Handbook of psychology volume 7 educational psychology

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

psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, &

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’

achievement expectations. Final report to the National Institute

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

Educational Psychology, 90(2), 202–209.

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-

mental Psychology, 28(5), 933–940.

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

Closing the achievement gap: A vision to guide change in beliefs

and practice (pp. 39–52). U.S. Department of Education

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

Adult Socialization of Children’s Goal Pursuit

244

Peers as Socializers of School Adjustment

247

CONCLUSIONS AND PROVOCATIONS FOR

THE FIELD

250

Defining School Adjustment

250

Developmental Processes

251

Theory Building

251

Research Methods and Designs

252

REFERENCES

252

SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT

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