Handbook of psychology volume 7 educational psychology
Relationships Between Teachers and Children
Download 9.82 Mb. Pdf ko'rish
|
- Bu sahifa navigatsiya:
- School Adjustment
- Interpersonal Relationships With Peers and Teachers 241
- Defining School Adjustment 250 Developmental Processes 251 Theory Building 251
- DEFINING SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT
- RESEARCH ON SOCIAL ASPECTS OF SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT Social Motivation: Social Goal Pursuit
- Research on Social Aspects of School Adjustment 237
- Students’ Goals in Relation to Other Forms of Adjustment
234 Relationships Between Teachers and Children Stuhlman, M., & Pianta, R. (in press). A narrative approach to assessing teacher-child relationships: Associations with behavior in classrooms. School Psychology Review. Toth, S., & Cicchetti, D. (1996). The impact of relatedness with mother on school functioning. Journal of School Psychology, 34, 247–266. van IJzendoorn, M. H., Sagi, A., & Lambermon, M. W. E. (1992). The multiple caretaker paradox: Some data from Holland and Israel. In R.C. Pianta (Ed.), Relationships between children and non-parental adults: New directions in child development (pp. 5–24). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher
E. Souberman, Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Waters, E. (1987). Attachment Behavior Q-Set, Revision, 3.0. SUNY Stony Brook. Waters, E., & Deane, K. E. (1985). Defining and assessing individ- ual differences in attachment relationships: Q-methodology and the organization of behavior in infancy and early childhood. In I. Bretherton & E. Waters (Eds.), Growing points of attachment theory and research. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 50(1, Serial No. 209). Weinstein, R. (1989). Perceptions of classroom processes and student motivation: Children’s views of self-fulfilling prophe- cies. In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Vol. 3. Goals and cognitions (pp. 13–44). New York: Academic Press. Weinstein, R. S., & Marshall, H. H. (1984). Ecology of students’
of Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Govt. Printing Office. Weissberg, R., & Bell, D. (1997). A meta-analytic review of primary prevention programs for children and adolescents: Contributions and caveats. American Journal of Community Psychology, 25(2), 207–215.
Wellborn, J. G., & Connell, J. P. (1987). Rochester Assessment Package for Children. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester. Wentzel, K. (1996). Effective teachers are like good parents: Un- derstanding motivation and classroom behavior. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York. Wentzel, K. (1998). Social relationships and motivation in middle school: The role of parents, teachers, and peers. Journal of
Werner, E., & Smith, R. (1980). Vulnerable but invincible. New York: Wiley. White, K., & Kistner, J. (1992). The influence of teacher feedback on young children’s peer preferences and perceptions. Develop-
Zeanah, C. H., Benoit, D., Barton, M., Regan, C., Hirschberg, L., & Lipsitt, L. (1993). Representations of attachment in mothers and their one-year old infants. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 32, 278–286. Zeichner, K. (1995). Educating teachers to close the achievement gap: Issues of pedagogy, knowledge and teacher preparation. In
Regional Educational Laboratory Network, Washington, DC. CHAPTER 11 School Adjustment KATHRYN R. WENTZEL 235 SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT 235 DEFINING SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT 235 RESEARCH ON SOCIAL ASPECTS OF SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT 236
Social Motivation: Social Goal Pursuit 236 Behavioral Competence: Prosocial and Socially Responsible Behavior 240 Interpersonal Relationships With Peers and Teachers 241 SOCIAL INFLUENCES ON SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT 244
CONCLUSIONS AND PROVOCATIONS FOR THE FIELD 250
Defining School Adjustment 250 Developmental Processes 251 Theory Building 251 Research Methods and Designs 252 REFERENCES 252
Being successful at school requires children to perform a range of social as well as academic competencies. In addition to mastering subject matter, developing effective learning strategies, and performing well on tests, children also must work to maintain and establish interpersonal relationships, strive to develop social identities and a sense of belonging- ness, observe and model standards for performance displayed by others, and behave in ways that are valued by teachers and peers. Quite often, children who succeed in these social en- deavors are also the most academically successful students. Although these social activities might vary somewhat as a function of a child’s age or the subject being taught, they re- flect the fact that positive forms of social behavior can create a classroom environment that is conducive to learning and cognitive development; similarly, positive interpersonal rela- tionships with teachers and peers can motivate and support the development of intellectual competencies. In the present chapter, children’s adjustment to school is discussed with respect to those social competencies that facil- itate achievement of school-related objectives. Specifically, the focus is on school adjustment as defined by social motiva- tion, behavioral competence, and positive interpersonal relationships. Research on each aspect of school adjustment is reviewed, with a particular focus on how these aspects form a profile of competencies that are related to each other as well as to academic achievement. The implications of this literature for future work on school adjustment are discussed. In addition, research on socialization processes that promote healthy adjustment at school are reviewed. DEFINING SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT School adjustment is often used as a fairly generic term that refers to any school-related outcome under investigation. Quite often, adjustment is defined with respect to the absence of negative or maladaptive student outcomes (e.g., aggres- sive, inattentive, or disruptive behavior) in addition to the presence of normative or positive competencies (e.g., coop- erative, compliant, or self-regulated behavior). In most cases, however, formal models have not been proposed to guide our thinking about what healthy adjustment to school entails or how it develops and can be supported within the classroom environment (cf. Ladd, 1989). To guide the present discussion, therefore, an ecological approach is proposed in which adjustment is defined as the achievement of goals that result in social integration, as well as those resulting in positive developmental outcomes for the self. Socially integrative goals are desired outcomes that pro- mote the smooth functioning of the social group, social ap- proval, and social acceptance, whereas self-related goals are those that promote the achievement of personal competence, feelings of self-determination, and feelings of social and emo- tional well-being (Bronfenbrenner, 1989; Ford, 1992). This 236 School Adjustment goal-based definition implies that classroom competence is a highly context-specific outcome reflecting the degree to which students are able to meet the demands of the classroom envi- ronment as well as achieve their own personal goals. Several perspectives on the nature of competence provide support for this approach. Bronfenbrenner (1989) argues that competence can only be understood in terms of context- specific effectiveness, as reflected in mastery of culturally and socially defined tasks. Therefore, competence is a product not only of personal attributes such as goals, values, self-regulatory skills, and cognitive abilities, but also of ways in which these attributes contribute to meeting situational requirements and demands. Moreover, Bronfenbrenner argues that competence is achieved in part when contexts provide opportunities for the growth and development of personal attributes as well as scaf- folding for learning what is expected by the social group. A similar perspective developed specifically to understand adjustment at school is found in the work of Connell and his colleagues (Connell & Wellborn, 1991; Deci & Ryan, 1991). According to Connell and Wellborn, students will engage in positive intellectual and social activities as well as experi- ence a positive sense of self and emotional well-being when teachers provide structure (e.g., articulation of clear and con- sistent expectations), autonomy support (e.g., opportunities for personal choice and decision making), and involvement (e.g., individual attention). These conditions are believed to contribute to adjustment by enhancing students’ sense of com- petence, self-determination, and social relatedness—that is, feeling that one is an integral and valued part of the social group. Ford (1992) also expands on Bronfenbrenner’s notion of person-environment fit by specifying four dimensions of competence: the achievement of personal goals, the achieve- ment of goals that are situationally relevant, the use of appro- priate means to achieve these goals, and accomplishing goals that result in positive developmental outcomes for the indi- vidual. Applying Bronfenbrenner’s and Ford’s perspectives to classroom functioning suggests that students are competent and well-adjusted if several criteria are met. First, students must be able to achieve goals that are valued by themselves as well as by teachers and peers. Second, they must do so in ways that are sanctioned by the group. Third, goals must be accomplished in ways that set the stage for other positive out- comes such as healthy self-concept or increased interest in academics. Finally, the classroom context must provide the structure and support for students to accomplish these goals. Little direct evidence exists to support the notion that lev- els of person-environment fit can influence classroom func- tioning and school adjustment. However, Hall and Cairns (1984) demonstrated that children are aggressive depending in part on the degree to which aggression is condoned in their setting at the time. Phelan, Davidson, and Cao (1991) docu- mented that adolescents can be categorized with respect to goodness of fit—that is, according to the degree to which they feel comfortable with and can easily adapt to the multi- ple demands of parents, peers, and school. In Phelan et al.’s research, students who reported the best fit also demonstrated successful adaptation to the academic and social demands of school, whereas those who reported the least amount of com- fort and belongingness felt disenfranchised and alienated, often dropping out of school altogether. This ability to coordinate and achieve a balance between per- sonal and socially valued goals is especially relevant for under- standing school adjustment when one considers the potentially negative motivational effects of competing, incongruent goals across family, peer, and classroom contexts often experienced by minority students (Phelan et al., 1991). Children from mi- nority cultures often are expected to adapt to normative expec- tations for behavior that are inconsistent with those espoused by their families and communities. Ogbu (1985; Fordham & Ogbu, 1986) describes how failing to achieve academically can be in- terpreted by some minority children as an accomplishment rather than a failure. In such cases, noncompliance with the ma- jority culture’s institutional norms and standards for achieve- ment can lead to acceptance within the minority community but to social rejection and academic failure at school. In summary, a full appreciation of how and why students thrive or fail to thrive at school requires an understanding of a student’s personal interests and goals, as well as the degree to which these are valued by teachers and peers, and contribute to the stability and smooth functioning of the classroom. Implicit in this perspective is that personal attributes such as the ability to coordinate multiple goals, motivation to behave in prosocial and responsible ways, and concomitant social-cognitive skills make critical contributions to school adjustment. In addition, the developmentally instigating properties (Bronfenbrenner, 1989) of the classroom that support and promote the expression and development of these personal attributes as well as goal at- tainmentmustalsobeinplace.Inthefollowingsection,research on student adjustment as defined by social motivation, behav- ioral competence, and relationships with teachers and peers is reviewed. Next, ways in which positive interpersonal relation- ships at school might support healthy adjustment are discussed. RESEARCH ON SOCIAL ASPECTS OF SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT Social Motivation: Social Goal Pursuit A basic tenet of motivational theories is that people do set goals for themselves and that these goals can be powerful motivators of behavior (Austin & Vancouver, 1996; Bandura, Research on Social Aspects of School Adjustment 237 1986; Dweck, 1991). Although definitions vary slightly as a function of theoretical perspective, goals are generally re- ferred to as cognitive representations of desired future out- comes. As noted at the beginning of this chapter, work in the area of social competence and social development suggests that competence in social settings often requires the achievement of goals that result in approval and accep- tance by the social group, as well as those resulting in the achievement of personal competence and feelings of self- determination (see Bronfenbrenner, 1989; Ford, 1992). Ex- amples of school-related goals that reflect these outcomes are social relationship goals such as to gain approval from others, to establish personal relationships with teachers or peers, or to cooperate with classmates; task-related goals such as to master subject matter or to meet as a specific standard of achievement; or more cognitive goals such as to engage in creative thinking or to satisfy intellectual curios- ity or challenge (see Ford, 1992, for a comprehensive list of goals).
Research on classroom motivation is typically focused on the latter set of task-related and cognitive goals. How- ever, the pursuit of socially integrative goals such as to be cooperative and compliant or to establish interpersonal rela- tionships is equally important for understanding school suc- cess. Researchers have studied social goals from three fairly distinct perspectives (see Wentzel, 2002b). First, re- searchers have investigated children’s knowledge about and choice of social goals as a social cognitive skill. Based on models of social information processing (e.g., Crick & Dodge, 1994; Dodge, 1986; Ford, 1984), this perspective highlights children’s interpretations of social situations and their knowledge of which goals are appropriate or inappro- priate to pursue under which conditions. Second, social goals have been construed as motivational or personality orientations that guide children’s behavioral responses to social opportunities and challenges (Dweck & Legget, 1988; McClelland, 1987). For the most part, these more global social goals or needs are believed to function inde- pendently of context. Finally, the pursuit of social goals has been studied as a motivational process that provides direction to behavior and is related to situation-specific competence. In this case, the extent to which children try to achieve certain prescribed goals is examined as a predictor of social competence and person-environment fit (Ford, 1992; Wentzel, 1991b, 1991c). Based on this perspective, I have explored the degree to which school-related success can be predicted by children’s pursuit of specific social goals to behave in prosocial and so- cially responsible ways. I define personal goals with respect to their content—that is, as a cognitive representation of what it is that an individual is trying to achieve in a given situation (see also Ford, 1992). This perspective is the focus of the present discussion. Goals For Education What are the goals for education that are pursued by teachers and their students? Goals for classroom life reflect a wide range of social as well as intellectual outcomes. At the policy level, educational objectives have included the development of social competencies as well as scholastic achievements— for producing model citizens as well as scholars. In general, character development and social responsibility have been stated as explicit objectives for public schools in almost every educational policy statement since 1848; they are pro- moted with the same frequency as the development of acade- mic skills (see Wentzel, 1991c, for a review). Specifically, social behavior in the form of moral character, conformity to social rules and norms, cooperation, and positive styles of so- cial interaction have been promoted consistently as goals for students to achieve. Teachers’ and students’ goals for school reflect the con- cerns for social development articulated in federal mandates. For instance, Krumboltz, Ford, Nichols, and Wentzel (1987) evaluated goals for students to achieve by age 18 in a sample of several hundred parents, teachers, and students. Goal state- ments reflected five academic domains (verbal, math, science, social studies, and fine arts), and five nonacademic domains (motivation, interpersonal competence, moral development, health, and career development). These statements were cho- sen based on school district curriculum guides from around the country and in consultation with local teachers and other experts in each domain. The most notable aspect of this study is that for each set of respondents, the social domains were regarded as more important than were any of the academic domains. In particular, students rated positive motivational outcomes (e.g., valuing education, being intrinsically moti- vated) as most important, whereas teachers and parents rated the moral domain as most important with motivation being ranked second. Interpersonal competence was ranked either second or third by all three groups. In short, motivation and so- cial competence in the form of cooperation, respect for others, and positive interpersonal relationships were nominated con- sistently as critical outcomes for students to achieve, over and above academic accomplishments. Although other researchers rarely have asked teachers about their specific goals for students, teachers have ex- pressed their ideas concerning what well-adjusted and suc- cessful students are like. When describing ideal students, middle school teachers mentioned three types of desirable outcomes: social outcomes reflecting socially integrative characteristics such as sharing, being helpful to others, and
238 School Adjustment being responsive to rules; learning outcomes reflecting moti- vational qualities related to learning such as being persistent, hardworking, inquisitive, and intrinsically interested; and per- formance outcomes reflecting task-related outcomes such as getting good grades, being informed, and completing assign- ments (Wentzel, 2000). In other research, teachers identified elementary-aged students toward whom they felt attachment, concern, indifference, or rejection (Brophy & Good, 1974). Of interest is that students placed in these categories displayed distinct behavioral profiles in the classroom, with character- istics of well-liked students matching those described in Wentzel’s (2000) study. Attachment students were typically bright, hardworking, and model students; concern students made excessive but appropriate demands for teachers’ atten- tion; indifference students had few contacts with teachers; and rejection students typically displayed problem behaviors and made illegitimate demands for attention. Similarly, elementary-school teachers have consistently reported prefer- ences for students who are cooperative, conforming, cautious, and responsible rather than independent and assertive or argu- mentative and disruptive (Brophy & Good, 1974; Feshbach, 1969; Helton & Oakland, 1977; Kedar-Voivodas, 1983). Teachers tend to report antisocial and aggressive behavior as most detrimental to classroom order (Safran & Safran, 1985). Research on school-related goals that students value has not been frequent (cf. Wigfield & Eccles, 1992). However, students do report trying to achieve positive social as well as academic outcomes. In an ethnographic study, Allen (1986) interviewed ninth-grade students about their school-related goals and found that two major goals were mentioned by al- most all students—goals to socialize with peers and to pass the course. Students believed these goals could be accom- plished by trying to figure out the teacher, having fun, giv- ing the teacher what he or she wants, minimizing work, reducing boredom, and staying out of trouble. When given a list of possible social and academic goals to pursue at school, high school students have indicated trying to achieve social goals to have fun and to be dependable and responsi- ble, in addition to task-related goals to learn new things and to get good grades (Wentzel, 1989). Finally, middle school students also have reported trying to achieve social goals to behave appropriately more frequently than they have re- ported goals to learn or to socialize with peers (Wentzel, 1991b, 1992). Specific student characteristics also have been related to personal goals. High school students identified as being at risk due to problem behavior tend to attach greater importance to goals concerning self-determination and rule breaking than do not-at-risk students, who tend to value achievement of positive academic outcomes and responsible, interpersonal behavior (Carrol, Durkin, Hattie, & Houghton, 1997). Al- though research on ethnic minorities is rare, Graham, Taylor, and Hudley (1998) reported that African-American students value high levels of achievement less than do Caucasian students. Students’ Goals in Relation to Other Forms of Adjustment The literature just reviewed clearly indicates that students as well as teachers value goals to be prosocial and socially responsible. In addition, findings provide support for the notion that social goal pursuit represents a basic psychologi- cal process underlying social behavior and interpersonal competence. For instance, pursuit of goals to be prosocial and socially responsible have been related consistently and posi- tively to displays of prosocial and responsible behavior (Wentzel, 1991a, 1994). Similarly, pursuit of goals to be so- ciable has been related positively to acceptance by peers as well as by teachers (Wentzel, 1991a, 1991b, 1994). More- over, there is ample evidence that students who pursue cer- tain social goals at school also succeed academically; pursuit of goals to be prosocial and socially responsible is related to classroom grades as well as to IQ (Wentzel, 1989, 1991a, 1993a, 1996, 1997, 1998). Social goals also have been examined as part of a coordi- nated effort to achieve multiple classroom goals. As predicted by an ecological perspective, high- and low-achieving high school students can be distinguished on the basis of the sets of social and academic goals they pursue or do not pursue at school (Wentzel, 1989). Specifically, 84% of the highest achieving students reported always trying to be a successful student, to be dependable and responsible, and to get things done on time; only 13% of the lowest achieving students re- ported always trying to achieve these three goals. Moreover, although the highest achieving students reported frequent pur- suit of academic goals (i.e., to learn new things, to understand things), less frequent pursuit of these goals did not distinguish the lowest achieving from average achieving students. Rather, an unwillingness to try to conform to the social and normative standards of the classroom uniquely characterized the lowest achieving students. These low-achieving students also re- ported frequent pursuit of other types of social goals such as to have fun and to make and keep friendships. In a follow-up study of middle school students (Wentzel, 1993a), two acade- mic goals (reflecting efforts to master new and challenging tasks and to earn positive evaluations) and two social goals (reflecting efforts to be prosocial and to be socially responsi- ble) were investigated. Pursuits of these social and academic goals were significant, independent predictors of classroom effort over time, even when other motivational variables such
|
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling