European Journal of Education Studies ISSN: 2501 - 1111 ISSN-L: 2501 - 1111 Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu doi: 10.5281/zenodo.1155890 Volume 4 │ Issue 1 │ 2018 HUMOR CLIMATE OF THE PRIMARY SCHOOLSi Ahmet Şahinii Assist. Prof. Dr., Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Education, Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Turkey Abstract: The aim of this study is to determine the opinions primary school administrators and teachers on humor climates in primary schools. The study was modeled as a convergent parallel design, one of the mixed methods. The data gathered from 253 administrator questionnaires, and 651 teacher questionnaires was evaluated for the quantitative part of the study. The study group of the qualitative part consists of 9 administrators and 12 teachers working in the primary schools. For data collection, the researcher developed and used a semi-structured data collection form consisting of open-ended questions. Qualitative data was also gathered by observation notes. In the quantitative part, a scale was used for gathering data on schools’ humor climate. A five-point Likert Scale was used in the questionnaire. Specific descriptive analyses which were conducted to calculate the quantitative data included percentage, frequency, arithmetic means, standard deviation, t-test and one-way ANOVA for unrelated sampling. Where the assumptions of one-way ANOVA were not satisfied, the Kruskal Wallis test was used. The qualitative data obtained was subjected to descriptive analysis and content analysis. The results of humor climate revealed that positive humor types were mostly used in primary schools. The beneficial effect of humor used by administrators was higher than the negative effect on school and subordinates. Parallel to these results, the study observed that positive humor climate styles were predominant in schools. Keywords: humor, humor climate, primary school, school administrator 1. Introduction In every part, humor is part of our lives and our workplace. It provides sometimes positive, and sometimes negatives emotions, and can sometimes create a constructive i This study is based on a part of the doctoral dissertation of the researcher entitled ‚Opinions on Humour Used in Managerial Tasks by Primary School Administrators and the Relationship among Schools’ Humour Climate, Administrators’ Humour Styles and Conflict Management Strategies‛. Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved. © 2015 – 2017 Open Access Publishing Group 95 Ahmet Şahin HUMOR CLIMATE OF THE PRIMARY SCHOOLS atmosphere where both sides laugh. However, it may sometimes cause a destructive case where one side is unhappy while the other side laughs. In other words, humor may play both constructive and destructive roles between both sides communicating to each other and may also produce both positive and negative consequences for the organizations (Cann, Watson and Bridgewater, 2014, p. 309; Lyttle, 2007, p. 239; Malone, 1980, p. 359; Meyer, 2000, p.329). Thanks to the effective use of humor in organizational settings, we expect a decrease in destructive outcomes of humor while the constructive outcomes increase. The effective use of humor has crucial effects on several organizational outcomes such as organizational success and efficacy. As such, we must consider that humor climate in organizational settings is therefore an important subject. Humor is more than telling the nominal joke at the beginning of the meetings, or the office cartoon that few employees understand. Humor is both an effective administrative tool and a dynamic symbolic communicative act that links people. It is a trainable skill; a strategy that everyone can use to create a positive workplace environment (Crawford, 1994, p.28). Humor has been attributed to improved morale, productivity, motivation, creativity, and a more positive culture in an organization (Hoffman, 2007, p.1). Both Cann, Watson and Bridgewater (2014, p.309, 317) state that a humor climate that reflects the presence of positive forms of humor among coworkers, and supported by supervisors, should be associated with higher job satisfaction and commitment. They, however, stress that a climate characterized by higher levels of negative humor in any form would be expected to relate to lower satisfaction and commitment. Given that humor has been shown to play a significant role in facilitating communication and improving the climate in workplaces, managers using and enjoying positive humor are expected to improve the task and relationship behavior occurring in work settings, as perceived by the employees. However, negative humor was found to be associated with lower perceived task and relationship behaviors in addition to other favorable employee outcomes such as satisfaction (Decker and Rotondo, 2001, p.459). Humor use in organizations that usually evokes positive and constructive emotions is one of the fundamental variables affecting the climate and culture of the organizations. While humor has negative impacts as well, the general perception concerning it is positive. However, effective and conscious use of humor has been attributed to making destructive outcomes into constructive ones. So, the effects of the use of humor in work settings on organizational climate have become a remarkable issue in terms of effectiveness and productivity. Vacharkulksemsuk, Sekerka and Fredrickson (2011, p.105), similarly claim that positive emotions in the work environment will create a positive emotional climate. Positive emotional climate will, thus, increase the performance of the organization and will improve it. Workplace humor that can be a central communicative component of an organizational culture (Leslie-Bole, 1985, p.186) is used to project the culture of the organization as an effective administrative tool (Crawford, 1994, p.15). In workplaces where a supportive, but also good-humored, competitive team spirit is nurtured and valued, alongside a positive attitude to having fun at work, tend to provide fertile European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 4 │ Issue 1 │ 2018 96 Ahmet Şahin HUMOR CLIMATE OF THE PRIMARY SCHOOLS contexts for creative humor. All these elements contribute to developing an organizational culture where humor is perceived as a constructive rather than a disruptive component in workplace interaction (Holmes, 2007, p.534). Organizational humor consists of amusing communications that produce positive emotions and cognitions in the individual, group or organization (Romero and Cruthirds, 2006, p. 59). The effect of humor on physiological, cognitive, and affective responses and on the communication process suggests humor may shape the climate and social relationship at the workplace (Decker and Rotonda, 2001, p.451; Hatch and Ehrlich, 1993, p.506). Consequently, humor that evokes positive emotions may be attributed to creating positive effects on workplace atmosphere. Humor makes employees optimistic and thus dominates positive communication, creates a positive atmosphere at work, plays as a lubricant in communication and builds a sense of intimacy at work. It also breaks unproductive thought loops and plays a key role in evoking creative thought. It leads creative problem solving and innovation initiatives at the workplace. Thus, humor accelerates the organizational outcomes of employees towards a positive direction, and because of this, humor may increase managerial effectiveness (Güler and Güler, 2010, p.207; Lyttle, 2007, p.240; Meyer, 2000, p.328-329). However, given that some humor is not positive and constructive, we should handle both positive and negative forms of humor in organizations. Moreover, most of the studies on organizational climate have neglected that humor could be an important part of the climate in the organizations (Cann, Watson and Bridgewater, 2014, p. 309). Therefore, it could be said that we need to explore humor in organizational settings in order to use it an effective and strong managerial tool. Humor climate in organizations expresses the effects of humorous experiences employees had on the atmosphere of the workplace. Humor climate is something different from individual differences in the humor styles of managers and employees. Humor climate focuses on how humor is used, experienced, perceived by employees, and which emotions it caused them to feel in the workplace. In fact, humor climate refers to the existence of humor in the climate of an organization. In other words, it refers to the atmosphere and environment created by the use of humor. Thus, the humor climate of an organization reflects both positive and negative forms of humor (Cann, Watson and Bridgewater, 2014, p. 307, 309). Humor climate consists of four factors: positive humor, supervisor support, negative humor, and outgroup humor. Positive humor and supervisor support reflect positive and constructive forms of humor, while negative humor and outgroup humor reflects negative and destructive forms of humor (Cann, Watson and Bridgewater, 2014, p. 317-318). A. Positive Humor Positive humor is typically those positive factors associated with higher satisfaction and commitment (Cann, Watson and Bridgewater, 2014, p. 317). The employees working in organizations in which positive humor is dominant have a humorous vision for life and stress positive emotions such as optimism, cheerfulness, wellness, self-confidence in European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 4 │ Issue 1 │ 2018 97 Ahmet Şahin HUMOR CLIMATE OF THE PRIMARY SCHOOLS humor they made. Thanks to positive humor, they try to escape from negative feelings and try to improve intragroup interaction. Employees enjoy making humor and approve it in such humorous climates in workplaces. They also care that the humor should not feel inhospitable and threatening. Humor is often used to encourage or support coworkers in positive humor dominant climates. Employees all enjoy sharing it at work because it makes the work more enjoyable and cheers them up. It, also helps employees relieve stress (Cann, Watson and Bridgewater, 2014, p.134-315). In brief, positive humor would be considered light playful banter that injures no one while it makes people happy (Duncan, 2006, p.53). B. Supervisor Support Supervisor support in humor climate relates to how the humor employees use in the workplace is perceived and reacted by managers. The aims, types, and styles of humor that managers use in organizations reveal their humorous sensations. As a result, to what extent managers support and approve the use of humor in the workplace reflects the degree of supervisor support in humor climates. It is believed that humor is necessary and beneficial in workplaces where supervisor support occurs. In such workplaces, humor is not seen unfavorably, does not stir up trouble. Besides, in workplaces where supervisor support occurs, humor attracts employees in spite of distracting them. Positive humor and supervisor support alike were also typically positive factors, associated with higher satisfaction and commitment (Cann, Watson and Bridgewater, 2014, pp.317-318). C. Negative Humor Negative humor is considered as biting, sarcasm that ‚puts-down‛ others in order to elevate oneself (Duncan, 2006, p.53). In detail, negative humor is a destructive feeling evoking a humor type such as threatening, ridiculing a colleague and offensive jokes. The party using negative humor tries to satisfy oneself by making fun of the others. This type of humor makes people feel belittled, ridiculed, intimidated and disparaged. The fact that some employees use negative humor to make someone in the group feel bad, to ridicule and belittle each other, to intimidate others in the group, and to make fun of coworkers indicates that there is negative humor in that organization. Moreover, negative humor was negatively associated with employee satisfaction (Cann, Watson and Bridgewater, 2014, pp.314,318). D. Outgroup Humor Outgroup humor refers to humorous sharing that the subject and the focus of the humor is out-group persons. In outgroup humor; employees often make jokes about ‚management‛. Management policies are often a target for jokes or ridicule among my coworkers, colleagues enjoy laughing together about management policies they do not agree with, humor directed at upper management is encouraged in the workgroup and jokes about company rules are common in the workplace (Cann, Watson and Bridgewater, 2014, p. 314, 318). Teaching is an extremely stressful job since teachers deal with overcrowded classrooms, changing educational technology, learning and behavior problems of students, legal issues, photocopying, reporting, communicating with the parents, and European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 4 │ Issue 1 │ 2018 98 Ahmet Şahin HUMOR CLIMATE OF THE PRIMARY SCHOOLS massive quantities of paperwork; all in addition to daily planning, managing and motivating students in the classroom. Most of the time, these tasks cause teachers to feel negative emotions such as anxiety, stress, fear, and dissatisfaction (Hurren, 2008, p.83). It is stated that positive organizational culture and climate is quite effective in the elimination of these negative emotions (Çelik, 2000, p.v; Doğan, 2013, p.101, 163-164; George and Jones, 2012, p.28; Türk, 2007, p.34; Vural, 1998, p.71). Similarly, Hurren (2006, p.383) emphasizes that the frequency of humor that principals use in the workplace is more specifically related to teachers’ higher job satisfaction. Principals are able to relieve teacher stress and improve teacher job satisfaction by creating a supportive structure that invites humor into the environment. That is, humor can serve as an effective tool to enhance teacher job satisfaction. George and Jones (2012, p.73) emphasize that work moods could have important effects on organizational behavior, and incorporating fun and humor into the workplace could have been a tool to promote positive moods. Aslan (2006, p.1) tresses that people have a tendency to express positive feelings while thinking positively and tend to feel negative while thinking negatively. Indeed, humor may create a climate that allows employees to feel better about their workplace, even though they are dissatisfied with their leader (Avolio, Howell and Sosik, 1999, p.225). In this case, it could be said that humor is so important in terms of creating a positive climate in organizations. Given that humor has both positive and negative consequences for organizations, there exists a need to study the use of humor and its product, humor climate, in organizations. As a result, the study is significant in terms of creating a positive environment in the organizational outcomes of schools such as motivating employees, enhancement of satisfaction and performance, organizational health, and effectiveness. The aim of this study is to determine the humor climate of schools according to the opinions of primary school administrators and teachers. In this context, the questions below were sought. According to the opinions of primary school administrators and teachers; 1. What level is the humor climate of primary schools? 2. Are there any differences between the views of school administrators on humor climate of primary schools according to their gender, seniority, education level, and job status? 3. Are there any differences between the views of teachers on the humor climate of primary schools according to their gender, seniority, education level, and job status? 2. Methodology 2.1. Research Design The study was modeled as a convergent parallel design, one of the mixed methods which combined qualitative and quantitative methods (Creswell, 2009, p. 14; Creswell, 2012, p.540; Creswell, 2014, p.219; Fırat, Kabakçı and Ersoy, 2014, p.72, 75; Mertens, 2010, p. 298). The first part of the study that aims to explore the opinions of school administrators and teachers on the humor climate of their schools in more depth and European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 4 │ Issue 1 │ 2018 99 Ahmet Şahin HUMOR CLIMATE OF THE PRIMARY SCHOOLS detail was designed as a holistic multiple-case study (Fraenkel, Wallen and Hyun, 2011, p.435; Güler, Halıcıoğlu and Taşğın, 2013, p.39; Yıldırım and Şimşek, 2011, p.77, 290) while the second part was designed as a descriptive survey model (Büyüköztürk, Çakmak, Akgün and Demirel, 2010, p.22; Karasar, 2002, p.81). 2.2. Study Group - Population and Sample Since a convergent parallel design was used in the study, the study group of the qualitative part and the sample of the quantitative one were presented with different titles below. A. Study Group of Qualitative Part The study group of the qualitative part consists of nine administrators and twelve teachers working in primary schools of Antalya Province in Turkey. The study group was selected according to maximum variation sampling method, one of the non- random purposeful sampling methods (Büyüköztürk etc., 2010, p.89). Four of the school administrators participated in the qualitative part of the study were principals and five were vice principals. Of these, seven were male and two were female. As for the education levels, one of the administrators has a two-year degree, the other one has a three-year degree, five have undergraduate degrees, and two have graduate degrees. For the entire group, the length of service varies from 8.5 to 34 years. Half of the twelve teachers participated in the study were female. Of them, four were class teachers, seven were subject teachers, and one was a psychological counselor. The length of service of the teachers varies from 5 to 30 years. One of the teachers had a two-year degree, ten had undergraduate degrees, and one had a graduate degree. B. Population and Sample of Quantitative Part The population of the quantitative part of the study consists of 631 primary school administrators and 6850 teachers working in state primary schools in five central districts (Muratpaşa, Kepez, Konyaltı, Döşemealtı, and Aksu) of Antalya Province in 2014-2015. Multi-stage sampling was undertaken for the determination of sample size. In the first stage, the stratified sampling method was utilized to select the required number of administrators and teachers from the central districts of Antalya Province according to the districts’ representation ratio of the population. Then simple random sampling was applied within each stratum to select sufficient participants (Büyüköztürk etc., 2010, p.83). The sample size was determined according to the sample size tables (Balcı, 2001, p.107; Krejcie and Morgan, 1970, p.608), and the formulas used for determining the sample size for continuous variables (Bartlett, Kotrlik and Higgins, 2001, p.46-48; Büyüköztürk etc., 2010, p.94). Finally, the data gathered from 253 administrator questionnaires and 651 teacher questionnaires was evaluated in the study. Power analysis was also utilized for each test. Conventionally, a test with a power greater than 0.80 than or equal to is considered statistically powerful and desired (Brown, 2015, p.381; Dattalo, 2008, p.16; Murphy and Myors, 2004, p.18-19; Murphy, Myors and Wolach, 2014, p.83). In this study, the results of all power analysis tests were greater than 0.95. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 4 │ Issue 1 │ 2018 100 Ahmet Şahin HUMOR CLIMATE OF THE PRIMARY SCHOOLS Quantitative study data gathered from 253 administrator questionnaires and 651 teacher questionnaires were evaluated in the study. 90 of the participating administrators were principal and 163 were vice principals. The number of female administrators was 71 (42.7%) and male ones were 182 (71.9%). With regards to seniority, 39 (15.4%) administrators had worked for 1-10 years, 108 (24.7%) for 11-20 years, and 159 (24.4%) for 21 years and more. In terms of educational level of the administrators, 23 (9.1%) of the administrators had two-year degrees, 183 (72.3%) had undergraduate degrees and 47 (18.6%) had graduate degrees. As for the teachers, 309 of the teachers were classroom teachers and 342 were taught specific subject matter. 391 (60.1%) of the teachers were female while 260 (39.9%) were male. In terms of teachers’ seniority, 278 (42.7%) teachers had worked for 1-10 years, 214 (32.9%) for 11-20 years and 159 (24.4%) for 21 years and more. 44 (6.8%) teachers had two-year degrees, 573 (88%) had undergraduate degrees, 33 (5.1%) had graduate degrees, and only 1 (0.2%) had a graduate degree. 2.3. Data Collection Tools and Process Qualitative and quantitative data were gathered synchronous and shown detailed below. A. Qualitative Data Collection Tool Both interviews and observations, two of the qualitative data collection techniques, were used in the qualitative part of the study in order to collect data in depth on humor climate of primary schools. For the interviews, the researcher developed and used a semi-structured data collection form. In the first part of the interview form, demographic questions were addressed to the participants. In the second part, open- ended questions were addressed to them in order to explore the humor climate of primary schools. Face to face, individual interviews were held with the participants who fulfilled the criteria in their own schools. The questions were asked the participants one by one. Then, the participants were asked to express their own thoughts in detail. When an issue was not mentioned, the interviewer asked more detailed sub-questions to the participant in order to uncover the related thoughts on the issue. In interviews, the researcher used a voice recorder to collect data with the permission of the participants. For the observations, the researcher developed an observation form and observed the school settings via this form. B. Quantitative Data Collection Tool The Humor Climate Questionnaire (HCQ), developed by Cann, Watson and Bridgewater (2014) and adapted into Turkish by the researcher, was used in the quantitative part of the study as a data collection tool on humor climate in primary schools. The first section of the questionnaire of the Turkish version inquired about the participants’ demographic information. In the second section, school administrators and teachers were asked to respond on what they thought of the humor climate in their schools. Since Turkish educators are more familiar with the five-point scales, the researcher used a five-point Likert scale ranging from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree in the Turkish version of the scale (Irmak and Kuruüzüm, 2009, p.15). Explanatory and European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 4 │ Issue 1 │ 2018 101 Ahmet Şahin HUMOR CLIMATE OF THE PRIMARY SCHOOLS confirmatory factor analyses were employed in the data gathered from HCQ. A total of 1073 questionnaires, 259 from administrators and 814 from teachers, were responded. After removing the questionnaires with problems such as missing values and outliers, 904 questionnaires were evaluated (Akgül and Çevik, 2003, p.419; Büyüköztürk, 1992, p.480; Hair, Anderson, Tahtam and Black, 1998, p.98-99). Given that Kaiser-Meyer- Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy was 0.83, it can be said that the sampling size of the study is adequate enough for the Explanatory Factor Analysis. As for the Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity, the chi-squared test is significant which shows the validity and suitability of the responses collected (X2(190)=4719.89; p<.01). As a result, it can be said that the data comes from a multivariate normal distribution (Akgül and Çevik, 2003, p.428; Büyüköztürk, 2003, p.120; Hair, Anderson, Tahtam and Black, 1998, p.99). In order to predict the factor pattern, the Principal Component Analysis and Varimax rotation were used (Büyüköztürk, 1992, p.474-475; Büyüköztürk, 2003, p.117; Çokluk, Şekercioğlu and Büyüköztürk, 2010, p.203). As a result, a questionnaire consists of four factors (positive humor, negative humor, outgroup humor, and supervisor support) and 16 items were developed. The total size of the variance explained by four factors was 56.815 %. Factor loadings of the items range from 0.692 to 0.774 in positive humor (four items), from 0.579 to 0.802 in negative humor (four items), from 0.448 to 0.828 in supervisor support (four items) and from 0.631 to 0.765 in outgroup humor (four items). The Cronbach’s Alpha reliability coefficient was calculated in order to determine the extent to which the questionnaire is reliable. The Cronbach’s Alpha values were respectively 0.748 for positive humor, 0.733 for negative humor, 0.709 for outgroups humor, and 0.725 for supervisor support, while it was 0.602 for the whole of the questionnaire (Akgül and Çevik, 2003, p.435-436; Bowling, 2009, p.164; Field, 2009, p.675; Kehoe, 1995, p.2). According to the findings of confirmatory factor analysis, t-values range from 8.58 to 24.16. It was found that all t-values were statistically significant at a 0.01 significance level (Hair, Anderson, Tatham and Black, 1998, p.623). The lowest factor loading of the item was 0.31, while the highest was 0.77 (Çokluk, Şekercioğlu and Büyüköztürk, 2010, p.324; Hair, Anderson, Tatham and Black, 1998, p.623). The goodness-of-fit of the model was evaluated using relative and absolute indices. When the goodness-of-fit indices computed were evaluated, it was seen that X2/sd (2.65), GFI (0.97), AGFI (0.95), IFI (0.97), CFI (0.97), NFI (0.95), NNFI (0.96), RMSEA (0.043), RMR (0.045), standardized RMR (0.040), and RFI (0.94) were satisfying the criteria well. In this context, it can be said that the four-factor and 16-item model of the Turkish version of HCQ fits the data gathered in the study (Çokluk, Şekercioğlu and Büyüköztürk, 2010, p.271-272, 304, 324; Hair, Anderson, Tahtam and Black, 1998, p.623; Seçer, 2015, p.190; Toprak and Aydın, 2015, p.48) and can be used to assess the humor climate of primary schools in Turkey. Furthermore, it was seen that the factor-item distribution of the Turkish version of the HCQ was the same as the original HCQ developed by Cann, Watson and Bridgewater (2014). European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 4 │ Issue 1 │ 2018 102 Ahmet Şahin HUMOR CLIMATE OF THE PRIMARY SCHOOLS 2.4. Data Analysis Qualitative and quantitative data were analyzed differently and presented below. A. Qualitative Data Analysis The qualitative data obtained was subjected to both descriptive and content analysis via NVİVO Software (Yıldırım and Şimşek, 2011, p.224-229). In order to satisfy the unity in the data analysis process, a thematic roadmap based on a conceptual framework and research questions was accomplished by the researcher and an academic on educational management and supervision. To ensure conformity and unity in the analysis of data, the researcher and the academic analyzed the responses of the first two respondents (one administrator and one teacher) using the roadmap. At the end of the other analysis achieved separately, most of the codes were well-matched and increased the reliability of the study. Then, the researcher shared the findings anonymously with four respondents (of these, two were administrators and two were teachers) to check whether the data accurately reflected their opinions (Güler, Halıcıoğlu and Taşğın, 2013, p.360). The researcher found that the respondents’ opinions regarding the data obtained overlapped with the study’s results. This is regarded as proof of high internal validity. The views of the participants from different demographics and different education districts were well-matched and increased the external validity. Moreover, the analyzed opinions of school administrators who came from different regions and had varying demographic characteristics were consistent with each other which increases the study’s external validity. Finally, the study’s level of reliability is even higher since the researcher clearly explains the research process, and the raw data is now archived and available for future inspection if necessary (Yıldırım and Şimşek, 2011, p.256-274). In order to keep the participants’ demographics secret, the researcher coded school administrators as ‚P1‛, ‚P2‛, etc.; teachers ‚T1‛, ‚T2‛, etc. and observations ‚O1‛, ‚O2‛, etc. Some names took part in the study were, also, coded as ‚Mr. R‛, etc. B. Quantitative Data Analysis Quantitative data gathered from HCQ was analyzed via LISREL and SPSS. An alpha level of either .05 or .01 was set for the analyses. Specific descriptive analyses which were conducted to calculate the quantitative data included percentage, frequency, arithmetic means, standard deviation, t-test and one-way ANOVA for unrelated sampling. In case the assumptions of one-way ANOVA were not satisfied, the Kruskal Wallis test was used (Akgül and Çevik, 2003, p.100, 129, 172; Büyüköztürk, 2003, p.39, 44; Bryman and Cramer, 2001, p.115, 117, 142; Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000, p.317; Field, 2009, p.134; Leech, Barrett and Morgan, 2005, p.27-28, 132, 139; Muijs, 2004, p.134). 3. Findings First, qualitative study findings, then quantitative findings, gathered from humor climate questionnaires, were presented in this part. What the school administrators feel about the humor used in school settings was described and presented in Table 1. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 4 │ Issue 1 │ 2018 103 Ahmet Şahin HUMOR CLIMATE OF THE PRIMARY SCHOOLS Table 1: The Views of Administrators on Humor Climate of Primary Schools Views A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 Positive Humor Supervisor Support Negative Humor Outgroup Humor In Table 1, I asked the school administrators what they feel about the humor used in school settings, and which emotions are evoked when humor is used. According to the administrators who participated in the study, dominant humor climates are positive humor and supervisor support which are attributed to positive humor climate types. Y1 stresses both positive humor and supervisor support in his school like that: “That the teachers are able to make humor comfortably in our work settings indicates there exists positive humor climate in your school settings. Despite the fact you have the administrator status, they use humor freely in the environment. This is, in fact, an indicator of a positive humor climate between the school administrators and employees. Moreover, the employees feel your support via the humor you do and their loyalty to you therefore increases. Because they accept you as one of them. I have a servant who imitates me. He does it freely. However, he never wants to humiliate or ridicule me. That he imitates my walking and shaking the bag in my hands, cheers me up. I am a little serious and businesslike as a principal regarding work discipline. However, I also have a witty temperament as well as my seriousness. People outside the school don’t know my witty and humorous temperament. But my employees come into my room seriously. If no stranger is in the room, humor starts to fly in the atmosphere in two minutes, and the ambiance, suddenly becomes colorful.” P2, similarly, stated the presence of the positive humor climate evoking positive emotions in oneself and other employees. “I like it (the humor made by other employees). I never miss, I certainly respond with another humor. Similarly, they always welcome me positively when I make humor... That is, I like it (the humor done in schools). And thanks to this humor, I feel more sincere towards the people. That is, it motivates me and evokes positive feelings in me as positive humor doesn’t hurt anyone else and is used in our school.” The note of the researcher on an observation conducted at the school of P4 regarding the positive humor is that “P4 welcomes me and we are going to the room of one of the vice principals together. The school principal, four vice principals, a person came for inspection, and I are in the room. I learned later that the school management had an inspection on İLBAP (The Project for Enhancing the Success of Primary and Secondary Education). The principal of another primary school came for inspection to P4’s school. P4 welcomes me in a funny and witty way, despite the stressful atmosphere. They are laughing. They are deriving humor from their tasks. They are making fun of some of their own failings while praising the positive sides in a humorous way. I felt a positive atmosphere. While I was expecting a stressful and negative atmosphere because of the inspection, feeling the positive and funny atmosphere, to tell the truth, surprised me. After drinking coffee and chatting, P4’s task finished, and we went to his/her office.” (O4). Related to the supervisor support, A2 points out that he/she likes, joins and supports the humor used by employees by saying ‚I like it. I, certainly, respond in a humorous way. I never miss responding.” This attitude of European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 4 │ Issue 1 │ 2018 104