Handbook of psychology volume 7 educational psychology

206

Relationships Between Teachers and Children

interactions. The utility of a focus at this level of analysis is

borne out by ample evidence from the parent-child literature

as well as studies examining children and teachers using this

relational focus (Howes, 2000a). For example, when the

focus of teachers’ reports about children is relational rather

than simply a focus on the child’s behavior, it is the relational

aspects of teachers’ views that are more predictive of long-

term educational outcomes compared with their reports about

children’s classroom behavior (Hamre & Pianta, 2001). Evi-

dence also suggests that teachers’ reflections on their own

relational histories, as well as current relationships with chil-

dren, relate to their behavior with and attitudes toward

the child more than do teacher attributes such as training or

education (Stuhlman & Pianta, in press). Coming to view the

disparate and multiple foci of most research on teachers and

children using the lens or unit of child-teacher relationships

appears to provide considerable gain in understanding the

complex phenomenon of classroom adjustment.

A relationship between a teacher and child is not equivalent

to only their interactions with one another, or to their charac-

teristics as individuals. A relationship between a teacher and a

child is not wholly determined by that child’s temperament,

intelligence, or communication skills. Nor can their relation-

ship be reduced to the pattern of reinforcement between them.

Relationships have their own identities apart from the features

of interactions or individuals (Sroufe, 1989a).

A Conceptual Model of Child-Teacher Relationships

A conceptual model of child-teacher relationships is pre-

sented in Figure 10.1. As depicted in Figure 10.1, the primary

components of relationships between teachers and children

are (a) features of the two individuals themselves, (b) each

individual’s representation of the relationship, (c) processes

by which information is exchanged between the relational

partners, and (d) external influences of the systems in which

the relationship is embedded. Relationships embody features

of the individuals involved. These features include biologi-

cally predisposed characteristics (e.g., temperament), person-

ality, self-perceptions and beliefs, developmental history, and

attributes such as gender or age. Relationships also involve

each participant’s views of the relationship and the roles of

each in the relationship—what Bowlby (1969) and Sroufe

and Fleeson (1988) called the members’ representation of the

relationship. Consistent with evidence from the literature on

parent-child relationships (Main, Kaplan, & Cassidy, 1985;

Sroufe & Fleeson; 1986), representational models are con-

ceptualized not as features of individuals but as a higher

order construct that embodies properties of the relationship

that are accessed through the participants. Note that this is an

advance from the model presented by Pianta (1999) in that

the current model places more emphasis on the partners’

representations of the relationship as distinct from character-

istics of the individuals.

Relationships also include processes that exchange infor-

mation between the two individuals and serve a feedback func-

tion in the relationship system (Lerner, 1998). These processes

include behavioral interactions, language, and communica-

tion. These feedback, or information exchange, processes are

critical to the smooth functioning of the relationship. It is im-

portant to recognize that these relationship components (indi-

vidual characteristics, representational models, information

exchange processes) are themselves in dynamic, reciprocal in-

teractions, such that behaviors of teacher and child toward one

another influence representations (Stuhlman & Pianta, in

press), and attributes of the child or teacher are related to teach-

ers’ perceptions of the relationship (Saft & Pianta, 2001) or in-

teractive behaviors (Pianta et al., 2002).

In turn, these relationship systems are embedded in many

other systems (schools, classrooms, communities) and inter-

act with systems at similar levels (e.g., families and peer

groups). Finally, it is important to emphasize that adult-child

relationships embody certain asymmetries. That is, there are

differential levels of responsibility for interaction and quality

C

T

C

T

Features of Individuals

- developmental history

- biological factors

Representational Model

Information Exchange Processes

- interactive behaviors

External Influences

Figure 10.1

A conceptual model of teacher-child relationships.

Conceptual-Theoretical Issues in Research on Child-Teacher Relationships

207

that are a function of the discrepancy in roles and maturity of

the adult and child, the balance of which changes across the

school-age years (Eccles & Roeser, 1998). 

Features of Individuals in Relationships

At the most basic level, relationships incorporate features of

individuals. These include biological facts (e.g., gender) and

biological processes (e.g., temperament, genetics, responsiv-

ity to stressors) as well as developed features such as person-

ality, self-esteem, or intelligence. In this way developmental

history affects the interactions with others and, in turn, influ-

ences relationships (Fonagy, Steele, & Steele, 1991; Zeanah

et al., 1993). For example, a teacher’s history of being cared

for can be related to how he or she understands the goals of

teaching and, in turn, can relate to the way he or she interprets

and attends to a child’s emotional behavior and cues (Zeanah

et al., 1993).

Characteristics of Teachers

In contrast to what is known about parents in relation to their

interactions with children, virtually nothing is known about

teachers. Despite a general recognition that teacher character-

istics and perceptions influence the practice of teaching, little

is known about how individual teacher characteristics and

perceptions impact the formation of their relationships with

children. Some have suggested that due to the importance of

the social climate of the classroom, teaching may require

more personal involvement than most other professions:

The act of teaching requires teachers to use their personality to

project themselves in particular roles and to establish relation-

ships within the classroom so that children’s interest is main-

tained and a productive working environment is developed. The

teacher relies on his personality and his ability to form relation-

ships in order to manage the class and ensure smooth running.

(Calderhead, 1996, p. 720)

When questioned about their relationships with teachers,

children acknowledge that teachers’ abilities to access this

more personal part of themselves is an important component

of creating a feeling of caring between teachers and children

(Baker, 1999). By providing emotional support and asking

children about their lives, teachers may enable children to feel

more comfortable and supported in the school environment.

Teachers, like all adults, vary in their ability and desire

to become personally involved in their work. In a series of

case studies logging the thoughts of several student teachers

over the course of training, Calderhead and Robson (1991)

discussed teachers’ images of themselves as educators and

provided examples of several very different perspectives on

what it means to be a teacher. Some student teachers empha-

sized their role as emotional supporters of children, whereas

others tended to speak more about the importance of efficiency

and organization of the classroom. It is likely that these differ-

ent orientations and associated styles of behavioral interaction

are related in important ways to the types of relationships that

teachers tend to form with students. Brophy (1985) suggested

that teachers view themselves primarily as instructors or so-

cializers and that these different perceptions impact the way in

which they interact with students. Instructors tend to respond

more negatively to students who are underachievers, unmoti-

vated, or disruptive during learning tasks, whereas socializer

teachers tended to act more negatively toward students they

viewed as hostile, aggressive, or those who pushed away as

teachers attempted to form relationships (Brophy, 1985). Al-

though there is some preliminary evidence that teachers do

vary in the pattern of relationships they form with children

(Pianta, 1994), connections between these patterns and other

teacher characteristics have yet to be elucidated.

How do teachers form this image of themselves as teach-

ers? Several of the teachers in Calderhead and Robson’s

(1991) study consistently referred to experiences with previ-

ous teachers as essential to their own ideas about teaching.

The student teachers’ perceptions of past teachers ranged

from very negative (intolerant, impatient, unsympathetic) to

very positive (caring, attentive, friendly), and the students

linked these perceptions to their thoughts about what it means

to be a good or bad teacher. For example, one student teacher

vividly recalled being ridiculed and embarrassed as a child by

teachers who failed to take the time to explain things to her.

She also remembered one teacher who took the time to help

her understand. This student teacher described having pa-

tience with children as being extremely important to her own

work as a teacher. Teachers’ images of their roles as teachers

develop in part from their own experiences in school.

Additionally, teachers may rely on past experiences with

other important people in their lives to help form their image

of themselves as a teacher. Kesner (2000) gathered data on

student teachers’ representations of attachment relation-

ships with their own parents and showed that beginning

teachers who viewed their relationships with their parents as

secure were also those who formed relationships with stu-

dents characterized as secure. In a related study, Horppu and

Ikonen-Varila (2001) showed that beginning teachers’ repre-

sentations of attachment with their parents related to their

stated motives for their work and their beliefs about a kinder-

garten teacher’s work and goals in the classroom. Beginning

208

Relationships Between Teachers and Children

teachers classified as having a secure-autonomous relation-

ship with their parent(s) were more likely than those classi-

fied as insecure to express motives that were child-centered

as well as centered on goals for the self. Teachers classified

as secure also described more complex conceptions of a

teacher’s work (involving social, emotional, and instructional

components) and were more likely to view relationships with

students as mutually satisfying (Horppu & Ikonen-Varila,

2001). Teachers’ own personal histories of relationship expe-

riences with parents and their representations of those experi-

ences were associated with their current views about

teaching, the degree to which they viewed teaching as in-

volving a relational component, and their comfort with that

relational component, demonstrating the extent to which

multiple aspects of the teacher’s own representational system

and belief system are interrelated and related to other compo-

nents of the child-teacher dyadic system.

In a case-based extension of these ideas, Case (1997) sug-

gested that one instance in which teachers’ early relationships

may be particularly important to their own classroom philos-

ophy is in the case of othermothering in urban elementary

schools. She described othermothering as “African American

women’s maternal assistance offered to the children . . .

within the African American community” (p. 25). Other-

mothering constitutes a culturally held belief in women’s re-

sponsibility for the raising of other mothers’ children, which

for some women is enacted through the role of a teacher.

Case (1997) described two African American teachers work-

ing in urban districts in Connecticut. Both of these women

related the connections they made with children in the class-

room to the experiences that they had with their own mothers

as children. Describing her early experiences in rural North

Carolina, one of the teachers stated,

At an early age, it was all self-esteem, believing in yourself. But

one of the things that we valued most as a family was the way

that we must treat other people. We must look to the values from

within and realize that everybody’s human: They’re going to

make mistakes, they’re going to fall flat on their faces some-

times, but you pick yourself up and say, “Well, I’ve learned from

this.” (p. 33)

As this teacher describes her first day of teaching, the con-

nection between these early experiences and her view of her

role as a teacher becomes apparent:

When I first had this class, their faces were hanging down to the

floor. . . . I had never seen such unhappy children. I felt as if they

had no self-worth. I just couldn’t believe the first couple of days.

They were at each other’s throats. I found that many of them

thought that school was a place to come and act out, and now

they are in cooperative groups, they share. It’s just that you start

where they are. . . . I think it’s about empathy. You look at them

and say, “It’s going to be a better day” and they say, “How did

you know?” (pp. 34–35)

These findings (Case, 1997; Kesner, 2000; Horppu &

Ikonen-Verida, 2001) suggest mechanisms by which teachers

develop styles of relating to all of the children in their class-

rooms. Beyond a global relational style, teachers bring with

them experiences, thoughts, and feelings that lead to specific

styles of relating to certain types of children. Research in this

area is scant, but there is a general recognition that the match

or mismatch between teachers and students can be important

to children’s development as well as to teachers’ job satisfac-

tion (Goodlad, 1991).

Teachers also hold beliefs about their efficacy in the class-

room and associated expectations for children that are related

to experiences with children and their own success and satis-

faction. Teachers who believe that they have an influence on

children can enhance student investment and achievement

(Midgley, Feldlaufer, & Eccles, 1989). When teachers hold

high generalized expectations for student achievement, stu-

dents tend to achieve more, experience a greater sense of self-

esteem and competence as learners, and resist involvement

in problem behaviors during both childhood and adolescence

(Eccles, 1983, 1993; Roeser, Eccles, & Sameroff, 1998;

Rutter, 1987; Weinstein, 1989). Furthermore, teachers who

view self improvement and effort as more important than in-

nate ability are more likely to have children who not only are

more motivated but also report more positive and less nega-

tive affective states (Ames, 1992).

These studies, just a selective part of a much larger litera-

ture on teacher beliefs and student motivation (see Eccles &

Roeser, 1998), call attention to the extent to which teacher

beliefs, experiences, and expectations are involved within a

model of child-teacher relationships. These beliefs, experi-

ences, and expectations are closely intertwined with teach-

ers’ and students’ behaviors toward one another. They change

with developmental time and with experiences with specific

children and stimulate loops of interaction in which changes

in student motivation and achievement feedback on teacher

beliefs in confirming or disconfirming ways.

In addition to psychological aspects of teachers as individ-

uals as described earlier, other attributes of teachers warrant

discussion in terms of their roles in a model of child-teacher

relationships. These include teacher gender, experience and

education, and ethnicity. Although the teacher workforce is

overwhelmingly female, particularly at the younger grades

(Goodlad, 1991), there is sufficient variability in teacher gen-

der to examine its consequences for child-teacher relation-

ships. By and large, this evidence is sparse, and the topic

Conceptual-Theoretical Issues in Research on Child-Teacher Relationships

209

has not been a focus of dedicated study. However, anecdotal

and survey data do suggest that teacher gender plays a role in

the extent of children’s use of the teacher as a role model; not

surprisingly, this is particularly true for male children and

teachers (Goodlad, 1991; Holland, 1996). Male teachers, who

are found more frequently in the older grades, are reported by

children to provide role models and are described as impor-

tant sources of support.

Holland (1996) suggested that, particularly for African

American boys, an African American male teacher plays a

key role in organizing male students’ adoption of educational

goals and behaviors. The extent to which this finding—as well

as others involving the match between African American male

students and teachers—is related to gender or race is at this

time unknown and unexamined. In a related finding, teacher

ethnicity appears to play a role in teachers’ perceptions of

their relationships with students, particularly as their ethnici-

ties interact with student ethnicities (Saft & Pianta, 2001).

African American teachers (nearly all female) report more

positive relationships (less conflict) with their students (of all

ethnicities) than do Caucasian teachers, and they are particu-

larly more positive (than White teachers) about their relation-

ships with African American children.

Teacher experience, in and of itself, has shown little

relation to teachers’ own reports about the qualities of their re-

lationships with children in the elementary grades (Beady &

Hansell, 1981; Stuhlman & Pianta, in press). Battistich et al.

(1997) reported that in a large sample of upper elementary

school students there were no significant associations be-

tween child-reported or teacher-reported perceptions of the

school as a caring community (which included an index of

teacher emotional support) and teacher age, number of years

teaching, education, or ethnic status. However, these data

were aggregated within schools and related to each other at

the school level, so they may mask significant associations for

individual teachers and children.

In a study that elicited teachers’ representations of their

relationships with specific students using an interview proce-

dure (Stuhlman & Pianta, in press), the extent to which teach-

ers’ reported negative emotional qualities in the relationship

were related to their negative behaviors toward the children

varied as a function of teacher experience. Teachers who were

more experienced were more likely to have their represented

negativity reflected in their behavior than were teachers with

fewer than 7 years of experience. The extent to which the

less experienced teachers held negative beliefs and experi-

enced negative emotions in their relationship with a specific

child was not related to their negative behavior with that child.

These data suggest some type of emotional buffering mecha-

nism that may wane with more years in the profession.

Characteristics of Children

From the moment students enter a classroom, they begin to

make impressions on a teacher, impressions that are important

in the formation of the relationships that develop over the

course of the school year. Though it is likely that a wide vari-

ety of child characteristics, behaviors, and perceptions are

associated with the development of their relationships with

teachers, our understanding of these associations is limited

and derived in part due from inferences about how these char-

acteristics function in relationships. Some characteristics,

such as gender, are both static and readily apparent to teachers,

whereas others are more psychological or behavioral in nature.

Young girls tend to form closer and less conflictual rela-

tionships with their teachers, as noted in studies using teacher

(Hamre & Pianta, 2001) and child (Bracken & Crain, 1994;

Ryan, Stiller, & Lynch, 1994) reports on the quality of the

relationship as well as in studies in which trained observers

rated relationship quality (Ladd, Birch, & Buhs, 1999). Even

as late as middle school, girls report higher levels of felt

security and emulation of teachers than do boys (Ryan et al.,

1994).

These gender differences may be related in part to the fact

that boys typically show more frequent antisocial behaviors,

such as verbal and physical aggression. These behaviors are,

in turn, associated with the formation of poorer child-teacher

relationships, as rated by trained observers (Ladd et al.,

1999). It is important to note, however, that the majority of

teachers in primary grades are females and that there are

no existing data to suggest how male teachers may relate

differentially to boys and girls in the primary grades. There is

some evidence that as children mature, gender matching may

be important in the formation of closeness with teachers. In

one study, 12th-grade girls reported that they perceived

greater positive regard from female teachers whereas the

boys in the study perceived more positive regard from male

teachers (Drevets, Benton, & Bradley, 1996). However, this

gender specificity in children’s perceptions was not reported

by the 10th- and 11th-grade students in this study.

Another child characteristic that is apparent to teachers is

ethnicity. As with the findings on gender, there are prelimi-

nary indications that the ethnic match between teacher and

child is associated with more positive relationships (Saft &

Pianta, 2001). Caucasian children tend to have closer rela-

tionships with teachers, as indicated in studies using reports

by teachers (Ladd et al., 1999) and students (Hall & Bracken,

1996). Unfortunately, teachers in most of these studies are

Caucasian, so it is difficult to make any clear inference about

the impact of a child’s ethnicity on his or her ability to form a

strong relationship with teachers and other school personnel.