanding chaos and complexity in education systems through conceptualization of fractal properties. In Chaos, complexity and leadership 2013 (Vol. 12, pp. 147–161). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Ertürk, A. (2012). The chaos theory: It’s reflections on management and the education. Journal of Kastamonu Education, 3(20), 849–868.Google Scholar
  15. Gürsakal, N. (2007). Complexity and chaos in social science (1st ed.). Ankara: Nobel press.Google Scholar
  16. Kayman, E. A. E. (2008). The level of the trained school principals’ fulfillment of quantum leadership behaviours within strengthening vocational education and training (SVET) project in Turkey. Masters’ Thesis. Hacettepe University, Institute of Social Science, Department of Education Science.Google Scholar
  17. Kökdemir, H. (2004). Anger and anger management. Pivolka, 3(12), 7–10.Google Scholar
  18. Maula, M. (2006). Organizations as learning systems: ‘living composition’ as an enabling infrastructure. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. Mitleton-Kelly, E. (2003). Ten principles of complexity and enabling infrastructures. In Complex systems and evolutionary perspectives on organisations: The application of complexity theory to organisations (pp. 23–50). An İmprint of Elsevier Science: PergamonGoogle Scholar
  20. Özen, H., & Turan, S. (2017). Complexity theory and complex adaptive leadership: A theoretical analysis. The Journal of Academic Social Science, 5(47), 67–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Öztürk, E. (2012). Anger causes and anger management methods of teachers working in primary schools: Elazığ province sample. Masters’ Thesis. Fırat University, Institute of Education Science.Google Scholar
  22. Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9(3), 185–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sayğan, S. (2014). Complexity theory in organization science. Ege Academic Review, 14(3), 413–423.Google Scholar
  24. Soykan, Ç. (2003). Anger and anger management. Journal of Crisis, 11(2), 19–27.Google Scholar
  25. Ssali, M. B. (2017). A comparative analysis of the fractal leadership practices of male and female school principals (Mbale/Uganda). Doctoral Thesis. Hacettepe University, Institute of Education Science, Department of Education Science.Google Scholar
  26. Takmak, H. (2016). Teachers’ emotion management competences od school administrators. Masters’ Thesis. Uşak University, Institute of Social Science, Department of Education Science.Google Scholar
  27. Tetenbaum, T. J. (1998). Shifting paradigms: From Newton to chaos. Organizational Dynamics, 26(4), 21–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tjosvold, D. (2002). Managing anger for teamwork in Hong Kong: Goal interdependence and open mindedness. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 5(2), 107–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Töremen, F. (2000). The chaos theory and the role of education managers. Education Management in Theory and Practice, 22(22), 203–219.Google Scholar
  30. Torres, R., Reeves, M., & Love, C. (2010). Adaptive leadership. In Own the future: 50 ways to win from the Boston Consulting Group (pp. 33–39). wiley online library.Google Scholar
  31. Ulukuş, K. S. (2016). Motivation theories and the elements of the leading management effect on the motivation of the individual. The Journal of Academic Social Science, 4(25), 247–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hazal Takmak
    • 1
  1. 1.Hacettepe UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations