Effects of Teacher-Student Relationships on High School students

Teachers play an important role in the trajectory of students throughout the formal schooling experience (Baker, Grant, & Morlock, 2008). Although most research regarding teacher-student relationships investigate the elementary years of schooling, teachers have the unique opportunity to support students’ academic and social development at all levels of schooling (Baker et al., 2008; Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998; McCormick, Cappella, O’Connor, & McClowry, in press).

Aligned with attachment theory (Ainsworth, 1982; Bowlby, 1969), positive teacher-student relationships enable students to feel safe and secure in their learning environments and provide scaffolding for important social and academic skills (Baker et al., 2008; O’Connor, Dearing, & Collins, 2011; Silver, Measelle, Armstron, & Essex, 2005). 

Teachers who support students in the learning environment can positively impact their social and academic outcomes, which is important for the long-term trajectory of school and eventually employment (Baker et al., 2008; O’Connor et al., 2011; Silver et al., 2005).

When teachers form positive bonds with students, classrooms become supportive spaces in which students can engage in academically and socially productive ways (Hamre & Pianta, 2001). Positive teacher-student relationships are classified as having the presence of closeness, warmth, and positivity (Hamre & Pianta, 2001). Students who have positive relationships with their teachers use them as a secure base from which they can explore the classroom and school setting both academically and socially, to take on academic challenges and work on social-emotional development (Hamre & Pianta, 2001).

This includes, relationships with peers, and developing self-esteem and self-concept (Hamre & Pianta, 2001). Through this secure relationship, students learn about socially appropriate behaviors as well as academic expectations and how to achieve these expectations (Hamre & Pianta, 2001). Students in low-income schools can especially benefit from positive relationships with teachers (Murray & Malmgren, 2005).

Students in high-poverty urban schools may benefit from positive teacher-student relationships even more than students in high-income schools, because of the risks associated with poverty (Murray & Malmgren, 2005). Risk outcomes associated with poverty include high rates of high school dropout, lower rates of college applications, low self-efficacy, and low self-confidence (Murray & Malmgren, 2005). There are several factors that can protect against the negative outcomes often associated with low-income schooling, one of which is a positive and supportive relationship with an adult, most often a teacher (Murray & Malmgren, 2005). Low-income students who have strong teacher-student relationships have higher academic achievement and have more positive social-emotional adjustment than their peers who do not have a positive relationship with a teacher (Murray & Malmgren, 2005).

There is substantial research on the importance of teacher-student relationships in the early elementary years (Pianta, 1992; Hamre & Pianta 2001). However, little is known about the effects of teacher-student relationships on high school students. Studies show that early teacher-student relationships affect early academic and social outcomes as well as future academic outcomes (Pianta 1992; Hamre & Pianta 2001), but few researchers have looked at the effects of teacher-student relationships in later years of schooling.

Researchers who have investigated teacher-student relationships for older students have found that positive teacher-student relationships are associated with positive academic and social outcomes for high school students (Alexander, Entwisle, & Horset, 1997; Cataldi & KewallRamani, 2009).

Academic Outcomes

Although many studies focus on the importance of early teacher-student relationships, some studies have found that teacher-student relationships are important in transition years; the years when students transition from elementary to middle school or middle to high school (Alexander et al., 1997; Cataldi & KewallRamani, 2009; Midgley, Feldlaufer, & Eccles, 1989).

Studies of math competence in students transitioning from elementary to middle school have found that students who move from having positive relationships with teachers at the end of elementary school to less positive relationships with teachers in middle school significantly decreased in math skills (Midgley et al., 1989). For students who are considered at high risk for dropping out of high school, math achievement is significantly impacted by the perception of having a caring teacher (Midgley et al., 1989).

Furthermore, students who went from low teacher closeness to high teacher closeness significantly increased in math skills over the transition year, from elementary to middle school (Midgley et al., 1989). These studies show that relationships with teachers in the later years of schooling can still significantly impact the academic achievement trajectories of students (Midgley et al., 1989).

Another example of the importance of teacher-student relationships in high school students stems from intervention studies aimed at improving academic outcomes for low-income students (Murray & Malmgren, 2005). In one intervention study that aimed to increase positive relationships between low-income high school students and their teachers, results showed that students who participated in the intervention significantly improved their GPA over the course of five months (Murray & Malmgren, 2005).

Such research shows that positive teacher-student relationships can improve academic skills in students as early as middle school and as late as high school (Midgley et al., 1989; Murray & Malmgren, 2005). In addition to positive teacher-student relationships, students’ motivation to learn is another factor that influences social and academic outcomes.

A possible reason for the association between academic improvement and positive teacher-student relationships is students’ motivation and desire to learn (Wentzel, 1998). Motivation may play a key role in the relationship between teacher-student relationships and academic outcomes (Bandura, 1997; Fan & Willams, 2010; Pajares & Graham, 1996; Ryan, Stiller, & Lynch, 1994; Wentzel, 2003; Zimmerman, Bandura, & Martinez-Pons, 1992).

Motivational theorists suggest that students’ perception of their relationship with their teacher is essential in motivating students to perform well (Bandura, 1997; Fan & Willams, 2010; Pajares & Graham, 1996; Ryan, Stiller, & Lynch, 1994; Wentzel, 2003; Zimmerman, Bandura, & Martinez-Pons, 1992). Students who perceive their relationship with their teacher as positive, warm and close are motivated to be more engaged in school and to improve their academic achievement (Hughes, Cavell, & Jackson, 1999). Students’ motivation to learn is impacted positively by having a caring and supportive relationship with a teacher (Wentzel, 1998).

Motivation is closely linked to student’s perceptions of teacher expectations. Studies of middle and high school students have shown that students shape their own educational expectations from their perceptions of their teachers’ expectations (Muller, Katz, & Dance, 1999). Students who perceive that their teachers have high expectations of their academic achievement are more motivated to try to meet those expectations and perform better academically than their peers who perceive low expectations from their teachers (Muller et al., 1999). Due to the influence of expectations on motivation, expectations can be an important factor on a students’ academic achievement.

Furthermore, teacher-student relationships have an impact on the academic self-esteem of students (Ryan et al., 1994). High-poverty students often have low academic self-esteem and low confidence in their academic and vocational futures (Wentzel, 2003). Thus, positive relationships with teachers are important in supporting higher levels of self-esteem, higher academic self-efficacy, and more confidence in future employment outcomes (Ryan et al., 1994; Wentzel, 2003). Self-confidence and future aspirations have a significant impact on students’ interest in school, their academic self-efficacy and in turn, their academic achievement (Wentzel, 2003). In addition to academic achievement, positive teacher-student relationships provide important social outcomes for students.

Social Outcomes

Although there is more research regarding the academic effects of positive teacher-student relationships for older students, there are notable social outcomes as well. Teachers are an important source of social capital for students (Muller, 2001). Social capital in a classroom setting is defined as caring teacher-student relationships where students feel that they are both cared for and expected to succeed (Muller, 2001). Social capital from positive teacher-student relationships can manifest itself in many different ways. For high school students, positive teacher-student relationships can reduce rates of dropping out by nearly half, help explore options for college, and provide support for further academic or vocational aspirations (Dika & Singh, 2002).

Common reasons for dropping out include low levels of family support, low academic achievement, poor relationships with peers and adults, and low interest in academics (Henry, Knigh, & Thornberry, 2012). Positive teacher-student relationships can impact students social and academic outcomes, and thus reduce drop-out rates (Dika & Singh, 2002; Wentzel, 2003). Low-income students often have neither the support they need to complete high school nor access to the information they need to pursue education beyond high school (Dika &Singh, 2002).

It is important for low-income students who experience academic difficulties and negative social outcomes to gain social capital from their teachers, because research shows they can benefit from the guidance and support (Croninger & Lee, 2001). Further, teacher-student relationships can impact peer relationships in schools.

Teacher-student relationships can have a significant effect on the peer acceptance of students. Teachers’ interactions with students can affect classmates’ perceptions of individual students, in turn affecting which students classmates choose to interact with and accept (Hughes et al., 1999). Conflicting interactions between teachers and students may convey a lack of acceptance, causing other students to also reject the student involved in the conflict with the teacher (Hughes et al., 1999). Peer rejection significantly impacts self-esteem of students leading to several negative social outcomes (Hughes et al., 1999).

As mentioned earlier, students with high self-esteem are more likely to be self-efficacious and set higher goals (Ryan et al., 1994; Wentzel, 2003). Self-esteem also affects students socially (Orth, Robins, & Widaman, 2012). Students with high self-esteem are more likely to have positive relationships with peers as well as with adults (Orth et al., 2012).

Self-esteem also affects students’ mental health outcomes including reducing anxiety and symptoms of depression (Orth et al., 2012). Self-esteem is especially important during adolescence and helps students develop a positive sense of self (Orth et al., 2012). A positive sense of self in adolescence leads to future outcomes including relationship satisfaction, job satisfaction, occupational status, emotional regulation, and physical health (Orth et al., 2012).

The support of positive teacher-student relationships for self-esteem and related social outcomes affects students during schooling as well as in their future educational and occupational outcomes (Orth et al., 2012).

Conclusion and Limitations

Although there is extensive research on the positive effects of teacher-student relationships on elementary school students, there is little research on middle and high school students. Middle and high school is when students begin to think about their academic futures, which are informed by academic achievement and social capital in elementary years (Alexander et al., 1997; Cataldi & KewallRamani, 2009; Dika & Singh, 2002; Muller, 2001).

Early high school is usually when students dedicate themselves to graduating or decide to drop out (Henry et al., 2012). Currently, high school dropout rates are high, and improving teacher-student relationships for students at this stage may decrease dropout rates (Henry et al., 2012). Similarly, high school is when students decide if they plan to attend college or stop their education (Alexander et al., 1997; Cataldi et al., 2009; Henry et al., 2012). Therefore, it is important to develop positive teacher-student relationships during this time.

Empirical evidence does show that teacher-student relationships are very important for high school students (Alexander et al., 1997; Cataldi et al., 2009; Dika &Singh, 2002; Hughes et al., 1999; Midgley et al., 1989; Ryan et al., 1994; Wentzel, 2003). Studies that have investigated older students’ relationships with teachers have found that students improve both academically and socially from positive teacher-student relationships (Alexander et al., 1997; Cataldi et al., 2009; Dika &Singh, 2002; Hughes et al., 1999; Midgley et al., 1989; Ryan et al., 1994; Wentzel, 2003).

However, much of this research is dated. Due to the ever-changing nature of the American educational system and the increasingly diverse student body, more current studies are needed to look at the effects of teacher-student relationships for this changing population. It is important to learn more about teacher-student relationships for low-income students to decrease high school dropout, and improve students’ social-emotional development.

 Conducting research on the relationship between high school students and teachers may be essential in improving the outcomes of low-income middle and high school students, and can potentially inform future interventions to help older students perform better both academically and socially.

References

Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1982). Attachment: Retrospect and prospect. In C.M. Parkes & J. Stevenson-Hinde (Eds.), The place of attachment in human behavior (pp. 3–30). New York: Basic Books.

Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Horsey, C. S. (1997). From first grade forward: Early foundations of high school dropout. Sociology of Education, , 87-107.

Baker, J. Grant, s., & Morlock, L.(2008). The teacher–student relationship as a developmental context for children with internalizing or externalizing behavior problems. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(1), 3-15.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.

Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss, Vol. 1: Attachment. New York: Basic Books.

Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (1998). The ecology of developmental processes.

Bronfenbrenner, U., & Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard university press.

Cataldi, E. F., Laird, J., & Kewalramani, A. (2009). High school dropout and completion rates in the United States: 2007 (NCES 2009-064). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Croninger, R., & Lee, V. (2001). Social capital and dropping out of high school: Benefits to at-risk students of teachers’ support and guidance.The Teachers College Record, 103(4), 548-581.

Dika, S. L., & Singh, K. (2002). Applications of social capital in educational literature: A critical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 72(1), 31-60.

Fan, W., & Williams, C. M. (2010). The effects of parental involvement on students’ academic self-efficacy, engagement and intrinsic motivation. Educational Psychology, 30(1), 53-74.

Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher–child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72(2), 625-638.

Henry, K. L., Knight, K. E., & Thornberry, T. P. (2012). School disengagement as a predictor of dropout, delinquency, and problem substance use during adolescence and early adulthood. Journal of youth and adolescence, 41(2), 156-166.

Hughes, J. N., Cavell, T. A., & Willson, V. (2001). Further support for the developmental significance of the quality of the teacher–student relationship. Journal of School Psychology, 39(4), 289-301.

Orth, U., Robins, R. W., & Widaman, K. F. (2012). Life-span development of self-esteem and its effects on important life outcomes. Journal of personality and social psychology, 102(6), 1271.

McCormick, M., O’Connor, E.E., Cappella, E. & McClowry, S. (Accepted). Teacher-child relationships and academic achievement: A multi-level propensity score model approach. Journal of School Psychology.

McCormick, M., Cappella, E., O’Connor, E.E. & McClowry, S. (Under Review). Parent involvement, classroom emotional support, and student behaviors: An ecological approach. The Elementary School Journal.

Midgley, C., Feldlaufer, H., & Eccles, J. S. (1989). Student/teacher relations and attitudes toward mathematics before and after the transition to junior high school. Child Development, , 981-992.

Muller, C., Katz, S. R., & Dance, L. J. (1999). Investing in teaching and learning dynamics of the teacher-student relationship from each actor’s perspective. Urban Education, 34(3), 292-337.

Muller, C. (2001). The role of caring in the teacher-student relationship for at-risk students. Sociological Inquiry, 71(2), 241-255. doi:10.1111/j.1475-682X.2001.tb01110.x

Murray, C., & Malmgren, K. (2005). Implementing a teacher–student relationship program in a high-poverty urban school: Effects on social, emotional, and academic adjustment and lessons learned. Journal of School Psychology, 43(2), 137-152.

O’Connor, E. E., Dearing, E., & Collins, B. A. (2011). Teacher-child relationship and behavior problem trajectories in elementary school. American Educational Research Journal, 48(1), 120-162.

Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 543-578.

Ryan, R. M., Stiller, J. D., & Lynch, J. H. (1994). Representations of relationships to teachers, parents, and friends as predictors of academic motivation and self-esteem. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 14(2), 226-249.

Silver, R. B., Measelle, J. R., Armstrong, J. M., & Essex, M. J. (2005). Trajectories of classroom externalizing behavior: Contributions of child characteristics, family characteristics, and the teacher–child relationship during the school transition. Journal of School Psychology, 43(1), 39-60.

Wentzel, K. R. (2002). Are effective teachers like good parents? teaching styles and student adjustment in early adolescence. Child Development, 73(1), 287-301.

Wentzel, K. R. (2003). Sociometric status and adjustment in middle school: A longitudinal study. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 23(1), 5-28.

Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting. American Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 663-676.

Chess in schools: bringing the classic mind game to life

The game of chess makes one of the most important contributions to the field of education. Inherent in it are the basic principles of psychological learning theory: Memory, Pattern Recognition, Decision making, and Reinforcement. All of these variables interact during a game of chess and produce the results of the human thought process: a win or a loss. Chess is a closed system.  

The number of possible moves and variations is finite, although this number is extremely large.  Because of its being a closed system, the game can be analyzed and organized for study, just like music, or calculus, or a foreign language. Once the player has incorporated the rule schema (system of rules) for chess, everything he learns about the opening, middle‑game, and endgame is based upon this rule system. If a player's understanding of the rule schema is of a high level, then it is very likely that his learning progress will be very rapid.  With the aforementioned as an introduction, I would like to discuss the contribution which chess does indeed make to education and learning.

During my two years of psychological research in chess, I have discovered certain facts about the game which relate to human cognitive processes:

Memory Improvement
Chess has done wonders for people in this area. Players of all levels have admitted that their general memory has significantly improved as a result of over-the-board play and home analysis. The nature of the game is such that the visual aspects of the game (positional configurations, anticipated piece movements, diagonals, ranks, files, etc.) make deep impressions on that area of the mind which is responsible for memory. 

Visual stimuli tend to improve memory more than any other stimuli; thus, chess serves well in this area. It should also be noted that recall is also improved. Many of my subjects have claimed that they can now recall in detail events which would have been obscure to them before they had taken up the game seriously. It would seem, then, chess is definitely an excellent memory exerciser the effects of which are transferable to other subjects where memory is necessary.

LogicI do not believe that anyone is born with a superior faculty for logic. I believe that logic is created and developed as a result of other psychological contingencies related to human learning. The kind of logic employed in chess is based largely upon the rule schema, but not entirely. The element of "player psychology" enters the picture and sometimes creates its own logic. Player "A" may choose a move not because it is most logical, but because he believes that player "B" will not see the reason behind it. Yet many of the players I have interviewed have asserted that chess either sharpened or created a unique sense of logic which they have applied to other aspects of life successfully. They feel that they make fewer mistakes where decision-making is concerned either in chess or out of it.

Observation and AnalysisBy observation I mean awareness.  Chess has the unique ability of teaching the player to become aware of details and the nuances of every position. The player learns to observe the whole board and recognize both the important and unimportant aspects of the position.  In short, the player is conditioned to observe and become aware. 

The effects of this conditioning are transferable. The college student, for example, who plays chess, may now find that when he studies for a test, he can separate the important from the unimportant facts; he also tends to notice and consider the small details of the material he is reading. He has learned to observe, and this is crucial. 

In the area of analysis the chess player is required to make mental calculations based upon the observed position and his knowledge of the rules. He learns to "see" deeply into position the possible tactical moves which may result in an advantage for him. He then calculates, always being guided by the rule schema. Many of my subjects who are either college or high school students have said that they can analyze and set up problems much better than before they studied chess. They admit  (at least some of them, anyway) that they are better able to solve math problems by transferring the same kind of methodology used in chess.

Operant ConditioningThis is by far the most important aspect of chess which directly relates to human learning.  In human psychology operant conditioning involves the learner actually doing, observing and responding to the stimuli presented to him.  In chess the same holds true.  The player makes moves based on his knowledge of the rules, his analysis and observations and above all, his judgment. After his opponent's reply, he sees the results of his thought process.  

From this experience he learns.  He learns from operating on what he has analyzed.  In a way chess is more complete than most college studies.  In many subjects the learner never gets a chance to operate on what he observes and analyzes. Thus, learning is incomplete and the learner gets turned off to further learning.  In psychology parlance, he becomes negatively reinforced.  In chess, however, the learner receives positive reinforcement. He obtains immediate knowledge of the results (the KR contingency).

Chess is a marvelous game, whether it be science or art, which should be instituted in schools and colleges throughout this country as it is in other countries. Its benefits to education are evident.  In my two interviews, one with Dutch grandmaster Jan Timman, and the other with Bent Larsen, both told me about the success of chess in the elementary and secondary schools of their respective countries. Timman said, "The future for chess in the schools is getting better and better.  

There are now special teachers for chess who give instruction to children." And Larsen commented, "In ordinary school in the ninth and tenth grades, students can select chess as a school activity... what you hear about school chess in Denmark comes from an organization outside the Danish Chess Federation.  It organizes a lot of chess in schools after school hours.  This is increasing in popularity."  I sincerely hope that chess instruction, lectures, praxis, etc. can find its way into the college curriculum on a steady basis.  In the Soviet Union, for instance, at the Institute for Physical Culture and Sport, a student, usually in the master category, can major in chess! In fact, I think it was Anatoly Karpov who wrote his Bachelor's thesis on the games of Bobby Fischer.  To conclude, I would like to quote that talented Soviet GM and chess teacher, Alexander Kotov. "It is not difficult to combine a very strong attraction to chess with work and study.  My own experience was that not only did chess not hinder my studies at school and in college, but even proved to be helpful as it played a part in development habits of logical thought."