Conflict resolution among early childhood educators

Conflict Resolution Among Early Childhood Educators Sandy Jenkins Shulamit Ritblatt Jeffrey S. MCDonald

Little attention has been given to conflict resolution in preschools. Early childhood educators working with children aged three to five completed a ten- to fifteen-minute survey to examine their attitudes and practices toward conflict. This study explored the types of conflict resolution strategies they used and thought were effective in their classrooms. The strategies were also examined in relation to the demographic characteristics of the participants. Results indicated that educators used cooperative strategies in their classrooms. Significant relationships were demonstrated involving the types of strategies used and demographic factors.

A

ccording to the U.S. Census Bureau (2003), there are now approximately five million children enrolled in child care centers. As a result of this, child care providers are essential in raising children and affecting their socioemotional development. A significant part of their social and emotional development is interacting with others in situations of conflict.

Conflict is unavoidable and occurs between individuals and small and large groups throughout each day, every day. Teachers of young children encounter conflict between children, between children and families, and between themselves and their students every day. By engaging in positive conflict resolution practices, the teacher is able to facilitate positive conflict resolution in the classroom.

This study examined the attitudes and practices of early childhood educators currently working with children aged three to five. A survey based on the Thomas-Kilman Conflict Mode Instrument (1978) was created in order to examine the types of conflict resolution strategies early childhood educators use.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY, vol. 25, no. 4, Summer 2008 © Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the Association for Conflict Resolution • DOI: 10.1002/crq.216

429

430

JENKINS, RITBLATT, MCDONALD

The study focused on these research questions: Did early childhood educators desire additional conflict resolution strategies? What type of conflict resolution strategies (cooperative, competitive, or avoidant) did these educators think work? What type of conflict resolution strategies did teachers use in their centers? Were there statistically significant differences between the type of conflict resolution strategies used and deemed effective on the basis of respondent demographics? These data included age, center type, child development units completed, and ethnicity.

Review of Literature There are several misconceptions about conflict. Chen (2001) stated that conflict often has a negative connotation associated with the word. Sometimes it implies tension and negative emotion or confrontation. This is a common misconception that can be detrimental to the learning experiences of young children. Children will inevitably experience conflict and therefore it would be best to learn to work it out in a manner that benefits both parties. Conflict can be destructive or constructive. Participants in conflict can choose to resolve it by acting aggressively or cooperatively or through accommodation (Howe, Rinaldi, Jennings, and Petrakos, 2002). According to research, children use several methods for resolving conflict (Chen, 2003; Stevahn and others, 2000). These strategies include telling the teacher, withdrawing, simply saying no, reasoning with others involved, evading, making threats, and describing social norms such as taking turns. Children tend to use a variety of tactics in dealing with situations of conflict.

Conflict can be a positive experience that can help children in future interactions with others. In this study, it is important to note the role of the teacher as a model in situations of conflict. According to social learning theory, children look to their teachers for cues in how to act during times of conflict. Teachers can have attitudes that promote the idea that the needs of the self and the other can be balanced. When interacting with other adults in the classroom, teachers can use approaches that benefit solely themselves or the other, or they can find a compromise that benefits both parties involved.

Social-Emotional Development Versus Academics

The need to teach academic skills often takes precedence for teachers over the desire to teach conflict resolution procedures. Harris (2002) asserted CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

Conflict Resolution Among Early Childhood Educators 431

that teachers of young children are urged to focus their efforts on developing children’s academic skills over social ones. Harris and other researchers (Adams and Sasse Wittmer, 2001; Arcaro-McPhee, Doppler, and Harkins, 2002; Cannon, 1996; Chen, 2003; Chernofsky and Gage, 1996; Fisher and Ury, 1991; Kohn, 1986) have recognized that peace and character education are a part of our society’s foundation; however, academic achievement has begun to take precedence over this foundation. The problem that many educators and administrators have regarding teaching conflict resolution skills is that it takes time away from academic readiness skills; test scores in subject areas such as mathematical and reading skills are important. This causes teachers to engage in a deficit mentality—the idea that if time is given to one subject it must be taken away from another. They do not consider the idea that conflict resolution skills can actually be embedded in the daily curriculum. Fagan and Mihalic (2003) confirmed this in a study involving a three-year program implemented by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence involving giving life skills training in middle and junior high schools. Fagan and Mihalic (2003) stated that teachers did not want to take away from the more academic courses.

It was further noted that when the Prevention of Violence program was implemented, teachers and administrators tended to lack follow-through.

They ended conflict resolution training practices because they were not convinced that the program was producing results.

Responses to Conflict

In this study, three general responses to conflict were studied: avoidance, competition, and cooperation. With regard to avoidance, it has been observed in several studies that educators frequently end conflict episodes quickly in order to reestablish peace (Arcaro-McPhee, Doppler, and Harkins, 2002; Chen, 2003; Chernofsky and Gage, 1996; Fisher and Ury, 1991; Kohn, 1986). Sometimes educators wish so badly to have peace that they overlook long-term solutions in favor of temporary ones. By not engaging in the process of conflict resolution, educators apply quick fixes to problems woven deeper into the social fabric of the classroom. To teach peace, strategies for obtaining and maintaining peace must be acquired.

By engaging in the practice of avoiding conflict so long as peace seems to prevail, educators are neglecting opportunities to teach conflict resolution processes that are necessary for the future development of their students.

Early childhood educators also use competitive resolution strategies (Cannon, 1996; Kaiser and Skylar Rasminsky, 2003). Aggression and the CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

432

JENKINS, RITBLATT, MCDONALD

misuse of power can occur between those in conflict. Kreidler (1984) explored conflict resolution between teachers and those experiencing conflicts in classrooms. In his research, the authoritarian teacher was viewed as one who used a competitive strategy. This style of teaching is often adopted because it seems to produce quick results, but it denies the children the chance to learn how to solve conflicts in the future. When dictating to students how to resolve conflicts, instead of allowing them to become an active part of the process, the teacher asserts power and maintains control, creating a solution in which one party wins and another loses. In competitive resolutions, power is often used to determine clear winners and losers in the situation.

Cooperative strategies are the most desirable conflict resolution strategies for teachers of young children to use because they embrace empathy and perspective taking. In cooperative strategies, the teacher takes on and models the role of mediator to children in situations of conflict (Stanulis and Manning, 2002). Social learning theorists such as Bandura (1969) have noted that by modeling desirable methods of resolving conflict, teachers enable children to learn effective strategies for future interactions (cited in Stanulis and Manning, 2002).

Educators’ Attitudes to Conflict

Research has indicated that teachers are often not comfortable with the conflict resolution strategies they use in their classrooms (Girard and Koch, 1996; Martin, Linfoot, and Stephenson, 1999). Many teachers feel unprepared to deal with conflict. Faced with conflict in their classrooms, teachers uncomfortable with conflict commonly respond with avoidance (Martin, Linfoot, and Stephenson, 1999). Teachers refer the student(s) to other teachers or administrators instead of dealing with the problem themselves. Martin and colleagues discovered in their study that the more teachers worried about the occurrence of conflict in their classrooms, the less confident they felt in their ability to deal with it. Teachers must be equipped with the knowledge of several strategies to deal with conflict because one strategy will not fit every situation. The more tools a teacher has to draw on when faced with conflict, the more capable and confident he or she will feel to deal with it.

The attitude of the teacher toward conflict is significant in the resolution strategies used in the classroom. Wheeler (2004) studied the climate in CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

Conflict Resolution Among Early Childhood Educators 433

schools and the impact of teacher attitude on conflict resolution strategies used by the teachers. He noticed that schools focusing on preparing students for academic readiness tended to use authoritarian strategies. The teachers often issued orders, telling children how to resolve conflict instead of helping them learn a process for resolution. This was attributed to the fact that teaching a process for resolution is too time-consuming. In the classrooms studied, Wheeler also discovered that teachers tended to view conflict as a negative concept instead of an opportunity for learning and growth.

Theoretical Constructs

Two primary theories are relevant to the strategies of conflict resolution used by early childhood educators. Behaviorist theory is frequently used because it is effective. The practices of positive and negative reinforcement are the most well known among educators. A child will often act in order to achieve a desirable outcome. Another theory that has roots in behaviorism is social learning theory, which suggests that people learn on the strength of social reinforcers and influences.

Behaviorism assumes that there is a heavy influence of the environment on the development of the individual (Skinner, 1974). Behaviorist theory is an approach that is commonly used in conflict resolution with young children thanks to its efficiency and popularity. Behaviorist strategies are often so effective in early childhood settings that they are accepted instead of critically examined. Teachers often resort to behaviorist practices because they are effective, not because they promote the child’s ability to solve conflict in the future. When educators engage in practices that require reinforcements, often only short-term results are produced. If the reinforcements are no longer forthcoming, the desired behaviors are often extinguished (Skinner, 1974).

Social learning theory is also relevant to the early childhood educator in situations of conflict, except according to this theory emphasis is placed on the role of the educator as a model for the child. When children observe the significant adults in their lives engage in positive conflict resolution, involving defining the problem and recognizing the needs of others, they are affected in dealing with their own future conflict (Kreidler, 1984).

Social learning theory also addresses issues involved in intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation. According to social learning theory, by engaging in a socially reinforced or expected behavior one begins developing certain CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

434

JENKINS, RITBLATT, MCDONALD

attitudes that are then internalized. Self-reinforcement can then occur (Bandura, 1969).

Methods and Data Although many preexisting measures, such as the Thomas-Kilman Conflict Mode Instrument, exist, none fit the specific research questions explored in this study. This survey was designed in order to assess demographic factors (in Part One), assess attitudes of early childhood educators regarding conflict resolution (in Part Two), and examine the practices of early childhood educators (in Part Three).

Sample

One hundred sixteen early childhood educators currently working with children aged three to five in child development centers participated in the study. Subjects employed with children under the age of two and over the age of five were not selected because developmental capabilities in situations of conflict for these ages are significantly different from those ages three to five. Subjects were selected by sampling child care center staff in community college child development courses and in child care settings. Some subjects were both students and child care center employees.

Others surveyed were not currently enrolled in child development courses. As a result, those subjects who were currently enrolled in child development classes might have responded differently from those who had received their education in the past. Subjects were assured confidentiality. An incentive was used to recruit subjects for this study; the subjects were asked to give the investigator their mailing address and phone number on the letter of consent in the event that they would like to be entered into a drawing for gift certificates to educational supply stores.

There was a response rate of 36 percent. A total of 318 surveys were distributed in person, by mail, or by fax. One hundred seventeen subjects responded to the surveys. Only one subject of the 117 was male; this subject was dropped because the distribution according to gender was insignificant given the overall sample size. Had there been more male subjects, it is possible that they might have demonstrated responses that tended less toward avoidant strategies (Neff and Harter, 2002). Seventysix surveys were gathered from child care centers, and forty-one surveys were collected from community college students in child development courses.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

Conflict Resolution Among Early Childhood Educators 435

Instruments

This study was conducted by using a three-part, self-developed Conflict Resolution Ideology and Practice Questionnaire (CRIPQ; see the appendix).

The first part of the CRIPQ assessed basic demographic information. Each participant was asked to check the appropriate boxes indicating gender, ethnicity, and center type. A write-in portion is the final component of Part One of the CRIPQ. This section asked participants to write the number of child development units completed and their age. Finally, participants were asked whether or not they would like to receive additional training in conflict resolution.

Part Two of the CRIPQ was designed using a tabular format and fourpoint Likert scale. This section of the questionnaire was designed to assess the attitudes of early childhood educators toward conflict. Part Two of this questionnaire was called Attitudes as it was designed to examine the strategies thought effective by early childhood educators. This section furnished the participant with thirty statements that can be rated “almost always,” “usually,” “sometimes,” or “almost never.” Each statement was created to fall into one of three categories used in the Thomas-Kilman Conflict Mode Instrument. The instrument (1978) was designed as a forced choice measure in which subjects were asked to choose the better of two statements.

These statements were then classified by placing them in one of five categories: Competing, Compromising, Cooperating, Accommodating, and Avoiding. For the purposes of this study, some of these strategy categories were combined; subject responses were classified as Competing, Cooperating, or Avoiding. Part Two of the CRIPQ, Ideology, used ten statements that fell into one of these three categories. The Cronbach alphas were Competing scale ⫽ 0.74, Cooperating scale ⫽ 0.58, and Avoiding scale ⫽ 0.77.

The final portion of this questionnaire was designed to assess the practices of early childhood educators in situations of conflict. Part Three, Practices, used a multiple-choice format that presented the participants with three options in response to common scenarios of conflict they might face in child care centers. They were asked to select the option they would most likely use first in each situation of conflict. Answers supplied also fit into one of the three conflict resolution style categories mentioned earlier.

The scenarios and possible answers in this section of the questionnaire were created according to situations faced by real teachers in their classrooms. The questionnaire was developed in this fashion in order to address potential issues regarding the validity of the instrument.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

436

JENKINS, RITBLATT, MCDONALD

Results Regarding the question of whether the subjects wanted to receive more training in the area of conflict resolution, it was surprising that only 68 percent responded yes. Although this question and result might seem simplistic, it is quite valuable; when designing the questionnaire, it was assumed that almost all of the subjects would want further training in conflict resolution. There were several possible reasons for this. The subjects might have felt comfortable with the strategies they were currently using and therefore not have felt a need for further training. It was also possible that the subjects felt their time was better spent on training in other subject areas such as academic readiness skills. The subjects might also have had less interest in conflict resolution as a training topic compared to other topics.

The second research question asked, “What type of conflict resolution strategies (cooperative, competitive, or avoidant) did these educators think work?” Results indicated that early childhood educators thought cooperative methods of conflict resolution were the most effective practices for resolving conflict, therefore supporting the hypothesis.

The third research question asked, “What type of conflict resolution strategies (cooperative, competitive, or avoidant) did teachers use in their centers?” Seventy-one percent of the educators used cooperative strategies, whereas 21 percent and 8 percent were classified as competing and avoiding strategies, respectively. These results again supported the hypothesis that teachers of young children currently use cooperative strategies in their classrooms.

The final question of this study was, “Were there statistically significant differences between the type of conflict resolution strategies (cooperative, competitive, or avoidant) used and deemed effective based upon respondent demographics? These will include age, center type, child development units completed, and ethnicity.” Results indicated that the subjects felt cooperative strategies were more effective as their ages increased. However, when examining the forty-nine-plus age group, it should be noted that the preference for cooperative strategies actually decreased (p ⫽ 0.007). Several studies were conducted that reflect similar results. Older subjects often show a tendency toward cooperative strategies or away from competitive strategies (Fontana, 1974; Hignite, Margavio, and Chin, 2002). This is attributed to several possible factors: decreased desire to disturb the status quo, higher maturity level, and even a set of generational values or characteristics.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

Conflict Resolution Among Early Childhood Educators 437

There was also a significant relationship between child development units completed and strategies used. Those who had completed more units in child development felt that competitive strategies were less effective than those in other groups. Along the same lines, subjects thought avoidant strategies were less effective in proportion to more units completed in child development. The likelihood of using competing conflict resolution strategies decreased with increasing education; the odds of the early childhood educators with thirteen to twenty-eight education credits using competing strategies were 2.57 times as large as those with twenty-nine or more credits (p ⬍ 0.0001), and the odds of using competing strategies were 4.49 times as high in the zero to twelve credit group as in the twenty-nine-plus credit group (p ⬍ .0001).

Several interaction effects were observed in this study, in relation to age and ethnicity (p ⬍ 0.001) and education and ethnicity (p ⬍ 0.001).

Latino/Hispanics in the thirty-six to forty-eight age group had the highest chance of using cooperative strategies; they were 3.5 times more likely to use cooperative strategies than white, non-Hispanic respondents in the same age category. The group that was least likely to use cooperative strategies was Latino/Hispanics aged eighteen to twenty-five. Latino/Hispanics were 7.1 times more likely to use cooperative strategies than the youngest group of the same ethnicity. The reverse relationship was discovered among white, non-Hispanic subjects. In this category, those in the youngest age group were 2.6 times more likely than those in the oldest group to use cooperative strategies.

A significant number of subjects in this study were Latino/Hispanic, and their responses differed from other subjects in several ways.

Latino/Hispanics with the least education credits (zero to twelve) were more likely to respond with “cooperating” than those with moderate (thirteen to twenty-eight) credits (p ⫽ 0.0006) or those with the most (twentynine-plus) credits (p ⫽ 0.0110). In the age group thirty-six to forty-eight, Latino/Hispanics had significantly higher odds of answering “cooperating” compared to white, non-Hispanics ( p ⫽ 0.0050). Young white, nonHispanics ages eighteen to twenty-five were significantly more likely to respond with “cooperating” than older white, non-Hispanics age forty-nine plus (p ⫽ 0.009). Older Latino/Hispanics ages thirty-six to forty-eight were significantly more likely to answer with “cooperating” than younger Latino/Hispanics ages eighteen to twenty-five (p ⫽ 0.0019). White, nonHispanics ages eighteen to twenty-five had significantly higher odds of answering with “cooperating” compared to Latino/Hispanics in the same CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

438

JENKINS, RITBLATT, MCDONALD

age group (p ⫽ 0.004). These results may reflect significant cultural expectations on the capabilities of the child and the role of the adult in situations of conflict.

Another interaction effect was established when examining child development units completed and ethnicity in regard to use of cooperative strategies. Latino/Hispanics with the least amount of child development units completed were 22.8 times more likely to use cooperative strategies than those in the thirteen to twenty-eight unit group and 15.2 times more likely than those in the twenty-nine-plus unit group. Those who responded as white, non-Hispanic with the most units completed were 2.8 times more likely to use cooperative strategies than those with fewer units completed.

Discussion The first question asked in this study was if early childhood educators wanted to receive more training in conflict resolution. Although the majority of responses indicated yes, 68 percent was a lower number than what was expected. According to the current literature in conflict resolution, the most likely limiting factor may be the teacher’s use of time and resources.

It was most likely that teachers felt if they were to receive more training in any subject area, conflict resolution would probably come after topics such as academic readiness.

The second question posed in this study involved which conflict resolution strategy early childhood educators felt worked. The findings support the hypothesis that teachers of young children will think that cooperative methods of conflict resolution such as positive reinforcement are the most effective practice to use in resolving conflict. Most educators (71 percent) favored cooperative strategies over the other two. This is reflected in the National Association for the Education of Young Children’s Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs (1997). Those who have received a higher level of education in child development have had more exposure to the developmentally appropriate practices they are expected to use in their centers.

Question three examined which strategies early childhood educators actually use in their centers. The findings again support the hypothesis that teachers of young children currently use cooperative strategies such

CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

Conflict Resolution Among Early Childhood Educators 439

as prevention and positive reinforcement in their classrooms. This hypothesis was formulated on the basis of the educators’ exposure to developmentally appropriate practices in working with young children.

Zahn-Waxler and others (1996) observed that when cooperative strategies were used, the results of the interactions were positive and satisfying to both parties involved. This in turn caused the parties to use more cooperative strategies in the future because they received positive reinforcement for doing so.

Another interesting result was that subjects in this study tended to feel that cooperative strategies were more effective as their age increased.

However, in the final age group, forty-nine-plus, this trend ceased. One possibility for this outcome is that those in the oldest age group received most of their education in child development at an earlier time. It is possible that their education (no matter how many units completed in child development) was completed so long ago that conflict resolution was not a common topic of discussion. It could also be that different methods of conflict resolution at the time were considered to be developmentally and socially appropriate. Age also proved to be an important factor when examined in relationship to the strategies used by the educators. The results of this were similar to those discussed earlier. The use of cooperative strategies tended to increase with age until the last (forty-nine-plus) group. In this case, as with ideology, use of cooperative strategies decreased when matched with the final age group. Child development units completed was also a factor explored in this study. As mentioned earlier, educators with more units completed in child development felt that competitive strategies were less effective. There was also a significant decline in feelings of efficacy of avoidance strategies when the level of education increased. This might have occurred for a couple of reasons.

First, the educators with a higher level of education might have had more exposure to developmentally appropriate practices. This indicates that they were less likely to feel that developmentally “inappropriate” strategies were effective (NAEYC, 1997). These results can also be confirmed by the results of other studies. Martin, Linfoot, and Stephenson (1999) conducted one study that indicated teachers felt more comfortable with strategies for conflict management as their education in the subject increased. Girard and Koch (1996) confirmed that if educators are given more tools for resolving conflict in the classroom, they are more likely to feel comfortable with positive resolution practices.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

440

JENKINS, RITBLATT, MCDONALD

There were also significant differences between child development units completed and the use of competitive strategies. Competitive strategies were used less by educators who had earned more units in child development. This was most likely due to the reasons mentioned earlier.

Those who received higher education were less likely to use inappropriate strategies because they felt they would be ineffective. Kohn (1999) also noted that teachers who have been trained to engage in introspective practices in their classrooms are more readily able to recognize their role as a model for behavior. Those teachers who have received more training are therefore more likely to recognize their role as a model and act accordingly. This, paired with heightened education in developmentally appropriate practice, might result in educators using less competitive resolution strategies.

Ethnicity also proved to be a significant factor in several aspects of this study. Significant differences began to appear when the practices of the educators were examined. Ethnicity became an important factor in educator practices in interacting with age and education. The first significant results involve age and ethnicity. When these two variables interacted, it was indicated that respondents in the youngest group were more likely to use cooperative resolution strategies if they were white and non-Hispanic.

White, non-Hispanic respondents in the forty-nine-plus category were the least likely to use cooperative strategies. It is interesting that within the youngest group, white, non-Hispanic subjects were more likely to use cooperative strategies than Latino/Hispanics. A further effect was noted in the Hispanic/Latino groups. Hispanic/Latinos in the thirty-six to fortyeight group used cooperative strategy more than those in the eighteen to twenty-five group. It is possible that the interactions between ethnicity and age reflect the development of different cultural constructs and how these cultures view the role of child and adult in conflict. These questions are perhaps best left for future study.

Ethnicity also produced a significant interaction effect when examined along with child development units completed. In this case, white, nonHispanics with more education were more likely to use cooperative strategies than those in the same ethnic group with less education. There was a converse relationship in the Latino/Hispanic category; those in this ethnic group with less education were actually more likely to use cooperative strategies.

The interaction effects that occurred among age, ethnicity, and child development units earned could possibly be explained by culture. The factors

CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

Conflict Resolution Among Early Childhood Educators 441

examined in these interaction effects describe the practices of different American cultures. Region might have also proved to be a significant factor in this case, but it was not explored in this study. Cultural perspectives of the capabilities of the child in conflict might have influenced these results. Historically, the view of the child has changed significantly over time according to various cultures. Some cultures might believe that children are capable of resolving their own conflicts. Others might believe that children are not as capable and therefore need adults to tell them how to resolve conflict. This study also offered an examination of interactions between adults in the classroom. This places heavy emphasis on the teacher as a model because children are watching and learning how to resolve conflict according to how the adults they encounter do so. In some cultures, it might be more acceptable to demonstrate conflict resolution between adults in front of children.

Recommendations An additional study should be conducted using the CRIPQ in conjunction with observing teachers in conflict in their classrooms. Although this survey was designed to assess the practices that teachers use in conflict, their actual responses might differ from what they put down on paper. It would be advisable to record the actions of teachers by video and audiotape for the purposes of observational analysis.

It is also highly recommended that this instrument be used as a tool for reflection for parents and early childhood educators as a part of conflict resolution training. This instrument can be used in order to begin discussions with groups of educators, parents, or even between parents and educators.

By answering and discussing the scenarios brought forth in the instrument, parents and educators will be able to discern which methods they are most likely to use when faced with a situation of conflict in their classroom.

They are then given opportunities to discuss with one another which answers they chose and why. After engaging in discussion, educators and families can propose and implement a succinct plan for conflict resolution within the classroom. With the educators and families working together using the same methods for conflict resolution and supplying continuity in responses for the children in their care, their conflict resolution strategies are more likely to be effective.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

442

JENKINS, RITBLATT, MCDONALD

Appendix: Demographic Questionnaire Please put an “X” in the box that best fits or write in the answer where requested. Please fill this out completely.

1) Gender: Female Male 2) Age: _______ years 3) Ethnicity: If you are bi- or multiracial, mark as many categories as apply: White, but not Hispanic Hispanic/Latino African American Asian/Pacific Islander Native American Other Please specify: ______________________ 4) Early Childhood/Child Development Education: How many early childhood education or child development units have you completed? Please estimate if you are unsure. ___________ units 5) What kind of program do you work in?

Church-sponsored Corporate Federally funded Parent cooperative Private for-profit Private nonprofit State funded Other Please specify: ______________________ 6) Do you wish to receive further training in conflict resolution?

Yes

No

CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

8) Conflict can be resolved by removing children from problem areas.

7) When children have conflict, I feel it works to take the child away from the group for a while.

6) When in conflict with children, it is important to establish that they must listen to the teacher.

5) It helps children solve problems when I tell them what will happen if they choose to act a certain way.

4) As the authority figure in the classroom, I must tell my students how conflict should be resolved.

3) I prevent conflict from occurring by verbally reinforcing my student’s positive behavior.

2) When in conflict it is important to exchange ideas in order to find an acceptable solution for both parties.

1) I discuss problems with other adults in my classroom.

Almost Always

Usually

Sometimes

(Continued)

Almost Never

Instructions: Please check the box with the best answer for the children and adults in general in your classroom. Please answer honestly. There is no need to go back and change responses.

Conflict Resolution Ideology and Practice Questionnaire

18) It helps solve problems when I take a child away from the conflict for a while.

17) When children are in conflict, I suggest some choices and ask them to choose how to solve their problem.

16) When in conflict with other adults in the classroom, my students must observe that I am in control.

15) When a child is in conflict with another child, I separate them.

14) I feel that it is important to make my students follow the rules of the classroom.

13) When I experience conflict with other adults in the classroom I discuss the problem with them.

12) When children have conflicts I redirect them to activities that will help them succeed.

11) I feel that my students are unable to solve conflicts on their own.

10) In conflict, I often find that one party wins while the other loses.

9) I try to develop solutions to problems by asking the children’s opinions about what should be done.

Almost Always

Usually

Sometimes

Almost Never

30) I feel uncomfortable when children engage in conflict.

29) In conflict, I feel that I have correct answers to the problems.

28) I ask both parties involved in conflict to tell me about what happened.

27) When I experience conflict with other adults in the classroom, I avoid discussing the problem in front of the children.

26) I try to accept suggestions by my students as to how they want to solve their problems.

25) When I see children in conflict, I know how it should be resolved.

24) I feel that the teacher should be in control when faced with conflict.

23) Young children are not capable of coming up with resolutions to conflict without my help.

22) In conflict, I try to consider my needs and the needs of the other equally.

21) Rewarding children for good behavior (such as giving hugs or pats on the back) helps students avoid conflict.

20) I state my actual feelings when in conflict.

19) Conflict can be resolved by taking away items that children fight over.

446

JENKINS, RITBLATT, MCDONALD

Please circle the one response that you, as the teacher, would most likely do first in each situation: 1) Two four-year-old children are playing in the sand yard. Tony wants a shovel from Rob. First Tony says, “I want it!” Tony grabs for the shovel. Rob struggles and keeps his hold on the shovel. Tony bites him on the arm and Rob begins to scream. You: A. Examine the bite. Ask each child to explain his side of the story.

Restate what they have each said. Ask the children how they can make the situation better. Agree upon a solution and help the children implement it.

B. Examine the bite. Immediately remove Tony from the sand yard.

Tell Tony that he cannot bite our friends at preschool.

C. Examine the bite. Call Tony’s parents to come pick him up.

2) Julie and Tracey are playing at the puzzle table. Each child finishes her puzzle and they both reach for the next puzzle. Tracey actually grabs the puzzle first. Julie pushes Tracey and yells, “I had it first!” You: A. Ask Julie to leave the puzzle table and find another activity. Tell her that you can see she is having trouble working at the puzzle table.

B. Tell the children what you observed. Ask them for their version of what happened. Ask them to help you figure out a solution.

C. Give the puzzle to Tracey because you saw that she did actually have the puzzle first. Tell Julie that she simply must wait her turn.

3) You are working in the classroom with another teacher. You have engaged the children in a music activity that they seem to enjoy. Sarah (your co-worker) begins to approach the children you are dancing with and takes them over to her own art activity. She continues to approach your group until only a few remain dancing with you.

You are upset. You: A. Stop your own activity and let the rest of the children move to Sarah’s activity. There is no need for the children to see that you are upset.

B. Confront Sarah. Tell her that you were working on an activity with the children. Explain that she should wait until you have finished and ask your students to come back to your activity.

C. Confront Sarah. Tell her that you feel upset because you were working with the children on a music activity. Ask her if there is a way you can both engage the children in music and art activities.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

Conflict Resolution Among Early Childhood Educators 447

4) Alejandra and Colby begin to argue over a toy. Alejandra insists that the toy is a helicopter. Colby insists that it’s a jet plane. They begin yelling louder and louder, neither yielding their position. You: A. Allow the children to continue arguing. Arguments are a part of life and you would like to observe how they handle it on their own.

B. You intervene. You tell the children that the toy they are arguing over is a helicopter. You describe the differences between helicopters and jet planes.

C. You tell the children what you observed. Ask them how they think they can decide if the toy is a helicopter or a jet plane.

5) Lonnie is walking through the block area in order to build. She accidentally knocks over Matt’s block tower. Matt begins to cry and yell that Lonnie ruined his tower. You: A. Tell Lonnie that she must be careful where she is walking. Suggest a different area where she will have more room to build.

B. Ask Lonnie and Matt what happened. Ask them how they think they will be able to work together in the block area without knocking over other people’s work.

C. Give Matt a hug until he stops crying.

6) Jeff has engaged a group of children in playing “Monsters.” This group chases the other children across the playground, holding their hands up in pretend claws and growling. The other children become frightened. You: A. Call a class meeting. Ask the group who is chasing and those who are being chased what the problem is. Ask both groups to decide how they can each play on the playground.

B. Remove Jeff from the situation so that he can calm down. When he seems calm, allow him to rejoin his group.

C. Tell the “Monsters” that they are playing a game not allowed at preschool. Take them to other activities where you feel they will do better.

7) Two five-year-old boys frequently engage in fights in the sandbox in which they hit each other. You: A. Tell the boys frequently that you are pleased with their behavior when they are not fighting. Make sure that you observe them closely during the day and verbally reinforce them when they are behaving in a nonviolent way.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

448

JENKINS, RITBLATT, MCDONALD

B. Attempt to keep the boys separated. They play well when they are not together and you would like to prevent future violence.

C. Do not allow the boys to play in the sandbox. When you notice them approaching the sandbox, you take them to different areas.

8) It’s snack time. Every day Angie washes her hands quickly and runs out to the snack table in order to find “her” seat. Today she finds that Madison is in “her” seat. She begins to cry and refuses to sit anywhere else. You: A. Hold Angie until she stops crying, then help her find a new seat.

B. Ask Angie and Madison if there is some way they can work out future seating arrangements.

C. Tell Angie that she cannot have her snack until she sits down in the remaining seat.

9) You share the same classroom space with another teacher. Carol (your co-worker) uses the classroom first. Each day she uses all 20 cubbies to hold the artwork of her 12 students. You have difficulty finding places for the artwork of your students. You: A. Confront Carol. Remind her that the rules are that you are to share the 20 cubbies. This means that you each must find a way to use only 10 cubbies each.

B. Don’t say anything. There is no need to make the situation worse when you can find different places for your children’s artwork.

C. Confront Carol. Ask her if there is a way that you can share the cubbies. Describe the difficulty that you are having in finding places for your student’s work and ask her for her opinion on how to share the space.

10) Mindy and Allie engage in daily conflict after snack time. Both girls finish their snack as quickly as possible so that they can race to the dress-up area. Each girl tries to claim a white lace dress to wear first. You: A. Remove the dress from the dress-up area for a while.

B. Stop the girls before they get up from snack. Ask them each where they are going. Ask them for help figuring out how they can share the dress.

C. Tell the girls that they must take turns with the dress. Allow Mindy to have the dress for the first 10 minutes. Next, let Allie use the dress for the following 10 minutes.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

Conflict Resolution Among Early Childhood Educators 449

References Adams, S. K., and Sasse Wittmer, D. “‘I Had It First’: Teaching Young Children to Solve Problems Peacefully.” Childhood Education, 2001, 78, 10–16.

Arcaro-McPhee, R., Doppler, E. E., and Harkins, D. A. “Conflict Resolution in a Preschool Constructivist Classroom: A Case Study in Negotiation.” Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 2002, 17, 19–25.

Bandura, A. Principles of Behavior Modification. Austin, Tex.: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1969.

Cannon, N. Roots of Violence, Seeds of Peace: In People, Families, and Societies.

San Diego: Miclearoy, 1996.

Chen, D. W. “Oh No! They’re Arguing Again! Using Peer Conflicts to Foster Young Children’s Moral and Social Development.” Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 2001, 67, 5–8.

Chen, D. W. “Preventing Violence by Promoting the Development of Competent Conflict Resolution Skills: Exploring Roles and Responsibilities.” Early Childhood Education Journal, 2003, 30, 203–208.

Chernofsky, C., and Gage, D. Change Your Child’s Behavior by Changing Yours.

New York: Three Rivers Press, 1996.

Fagan, A. A., and Mihalic, S. “Strategies for Enhancing the Adoption of SchoolBased Prevention Programs: Lessons Learned from the Blueprints for Violence Prevention Replications of the Life Skills Training Program.” Journal of Community Psychology, 2003, 31, 235–253.

Fisher, R., and Ury, W. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. New York: Penguin Books, 1991.

Fontana, B. N. “The University as a System with Competing Constituencies.”

Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1974, 18, 595–620.

Girard, K., and Koch, S. J. Conflict Resolution in the Schools: A Manual for Educators. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1996.

Harris, I. “Challenges for Peace Educators at the Beginning of the 21st Century.”

Social Alternatives, 2002, 21, 28–31.

Hignite, M. A., Margavio, T. M., and Chin, J. M. “Assessing the Conflict Resolution Profiles of Emerging Information Systems Professionals.” Journal of Information Systems Education, 2002, 13, 315–325.

Howe, N., Rinaldi, C. M., Jennings, M., and Petrakos, H. “‘No! The Lambs Can Stay Out Because They Got Cozies’: Constructive and Destructive Sibling Conflict, Pretend Play, and Social Understanding.” Child Development, 2002, 73, 1460–1473.

Kaiser, B., and Skylar Rasminsky, J. Challenging Behavior in Young Children: Understanding, Preventing and Responding Effectively. Boston: Pearson, 2003.

Kohn, A. No Contest: The Case Against Competition. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1986.

Kohn, A. Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A’s, Praise and Other Bribes. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1999.

Kreidler, W. J. Creative Conflict Resolution. New York: Scott, Foresman, 1984.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq

450

JENKINS, RITBLATT, MCDONALD

Martin, A. J., Linfoot, K., and Stephenson, J. “How Teachers Respond to Concerns About Misbehavior in Their Classroom.” Psychology in the Schools, 1999, 36, 347–358.

National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs. Washington, D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1997.

Neff, K. D., and Harter, S. “The Authenticity of Conflict Resolutions Among Adult Couples: [Do] Women’s Other-Oriented Behavior Reflect Their True Selves?” Sex Roles, 2002 47, 403–417.

Patota, N., Schwartz, D., and Schwartz, T. “Leveraging Generational Differences for Productivity Gains.” Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge, 2007, 11, 1–10.

Skinner, B. F. About Behaviorism. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1974.

Stanulis, R. N., and Manning, B. H. “The Teacher’s Role in Creating a Positive Verbal and Nonverbal Environment in the Early Childhood Classroom.”

Early Childhood Education Journal, 2002, 30, 3–8.

Stevahn, L., and others. “Effects of Conflict Resolution Training Integrated into a Kindergarten Curriculum.” Child Development, 2000, 71, 772–784.

Thomas, K., and Kilman, R. Thomas-Kilman Conflict Mode Instrument.

San Francisco: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1978.

U.S. Census Bureau. “School Enrollment—Social and Economic Characteristics of Students: October 2003,” 2003, retrieved Sept. 21, 2005, from http://www. census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p20–554.pdf.

Wheeler, E. J. Conflict Resolution in Early Childhood. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson, 2004.

Zahn-Waxler, C., and others., “Japanese and United States Preschool Children’s Responses to Conflict and Distress.” Child Development, 1996, 67, 2462–2477.

Sandy Jenkins is an adjunct faculty member in child development at San Diego’s Miramar College and Southwestern College.

Shulamit Ritblatt is an associate professor in the Department of Child and Family Development at San Diego State University.

Jeffrey S. McDonald coauthored this article while working as a graduate student at the Statistical Consulting Center at San Diego State University.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/crq