As a social system, the school is the accumulation of the integral components of interacting socially and have a gait that depends between each other. Zamroni (2001) states that the approach microcosmis see school as a world itself, in which have elements to be called a society, as leaders, government, community or the rules and norms and social groups.
In accordance with the structural functional approach, institutions are like the small community school which has the power to regulate and manage the organic components. The sections are organized and integrated social control system under the form of a formal organization. Formal is a reference guide from all backgrounds fundamental attitudes and behaviors of carrier status and role in the school.
The structural functional approach see the school environment is essentially an array of roles and status of different, each of which is concentrated in one part of a legal power that drives the structural power of orientation in order to achieve certain goals. Of course, the social system relies on the status of the school as a formal institution.
The presence of teachers, students, principals, school psychologists or counselors, parents, students, administrators. Administrator of the functional components that interact actively and determine all kinds of development dynamics of school life as an organization of formal education. So that here the functional strukural underlie our view to see the different roles and formal status in the school as the only basic guidelines for all activities undertaken by its citizens.
Manifestation of the fundamental role of school norms have been binding on the integrity of its citizens in the nuances of high consciousness. Meanwhile, the conflict approach emphasizes the portion of the subjective assessment of the role of school principals and objective consequences for a form of school as an institution that maintains the power system. Approach to the conflict to see the other side of the martinet school community behavior in practice the desires of the individual who is always obedient to the normative force.
In more radical approach to the conflict a few adherents assert that the existing social order (including in schools) is the result of either the dominant power source from the physical coercion and symbolic violence (violence symbolic). This means that the dominant social classes have a social symbols menghegomoni sejalur awareness to all members with an objective value system which is essentially a lot of siding with the ruling group or class.
Inside the school, a school principal in addition to having a formal position as a school leader it also indicates a conflict of interest and autonomy of others is lower status, such as teachers, administrative staff and so forth. Against the teacher, when a school principal formal functions, then there is the point of destabilizing opposition role of teacher autonomy in managing the teaching and learning.
On the one hand, school principals hope that the students succeeded in learning the process of effective teaching, efficient and able to achieve mastery of the target material a lot. On the other hand, hopes that symbolizes the status of principal interest is of course a burden as well as the role of the position of teacher autonomy in managing the classroom learning.
Faisal and Yasik (1985) states that conflict can be drawn from this approach are two basic assumptions that appear on the school institution. An institution that has certain goals and maintain a lot of different status and also has a functional role. Diversity status functions are managed through formal legal authority to utilize the principles of bureaucracy. Two assumptions are that:
1) The potential for conflict in integrating an understanding of the goals of school to the stockholders berbedabeda status. For one purpose of education, each carrier will have a power position capture sectoral berbedabeda in interpreting the results and the process of achieving goals.
2) The difficulty of reaching a common perception about the role and position limits of education. As a result, the situation of internal conflict sparked a cross position. The definition of the role of internal conflict is a conflict antarpihak expectations of the role of the position holders in the school. The teachers are faced with conflicting expectations with the principal, superintendent, staff counseling, education administrators, parents and even from their own pupils.
Of the two main approaches above (structural and functional conflict) can be concluded that the school is not just a set consisting of the executive administration, teachers and students with all their innate nature and each (Horton and Hunt, 1999: 333). More than that, school is a social system in which there is a set of well-established relationship, interaction, confrontation, conflict, accommodation, and integration that determines the dynamics of its citizens in the school. Therefore, in the school will always contain elements and social processes as well as complex social dynamics of the general public