CC BY
1FUNCTIONS THAT DETERMINE THE TEACHERS ATTITUDE TO CONFLICT SITUATIONS
Halikov Azam Abdusalomovich
Professor of Tashkent State Pedagogical University named after Nizami, doctor of Pedagogical Sciences https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10207673
Abstract. From the point of view of functions, conflict is a rather contradictory phenomenon. By entering into confrontation, teachers can achieve their goals. But it is often difficult to predict even not very distant consequences that will follow. In this case, the consequences can be both positive and negative for the parties to the conflict.
Keywords: function, conflict management, controversial situation, pedagogical process, beneficial interests, conflicting outcomes, to be agreed.
The attitude of the teacher towards various problems in conflict situations can be determined on the basis of the following functions:
1. Dispute denial function. This function is considered a set of methods used in cases where a conflict situation occurs on the basis of issues that do not require too much attention in their content, and there is no basis for its expansion. In this, the teacher chooses to direct his strength and energy to more important issues and is brought to a solution by denying the dispute. But at some times, ignoring a dispute can cause even larger conflict situations. Because denying a dispute does not always mean that conflict leads to a solution. In this situation, the teacher becomes deprived of his influence on the conflict situation. The lack of teacher influence drives him out of the pedagogical process. Interrupts the influence of the teacher on the conflict situation. The dispute begins to live outside the teacher. As a result, the situation of bringing the dispute to a solution will be missed. Accordingly, it is desirable that the efforts of the teacher are always directed to the solution of the dispute.
2. Conflict resolution function. The function of the parties to achieve victory in bringing the dispute to a solution does not mean only the achievement of one side, but also the same achievement of all parties involved in the conflict. At some point, however, most teachers traditionally act precisely by themselves wanting the truth to win. As a result, it is not the general truth that is won, but precisely the fact of the teacher. But the fact of the teacher, achieved in such a way, can contradict the interests of the parties and undermine the effectiveness of the pedagogical process. When this is done, the idea that injustice has taken place in the thinking of all participants of the pedagogical process, except the teacher, arises, and it is this injustice carried out by the teacher that settles in their minds. Participants in the pedagogical process cannot accept the "reality" of the teacher. They deny that the truth of the teacher is fair. And the teacher begins to play a role as the person who brought this injustice to the surface. Naturally, in front of the students, the teacher's respect decreases, and the student confesses firsthand that injustice can be made by the teacher. Accordingly, it is necessary that the teacher does not establish his own reality in conflict situations, but leads the conflict to a fair solution. And when bringing a dispute to a solution, it is assumed that it takes into account the interests of all parties, focuses its power and experience on the solution of the dispute, and in relation to the parties, it is assumed that it stands in an attentive, respectful and neutral position. If in the solution of the
dispute each side is satisfied with this solution and remains in the opinion that "I did not lose, I won," the teacher will indeed have brought the dispute to a fair solution. Consequently, a pedagogical dispute solution does not imply that the teacher is right, but that the teacher has harmoniously looked at the interests of all participating parties in bringing the conflict to a solution, and a solution has been found that satisfies all parties [1]. Accordingly, it is assumed that the teacher will not establish his own reality, but will take note of his common knowledge and ensure that they are agreed and brought to a point. At the same time, the teacher takes the field as a person who needs to teach him to take into account the interests of each of the parties involved in a conflict situation. If in a conflict situation the parties go only on the path of protecting their interests, then this conflict will not lead to a solution that at no time satisfied all parties as one. If in a dispute each side moves only to the protection of their own interests, this means that the dispute has passed into a constructive state, and it becomes more difficult to bring it to a solution. In the destructive state of the dispute, the parties begin to provoke in their desire to protect their interests such as intimidating each other, threatening, overpowering oneself, tormenting others, laughing at someone else, insulting him. If one side moves on to the listed destructive actions, naturally the other side will also begin to apply them. As a result, the relationship deepens in the long term. If the teacher himself begins to follow such actions towards the student, fearing a decrease in his reputation, his respect will also be greatly reduced in front of everyone, that is, before all students, colleagues and the entire pedagogical community [2]. Consequently, the teacher's function is manifested in ensuring the regularity of his respect on the basis of neutrality and in such a way as to react to the interests of all parties. For the teacher, the main achievement is the fact that any conflict that arises on the basis of a conflict situation is brought to a solution and that all parties, satisfied with this solution, forget about the conflict, that the conflict has left their lives, that they are no longer worried.
3. The function of the teacher's skill in solving conflict situations. In bringing pedagogical disputes to a solution, the teacher will have the following ways of coming to a compromise: the parties and their character traits, adaptation to their interests, an attempt to realize their interests, a side in some issues, coming to murasa, an attempt to preserve the interests of the parties in a pre-conflict situation, the use of the help and In the process of adaptation and bias, the importance of the interests of the other party and the presence of seats useful to the two parties in the views of the other side are recognized. As a result, the opinions and views of the other side are accepted. Although in fact the views of the other party are accepted, the party that accepts this view also achieves a breakthrough. Because this vision takes into account both the interests of all parties and serves for success. Giving side manifests itself through actions such as focusing on the opinions and views of others, openness and sincerity in their analysis, being able to find acceptable ideas among other thoughts and accepting them cooperatively, being able to show their neutral and rational attitude. Interpersonal mana provides ample opportunities for achieving such an acceptable agreement. However, when accepting opinions and views on the other side, losing on the other side, harming their own interests, submitting to someone, becoming a mulzam, being assessed as a loss, these situations cause escalation of the dispute, that is, further intensification. The teacher himself, on the other hand, is required to take no time off from such actions as to outmaneuver himself in general in a conflict situation, to bully the other side, to molest the other, to commit psychological and physical violence, to instill his opinion with force, to impose pressure on others. The compromise
confirms that the interests of the parties to one degree or another are taken into account. Each side realizes that the most important of their interests have been accepted, but some other opinions have not been taken into account, and agrees with that result. The importance of accepted seats in the interests of the parties will occupy a position superior to those not accepted. However, in most conflict situations, naturally one side is more likely to compromise on the other. If there is any dissatisfaction in the views of this side, the dispute will pass for a while in peace and tranquility, and later, the conflict with new strength and energy will reappear and begin to resonate again in the relations of the parties.
4. The function of the interaction of the teacher with students in conflict situations. Discussing the parties involved in any dispute in cooperation with the existing problem, offering a way, methods and means to get out of the conflict, going to compromises, nurturing the passion and desire to overcome the conflict ensures that both sides win in the conflict process and the "win-win" situation applies. However, in a concrete situation, the parties involved in the conflict do not always understand this correctly and proportionally. Therefore, the role of the teacher in the performance of this task is considered very significant. Consequently, it is important to establish the cooperation of the parties in any conflict situation. For cooperation, it is assumed that intimacy in the views, opinions and views of the parties, the presence of places that are mutually recurring and valuable for both parties, the emergence of common interests and goals, emotional-emotional and mental thinking activities on both sides. The teacher is in charge of cooperation between students, colleagues, Management in conflict situations. Being able to establish cooperation plays an important role in eliminating the conflict and preventing it. Cooperation in a conflict situation together means discussing various problems and making appropriate decisions.
Conclusion. From what has been analyzed above it can be inferred that to carry out this function, it is necessary to take into account and study the interests and needs of all parties involved in a conflict situation, take measures to practically accept and ensure them, respect their value system, ensure objectivity in discussions, and view problems from the individual in a separate way [3, 44p.].
REFERENCES
1. Thomas K.W. Conflict and negotiation // Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology/ Eds. M.D. Dunnette. Palo Alto, CA, 1992. - P. 889-935.
2. Rybakova M.M. Конфликт и взаимодействия в педагогическом процессе. - М.: Pedagogics, 1991. - 168 p .
3. Khalikov A.A. Педагогик майорат. //Textbook. - Tashkent, Moliya. 2015.- 435 бет.
