Download - Insider Views of the Emotional Climate of the Classroom: What New Zealand Children Tell Us About Their Teachers' Feelings

This article was downloaded by: [Massey University Library]On: 09 February 2015, At: 18:36Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Research in ChildhoodEducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujrc20

Insider Views of the Emotional Climateof the Classroom: What New ZealandChildren Tell Us About Their Teachers'FeelingsRachel J. Andersen a , Ian M. Evans a & Shane T. Harvey aa Massey University , Palmerston North , New ZealandPublished online: 22 Mar 2012.

To cite this article: Rachel J. Andersen , Ian M. Evans & Shane T. Harvey (2012) InsiderViews of the Emotional Climate of the Classroom: What New Zealand Children Tell Us AboutTheir Teachers' Feelings, Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 26:2, 199-220, DOI:10.1080/02568543.2012.657748

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2012.657748

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujrc20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/02568543.2012.657748

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2012.657748

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 26: 199–220, 2012Copyright © Association for Childhood Education InternationalISSN: 0256-8543 print / 2150-2641 onlineDOI: 10.1080/02568543.2012.657748

Insider Views of the Emotional Climate of the Classroom:What New Zealand Children Tell Us About Their

Teachers’ Feelings

Rachel J. Andersen, Ian M. Evans, and Shane T. HarveyMassey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand

To explore children’s perceptions of their teachers’ feelings in everyday classroom contexts, theauthors conducted focus groups with New Zealand primary (elementary) schoolchildren to discusswhat they observed about positive classroom teachers’ interactional style and emotional behavior.Seventy-nine students between age 8 and 12 years, from low- and high-socioeconomic communi-ties, were divided into small focus groups to answer questions about their school experiences usinga novel game-like procedure to foster open communication. Verbatim statements from the childrenwere recorded and organized into major topics using thematic analysis. Age-related developmentaldifferences were noted in the children’s ability to recognize teachers’ feelings. In general, however,the level of insight that children revealed about their teachers showed considerable emotional com-petence. Students were acute observers of teachers’ feelings as reflected in their teaching style, howthey maintained discipline, their relationships with the children, and their overall emotional respon-siveness. The authors concluded that emotion permeates all aspects of teaching practice and emergesfrom the relationship between teachers and members of the class. When positive, this relationship isone of mutual positive respect and enjoyment.

Keywords: classroom climate, teacher emotions, elementary school, teacher-student relationships

In primary (elementary) school, children typically spend much of the day in the presence ofone classroom teacher, and this arrangement usually lasts for a full academic year. It is not sur-prising, therefore, that the overall class climate created by the teacher is widely recognized asimportant in determining how children function at school (e.g., Anderson, 1982; Cohen, 2006;Hargreaves, 1998). Positive classroom environments have been associated with enhanced aca-demic achievement (e.g., Goh & Fraser, 2000; Jennings & Greenberg, 2009; Zullig, Koopman,& Huebner, 2009), as well as decreases in aggression and bullying (e.g., Raskauskas, Gregory,

Submitted January 11, 2011; accepted May 10, 2011.

Data reported were gathered by Rachel Andersen as a component of research conducted by her for the fulfillment ofa master’s degree. Her thesis was supervised by Ian Evans and Shane Harvey, who are the principal investigators of TeAniwaniwa, a research project funded by the Marsden Fund, which is acknowledged with thanks.

Address correspondence to Ian M. Evans, School of Psychology, Massey University, Private Box 11-222, PalmerstonNorth, New Zealand. E-mail: [email protected]

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5

200 ANDERSEN, EVANS, HARVEY

Harvey, Rifshana, & Evans, 2010; Wilson, 2004), and increases in prosocial behavior (e.g.,Kasen, Johnson, & Cohen, 1990; Welsh, 2000). There have been many important developmentsin defining classroom climate and in analyzing its separate components (e.g., Fraser, 1989).Three dimensions have been identified by Pianta and colleagues (Hamre & Pianta, 2001; Pianta,La Paro, & Hamre, 2007) in a series of major studies designed to produce a rating measureof classroom quality. Pianta’s dimensions are emotional support, classroom organization, andinstructional support.

It is the first of these components of classroom climate that our research program has con-centrated on. This is because emotions seem to be so vitally important for understanding thedynamics of the classroom and the complex relationship between a group of children and theirteacher. In a recent synthesis of the many closely related constructs relevant to classroom cli-mate, Evans, Harvey, Buckley, and Yan (2009) suggested that although emotional interactionsare embedded in discipline style (behavioral management) and academic processes (teachingstyle, curricular issues), the emotional relationship between teacher and student is an independentquality of the classroom atmosphere.

A warm classroom climate means that teachers are able to create an overall environment inwhich children are generally happy and engaged, enjoy being in the class, and feel emotionallysecure. But even in environments with these global characteristics, many individual students arelikely to experience a complex range of feelings within any given day. At any time, children canfeel anxious, worried, jealous, sad, angry, hurt, and so on—sometimes in response to things hap-pening among peers, sometimes in response to their interaction with the teacher, and sometimesrelated to more distal causes, such as a result of events happening at home or in their community.A teacher has to make repeated and rapid decision as to how to handle these emotional expres-sions, whether to attend to them, whether to validate them, and whether to suggest strategies forthe children to manage them.

It is obvious that the willingness or ability of the teacher to engage in this kind of emotionmanagement is going to be a function of that individual’s own emotional understanding, beliefsabout his or her role as a classroom teacher, attitudes toward the child in question, and also abouthis or her ability to manage their own affect and mood at the time. Emotional competence inteachers might also involve such components as the language that they use to talk about feelingsand to articulate the meaning of feeling words, perhaps also normalizing feelings through suchmechanisms as revealing or disclosing their own feelings, either in the present or when recountingpast experiences. These processes have parallels in the parenting literature; for example, studiesconducted by Salmon and colleagues have demonstrated a link between how parents engage inemotionally rich conversations with children and the children’s ability to manage their own emo-tions effectively and appropriately (Salmon, Dadds, Allen, & Hawes, 2009; Van Bergen, Salmon,Dadds, & Allen, 2009; Wareham & Salmon, 2006). Another example is Gottman’s observationsof emotion coaching by parents in the context of their philosophy (beliefs), or feelings aboutfeelings (Gottman, Katz, & Hooven, 1997).

Harvey and Evans (2003) proposed a complex five-component model of these various ele-ments. The development of the model has been based on extensive interviews with teachersand students, as well as direct classroom observations (see Yan, Evans, & Harvey, 2011).But to fully understand positive classroom emotional climate, we need to know more aboutwhat those on the inside feel and observe. The aim of this study was to explore students’perceptions of their teachers’ feelings in the context of everyday classroom interactions.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5

CLASSROOM EMOTIONAL CLIMATE 201

By asking elementary schoolchildren questions about their thoughts, memories, and experi-ences of teacher-student interactions, our goal was to provide an additional perspective onthe emotional environment of the classroom—as interpreted in their own words by studentsthemselves.

METHOD

Participants

Seventy-nine students between age 8 and 12 years (Grades 3–7 in the United States; Years 4–8 inNew Zealand) from primary schools across the central North Island of New Zealand participatedin 21 separate groups of three to four students each. The children interviewed came only fromclassrooms that had each been nominated as having a teacher able to create a positive emo-tional climate. Ethically, we felt it would be undesirable to question students about teachers whowere not perceived by their peers as emotionally competent. Nominations were solicited fromdistrict itinerant teaching specialists, educational psychologists, and parents. Participation wasthen invited if a teacher had received more than one nomination and their school principal hadconcurred and agreed to their selection. From this pool, six varied classes were selected, so asto include a diverse range of student participants. Each class provided at least three groups ofstudents. The six classes came from two broad educational levels: middle primary (Years 4–5;students ages 8, 9, and 10 years) and senior primary (Years 6–8; 11- and 12-year-olds). Withineach of these bands we selected schools from low (decile 1 to decile 3), middle (decile 4 todecile 7), or high (decile 8 to decile 10) socioeconomic communities (all schools in New Zealandare classified into deciles according to the average economic level of their catchment areas). Theteachers selected this way consisted of four female and two male teachers, with a range of 2 to19 years of teaching experience (mean of 6 years); two were Maori (the indigenous people)and four were Pakeha (New Zealand European). Class sizes ranged from 20 to 28 pupils, andthe school enrollments varied from 104 (small rural school) to 500 (a city school); in some ofthe smaller schools, a given teacher’s class contained pupils from more than one year level, forexample, mixed Years 4 and 5.

Materials and Procedure

Preparing the participants. Initial student, parent, and teacher contact was conducted bythe first author, at the time a graduate student in psychology with extensive teaching experience.After parents had been given detailed information about the research, a class meeting was heldwith the teacher present, during which child information sheets and consent forms were dis-tributed. At these class discussions, Andersen (the first author) was introduced as the researcherand the methodology and purpose were explained. The aim of this personal approach was togenerate enthusiasm about the project and reduce apprehension, to start building rapport, and toexplain the consent procedure. We considered it important that the teacher introduce the project,as we did not want the children to have the impression that we were spying on the teacher or ask-ing children to tell tales. Enough time was spent on the explanations to ensure that the children

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


understood the purpose of the research, what would happen during the small-group interviews,and when and where they would take place. This process achieved a 50% return rate for parentand child consent forms.

The small-group interviews were held on school property in a quiet place away from otherstaff and students, as negotiated with the school—for example, the library or a conference room.The discussions took between 25 and 80 minutes (mean of 40 minutes) as the situation dictatedand the students remained engaged. Once the children were settled in the interview room, theinterviewer discussed confidentiality, ensuring they understood how it would apply to this situ-ation, and explained that the video camera was recording only so that she did not have to takenotes and that no school personnel would see or hear the tapes. She explained that the focuswould be on what their current teacher does that helps them. However, the students often usedother teachers as reference points; as much as possible, the conversation was directed away frommaking comparisons.

Warm-up procedure. A warm-up game was introduced, called Feelings Tic-Tac-Toe(“noughts and crosses”). A 3 × 3 grid was made with cartoon pictures of people and creaturesshowing different emotions on their faces. The game was played in teams (usually boys vs. girls,as selected by the students). The regular rules of Tic-Tac-Toe were observed, with each teamtaking turns to place a counter on the square they wanted; prior to counterplacement, a memberof their team had to tell the group (or whisper it in the interviewer’s ear, if they preferred) of atime they had felt the same way as the person in the cartoon.

Game-facilitated discussion. Data collection entailed focused discussion of aspects ofthe classroom environment, conducted in the context of a second game. An Envelope Gamewas introduced following the warm-up. For this game, the interviewer spun a paper arrow,and whichever student the spinner pointed to was able to choose an envelope from 20 differ-ent brightly colored envelopes. The student could then read out the question inside, or ask theinterviewer or a friend to read it aloud. The questions were all phrased as open-ended questions,or as the first part of a sentence. To clarify thoughts expressed by the children, however, the inter-viewer sometimes had to paraphrase or extend their words, with which they could then agree ordisagree.

The specific probe questions and topics for discussion are listed in Figure 1. Because our goalwas to explore emotional dimensions of the classroom as theorized in previous work (Evanset al., 2009; Harvey & Evans, 2003), questions revolved around four domains: disciplinarymanagement, instructional style, emotional relationships between teacher and students, and theoverall emotional tone or feel of the classroom. We selected the questions that would provokediscussion on the basis of many hours of talking with teachers about the classroom’s emotionalclimate.

Once the question had been read aloud, everyone chose whether they wanted to answer. Theinterviewer fueled discussion by prompting individual students and asking follow-up questionswhen appropriate. Discussion continued until everyone had said everything they wanted to say oneach particular topic. Then, the spinner was spun again and the next child selected an envelopewith a question inside. This process continued until everyone had had a turn at selecting anenvelope.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


What do you think your teacher likes about their job?

How easy is it to relax around your teacher?

Is your teacher always fair?

If you are upset about something, would you tell your teacher?

How can you tell if your teacher likes you?

My teacher helps me get on with my friends by . . .

If your class is too noisy, what does your teacher do?

What does your teacher do to help you behave well?

Do you feel like your teacher is concerned about you?

What makes a good teacher?

What’s the best thing about a school?

My teacher makes me feel good when . . .

I learn best when . . .

What one quality would you like in a teacher?

What one quality would you like in a school?

Does your teacher understand what’s going on for you?

What does your teacher do when people get upset?

Do you feel safe in your classroom?

If you were having a bad day, would your teacher know?

I know my teacher is having a good day when. . .

What’s important to your teacher?

If you are upset, what will your teacher do?

What makes your teacher good at teaching?

When does your teacher talk about how people feel?

What does your teacher do if someone is crying?

I feel happy when my teacher. . .

FIGURE 1 Questions and sentence stems that were in the envelopes.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


Session ending. At the conclusion of all the sessions, the interviewer asked two follow-upquestions. This ensured that every student left the interviews in a positive frame of mind. Thequestions were: “What’s the best thing about being in Mr./Miss ______’s class?” and “If therewas one thing you could tell all the teachers and principals about what they can do to makeschools happy learning environments for children, what would it be?”

Data Analysis

All focus group discussion from the videotapes was transcribed, with the researchers ensur-ing that each student’s responses were identified and clearly separated from the general flowof the discussion, much like the script of a play. Transcriptions were checked for accuracy andthen read carefully and independently by members of the research team, looking for patternsand meaning within the student’s discourse for which emotion was the direct topic or the sub-text. The analytic approach known as thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) was adopted.Each researcher generated initial codes, which were then sorted into themes. Themes were thencompared across coders and retained where there was agreement. Although the words used todescribe a theme sometimes were different, on discussion consensus was reached regarding thenature of the theme and its exemplars. Not surprisingly, because the questions had been posedthis way, four overarching themes were immediately recognizable and could be named: emotionrelated to discipline practices, teaching style, interpersonal relationships (teacher-student), andgeneral affective properties of the classroom. However, one even more general feature emerged,not as a theme of the students’ discourse, but as the way in which the ages of the students mod-erated their understanding of classroom emotion. It became apparent that this was not itself atheme regarding their perception of the emotional climate of the classroom, but a developmentalfeature of the way that students attempted to make meaning of the classroom environment andthe manner in which they were able to express it.

RESULTS

Developmental Differences in Emotional Understanding

We first report the developmental characteristics that seemed to influence the students’ under-standing. There appeared to be three different developmental levels across the 4 to 5 years ofage differentiating the students: (1) Some of the younger children had difficulty talking abouttheir nominated teacher’s feelings. They could talk about things their teacher did, and of thingsthat made them feel better within their class, but they could not always see that this was ever theteacher’s intention. Events were interpreted mostly as a reward or punishment for their behavior.(2) The middle age group, in comparison, realized that their teacher had feelings that could beregulated and could easily describe many instances and reasons for a variety of feelings, even ifit meant making some assumptions. (3) Some of the older children could speak eloquently abouttheir teacher’s intentions and reasoning. A frequent recognition from the older children was thattheir teacher was concerned about the type of student and person each child would be in thefuture and that this affected their teacher’s emotions. Another developmental difference was the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


children’s beliefs regarding the teacher’s permanence of affection for them. The older childrencould see that a teacher’s bad mood did not change the global picture, although this was harderfor the younger children to recognize. These features of the students’ developmental understand-ing are illustrated below. In these verbatim comments, and in all subsequent ones, each line orlines contained within quotation marks represents a new student speaking:

Not able to recognize the teacher’s affective intentions:

(Year 4; 8-year-olds):

“There’s these three, four, five girls who didn’t get along last week, so they had to go tothe garden and do weeding, and. . . .”

“And then they became friends again.”

Interviewer: “So do you think that doing gardening and stuff, do you think that helps you?”

“No. No, you have to do that for a punishment.”

In contrast, in the following extract, the Year 6 children were retelling what happened after othersin the class had an argument:

(Year 6; 10- to 11-year-olds):

Interviewer: “If she can tell you’re upset, what does she do?”

“She says, ‘Are you alright? Do you need to go outside to cool down?’”

Interviewer: “So, if she sends you out of the class, is that a punishment?”

“Oh, no. To just settle down.”

“Yeah—if you’re upset, she’ll say, ‘Do you want to go outside and have a little time byyourself?’ And you go outside.”

Identification of instances and reasons for a teacher’s feelings:

(Year 4; 8-year-olds):

Interviewer: “Tell me about a time that Mrs. N felt sad.”

“Ooh, gosh!”

“Oh, no. What if you can’t? What if you can’t do a story?”

Interviewer: “Well, you can talk to your teammates.”

“I don’t know . . .”

Interviewer: “OK, so when did Mrs. N . . . feel like that?”

“What was it again?”

Interviewer: “Sad.”

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


“I think she never feels like that.”

In contrast, the older children always found it easy to identify and discuss examples of teachers’feelings and enjoyed retelling stories about their teacher:

(Year 7 & 8; 11 and 12 years of age):

“Mr. S feels like that [annoyed] sometimes when someone talks in class.”

Interviewer: “How do you know he feels that way?”

“Because he gets really frustrated, and he’ll say, ‘Put your name on the board.’”

“Yeah. His expression says it all, because when he’s happy he smiles and when he’s sortof angry he makes this sort of his face” (child scowls).

Interviewer: “And what makes him feel that way?”

“ ’Cos he’s our teacher; he doesn’t like losing.”

“Yeah, he loves winning.”

These older students not only gave instances of a particular emotion, but could also go into detailabout what aspects of their teacher’s personality related to him feeling a certain way.

Older students make assumptions about their teacher’s feelings:

Younger children tried to avoid discussing the more complex feelings (especially “loving,” “ner-vous”). In contrast, the older children were able to make assumptions about their teacher’sfeelings, even if they could not think of a specific instance of their teacher expressing thatfeeling:

(Year 6; 10- to 11-year-olds):

Interviewer: “You said that when Miss X got married, she was in love?”

“Yeah. Love, love, love.”

Interviewer: “How do you know?”

“Oh, everyone is. . . .”

“Yeah, ’cos if she wasn’t in love, she wouldn’t have got married.”

(Year 7 & 8):

Interviewer: “So how did you know he was nervous?”

“Umm, ’cos he sort of had to rush around like all different places, and that, and try and findpeople, and when he couldn’t find people he was sort of like uh, oh, worried looking andstuff.”

Older children recognize that the teacher is concerned about the type of person they will be inthe future:

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


The older children recognized that their teacher talked to them about problems, not to tell themoff, but in an attempt to resolve issues and to develop their character:

(Year 7 & 8):

“He sort of encourages you, or if you’re one of those real quiet kinds of people he doesn’tpick on you, but he like makes you answer the question because he wants you to like exceland try and participate more than you usually do.”

“Yeah. He actually worries; cares about us, not just the work. . . .”

“Thinks of us not as just students, he thinks of us as individuals.”

“And if anybody got into trouble in the weekend or something, he’ll have a talk to themabout right choices and why they did it.”

Older children could see that a teacher’s affection for them did not change:

Younger children found it difficult to distinguish between temporary moods and ongoing affec-tion for students, whereas the older children understood that a mood may make a teacher reactdifferently, but his or her feelings about them remain constant.

(Year 4 & 5):

“Yeah, sometimes she cares about us, but sometimes she’s too busy talking to otherpeople.”

“Sometimes she does care about us and sometimes she doesn’t.”

“And, and when she doesn’t, it’s quite mean . . . not fair.”

“But maybe she’s too busy. She doesn’t not like me, she’s just too busy.”

In the above extract, 8- and 9-year-old children are struggling to explain how their teacher feelsabout them in difficult circumstances, with the last comment indicating a growing understandingof context. Compare these comments, however, with the certainty in the following Year 6 (10-year-olds) responses:

(Year 6):

“But she still likes all of us.”

Interviewer: “She still likes you, even if you are misbehaving?”

“Yeah!” (two students in unison)

Behavior Management and Emotion

The students’ perceptions of behavior management—maintaining discipline and control—inthese classes was closely tied to emotional issues, tending to focus on receiving clear guidelinesso that students know exactly what is expected of them. This involved warnings for misbehavior,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


giving the students a chance to self-correct prior to any punishment, and rewarding the desiredbehavior rather than punishing those who did not meet expectations. Teachers expressed feel-ings by telling students when they felt let down by their behavior but generally did so in a calm,explanatory way. This worked because these teachers were quite open with the students and atease talking about their feelings. Children knew where they stood with these teachers at any pointin time; they knew when they were pushing boundaries and knew how their teacher would react.Children also felt that the teachers were fair and firm without being irritable and seldom punishedpeople who did not deserve it. The following discussions illustrate these themes:

Warnings before punishments:

Students in these classes were given warnings when they were seen to be misbehaving,rather than being punished in the first instance. Here, the children are discussing how theteacher handles a child who misbehaves:

(Year 4 & 5):

“Because every time my friend K gets in trouble, Mr. G gives him a warning. Hm. Like‘One more time and you’re going to Mrs. T.’”

(Year 4):

“And if some people continue to be noisy she gives them warnings, but if they continue tobe noisy they get detention.”

Reward focused:

A teacher’s strategy of focusing on rewarding children for complying was raised fre-quently. Children saw this as a more motivating tool than punishments. It also allowedpunishments to be saved for persistent or particularly poor behavior. Here, the studentsare discussing rewards, when they occur, and the effect of promised rewards on theirbehavior.

(Year 7 & 8):

“Yeah, you get a fun day. Because Mr. P said ‘If you guys be good, you’ll get a game day,’which means we play games, X-Box, the Playstation. . . .”

“. . . and movies, and ever since that’s happened, we’ve all been very good.”

“Mr. P helps me behave when he gives me treats and that, so I keep on behaving, and hegives me free time.”

(Year 7):

“And in the first two terms, every time we did our homework we got a little raffle ticket,and at the end of the term she draws out the numbers and you get to pick a prize.”

“Yeah, and we’ve just finished the Banana Boat Race! If we did our homework for theweek, then we get a bowl, and then we get a spoon, and then it keeps going on, and at theend we get ice cream and chocolate fudge sauce!”

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


Teachers tell the children when they feel let down:

Most of these teachers were open enough with the students and respected enough by themto be able to tell them how they were feeling. In one class of older children, the teacher’sfrank disappointment about poor behavior with a relief teacher in Term 1 had such an effecton the children that they remembered the incident several months later, so that there hadnot been any more problems that year with relievers (substitute teachers):

(Year 7):

“She had a real big growl [NZ slang for a telling off] at the class. It was nearly at the endof school that term; she was just about in tears actually, that made us feel guilty.”

“Yeah, she was like, she was growling us and then afterwards, when we left, then she waslike crying. She was so like disappointed in us.”

Students know where they stand:

Children knew where they stood with these teachers at any point in time, they knew whenthey were pushing boundaries, and knew how their teacher would react:

(Year 7):

“And we know that there are consequences for not getting it done.”

Teachers are fair and firm without being grumpy:

Teachers could be strict, while also being reasonable, around things like time manage-ment, presentation, and behavior, without being seen as punitive or grouchy. Being strict isperceived as very different from being bad tempered.

(Year 6):

Interviewer: “What makes her ‘cool’?”

“Her attitude.”

“Yeah, her attitude, and she’s funny.”

“She’s funny, she can take a joke.”

“Most teachers, they’ll be like, ‘Stop mucking around, get on with your work!’ But shelike laughs with us kids.”

Interviewer: “What’s the best thing about being in Mrs. X’s class?”

“She’s not like all crabby and that.”

“And you can’t really get away with much from her. . . . She’s strict, but she’s not tooover-the-top strict.”

In these classrooms, children could see that if their teacher was having a bad start to the day, orif the teacher had to tell someone off, there were few or no carryover effects to the rest of the dayor to other students:

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


(Year 6):

Interviewer: “And if she tells someone off before morning tea, what’s she like aftermorning tea?”

“She kind of calms down, really, when she’s had something to drink and eat.”

“Yeah. When she’s been at the teachers’ lounge. And calmed down a bit.”

(Year 4 & 5):

Interviewer: “What does she do to get over feeling angry?”

“She calms herself down.”

“Sometimes she would say she was going to go to another classroom when actually she’lljust go out into the hallway and just breathe.”

This excerpt also shows that even children as young as age 8 or 9 years can see through theirteacher’s deceptions, and they can recognize an attempt at emotional self-regulation. The follow-ing quote also demonstrates the older children’s ability to notice emotion self-regulation:

(Year 7 & 8):

“He says, ‘Oh, I’m not having such a good day.’ But he doesn’t take it out on us; like hewon’t take it out on us. He’ll take it out on a pen or something, but not on us.”

Interviewer: “So it doesn’t change your day at all if he’s having a bad day?”

“No, but hmm . . . sometimes he gives us really hard work!”

Academic (Teaching) Issues and Emotion

Students perceived that teachers understood their learning needs and their differences, settingrealistic goals to motivate them without intimidating them. Teachers were seen as people whostrive to make learning as interesting and fun as possible. The students felt that their teachersliked helping children learn and recognized they learned best when teachers were helpful andpatient.

Teachers understand students’ academic needs:

Students perceived the teachers as understanding individual learning needs and how thesemight differ within a class, without there being any judgments from the teacher aboutstudents who were below average in any area:

(Year 4):

“And he knows that I can’t write properly, and he’s not going to force me to write otherthings, not too long, because I still can’t handle my pencil properly.”

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


(Year 7):

“She knows us individually; she knows what standard we’re at, and how well we cando. If she thinks that we can be pushed harder, then she will push us individually, noteverybody, so that people don’t feel uncomfortable about what we’re doing and stuff.”

Teachers set realistic goals:

The teachers’ understanding of students’ individuality and personalized learning goalsmeant that they were perceived as being able to work with students to set achievable goals,which motivated students rather than making anyone feel stupid:

(Year 6):

Interviewer: “So you think the teacher really understands what’s easy and hard for you atschool?”

“Um, yes, because she does, um, she tests us and all that to see where we are. Quite a bit.To see where we are in our work, just whatever we’re doing.

(Year 7 & 8):

“Like Miss N, she knows what standard each of us is at, so she won’t give us hard workthat’s too hard for each for us. She will give us like at our own skill level work.”

Work is interesting and fun:

Students could see that, as much as possible, these emotionally responsive teachersstrove to make learning interesting, and school fun, and took pleasure in the children’slearning:

(Year 7 & 8):

“It’s like he remembers what it’s like being a kid.”

(Year 4):

Interviewer: “What’s the best thing about being in Mr. P’s class?”

“That he always gives us fun work. Say it’s maths, and it’s plussing or times, and Mr. Ptells us to do it the fun way, like think of a simple number in our head and then like add it.”

(Year 6):

“She likes helping people learn.”

“She likes if we get our spelling words right—she gives us points, and she’s happy.”

(Year 7 & 8):

“He’s really happy when some of us go up to 15+ in our reading ages.”

“Yup, and then he goes and brags to all the other teachers!”

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


Dealing with academic problems:

The students knew they could tell these teachers about academic problems; the teacherswould not make them feel stupid and would provide them extra help if needed:

(Year 4):

“He gives me help when I don’t know what to do, and I say, ‘Mr. P, can I please havesome help?’ And he says, ‘OK then, I’ll give you some help’ and then he helps me and I’mconfused at first, and then I get it.”

“We’re lucky that we’ve got a teacher we can actually learn from.”

(Year 7):

“I learn best when Mr. S takes me aside and explains it more, and like shows me anddoesn’t get angry about it.”

Emotional Relationship and Intimacy

Emotional relationships covers the cluster of elements that we are most interested in, althoughwe recognize that an orderly environment (good, positive discipline) with a strong learning focus(skilled pedagogy attuned to students’ skills and motivation) provides the essential supports fora positive class atmosphere. In our five-component model, we see the relationship as central butnot sufficient. The emotional feel of a classroom is related to other important emotion transac-tions, including emotion coaching, appropriate interpersonal guidelines (boundaries, fairness),teachers’ emotional awareness, and their own intrapersonal beliefs and philosophies about emo-tion. Because students experience the latter two categories but cannot easily judge them, wehave classified the following themes slightly differently to emphasize what children themselvesunderstand. In terms of individual relationships, students felt that these teachers knew them asindividuals, and often their families as well, and that these teachers liked them personally. Theyfelt their teachers were available as much as possible for students. Students felt close to them andexperienced a level of mutual trust. They could tell them about their lives and problems and theteachers could be trusted with personal information and to help where possible. This all camefrom a feeling of being relaxed around these teachers. In many instances, the mutual regard meantthat teachers would also open up to students regarding aspects of their own personal lives.

Teacher knows each student:

These teachers knew all the students well and, in some cases, were seen as part of the localcommunity. It was not unusual for the families of the students and the teachers to knoweach other.

(Year 6):

Interviewer: “So, what lets you know her so well?”

“Because she comes ’round for tea sometimes.”

Interviewer: “Does she go to everyone’s house for tea sometimes?”

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


“Yup.”

“No. Just mine and S’s.”

“And mine.”

“And mine.”

“Yeah, she came to our house for drinks.”

(Year 4 & 5):

“And I also like Mr. P because my Mum and Dad know him.”

“Yeah, so do my parents.”

Teacher is available to individual students:

The impression from the students was that these teachers strove to be emotionally availableto them, whenever possible. In one class, the teacher had extra responsibilities in the widerschool (she was deputy principal), so she used a tin box in which students could put notesto her if there was something they wanted to tell her anonymously (not tales), or talk to herabout, so that she could stay in touch with students.

(Year 6):

Interviewer: “So, is Mrs. X ever too busy to help if you’ve got a problem or something?”

“Yes. Sometimes. Like with the production she was pretty busy.”

“But we could still go to the staff room or the office and ask if we really wanted to. So wecould tell her our problems any time really.”

“She does have that tin that she checks. And, um like I told Mrs. X some things I felt reallysad about. And she said that I could come and talk to her when I wanted to.”

(Year 7 & 8):

“Mr. S is a real open-minded person. That’s what we like him for.”

“It depends what’s on his mind. Sometimes he just says, ‘No, go away,’ especially if he’sbusy.”

“But he says to come back obviously a little bit later, or he’ll call you over.”

Dealing with personal problems:

The students felt they could talk about their personal lives and problems and the teacherscould be trusted with this information and to help where appropriate.

(Year 6):

“And she’s happy for us to go ask questions. She’s got a box that we can put questions in;like about puberty.”

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


Interviewer: “So you can put private questions in?”

“Yeah, if we’re afraid to ask in school class or something.”

“She talks to you about your question and gets it all solved.”

“But you don’t have to write your name.”

Students feel relaxed around their teacher:

The ability of the students to be themselves, ask personal questions, and request help camefrom a feeling of being relaxed around their teacher, knowing their teacher, feeling thattheir teacher accepted and liked them, and was predictable.

(Year 6):

Interviewer: “How easy is it to relax around your teacher?”

“Very easy. Calm, kind.”

“Very, very easy. Fun.”

“Fun. Good, yeah? Not, ‘Blah blah blah blah’ like some teachers are.”

“So we don’t have to get all nervous.”

Teachers share information about their personal life:

In many instances the mutual regard meant that teachers would open up to studentsregarding aspects of their own personal lives:

(Year 7 & 8):

Interviewer: “What’s important to her outside of school?”

“Her cats. Her study. She tells all these funny stories about what happens outside school,working and stuff. . . .”

“Oh, and, um, she told us one story. Everyone was saying ‘Oh, cool shoes, eh?’ and she toldus why she got new shoes: because her cat peed in them! Yuk! And so she got new shoes.And then her cat peed in those; they were orange and black and they were her favoriteshoes, and she came home and they were wet. She put her foot in it!”

Emotional Interpersonal Guidelines

The second broad emotional category directly comparable to our theoretical model coveredemotional interactions that contributed to a general classroom climate that was positive for all stu-dents. Some parts of the discussion indicated a specific recognition of teacher affect that relatedto all members of the class, impacting the overall feel of that particular classroom. Studentsidentified that everyone in the class was valued and that generally they were able to work well asa supportive team. These classes seemed to have few internal disruptions or negativity. Younger

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


students could not always recognize the teacher’s role in this, due to the developmental levelsdiscussed. Older students could talk about class debates and discussions that dealt with internalproblems, or, if more appropriate, private conversations they had had with their teacher. Eitherway, issues were dealt with directly, not swept under the carpet. The overall feeling was thatthese teachers, in comparison to others, actually enjoyed their job.

Everyone is valued as part of the team:

Students felt like everyone in the class was valued equally by their teacher, which seemedto lead to a feeling of unity.

(Year 7 & 8):

Interviewer: “What’s important to your teacher?”

“Kids!” (This response was loud and in unison)

Students talk about an open-class climate:

(Year 6):

“We sometimes have class meetings, and she says, ‘You can talk about anything.’”

“But sometimes people don’t like telling it out loud.”

(Year 4 & 5):

“Mr. P saw it [a student’s note] on his desk, and he saw ‘fifth best friend,’ and he said,‘I wouldn’t like to be your fifth best friend, I would like to be just a friend.’ ”

Private conversations:

Sometimes private conversations are used as a more appropriate way of dealing with small-group issues or personal problems.

(Year 6):

Interviewer: “So if she can tell you’re upset, what does she do?”

“She says, ‘Are you all right? Do you need to go outside?’”

“And, oh, yeah, she takes us out from the group, and she says, ‘Are you all right?’”

“She says, ‘Oh, what’s the matter, what happened? Are you all right, sweetie?’ Yeah.”

Issues are dealt with directly, not hidden or ignored:

(Year 4 & 5):

“And sometimes when we’re angry and we’re not getting on with each other at morningtea or lunch, he tells us to go out to the cloak bay and apologize to each other and thinkabout what we have to do.”

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


(Year 8):

“She’d help us sort it out if it keeps going on.”

“Yeah, she wouldn’t let it go on—like arguing with other people.”

“If it’s in the classroom—like it will happen every day, and won’t get sorted out.”

“She tries to sort everyone’s problems and that. She doesn’t let anyone’s problems justkeep going.”

Teachers like their job:

The children thought that, unlike some teachers, these teachers enjoyed teaching, somegoing as far as to say that they thought they would still do this job if it was unpaid. Theirimpression was that their teachers liked children, liked helping children, and enjoyed com-ing to school each day. One of the Year 6 classes had some high needs and quite challengingstudents, but the children felt the teacher liked them all, and they obviously liked her.

(Year 6):

“And she said that she likes us because we’re all good kids, and we are always a laugh.”

“And she likes us being in her class as well.”

Interviewer: “OK. So how do you know she likes you guys being in her class?”

“Because she tells us.”

“Yeah. She knows that all of us can be happy if we all get along.”

“Um. She’ll try and cheer us up. And help us if she can.”

“Um, she likes spending time with us when we play games and that.”

The overall feeling was that the children felt that these teachers, in comparison to other teachers,actually enjoyed their job and most importantly enjoyed being with children:

(Year 6):

“She’s got a good reputation as a teacher and stuff. She learns from us children.”

“. . . ’cos she likes working with us.”

Interviewer: “How do you know she likes that?”

“Because she says when she’s really sick and she’s got to go home early, she says that shedoesn’t want to go home because she wants to work with us.”

“She helps us, and she says ‘I love working with you kids. And I hope I can have you againnext year.’”

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


“Yes, she doesn’t just actually come up to you and go, ‘Oh, I like you as a kid’ (generallaughter). She just tells us she likes us other ways. Like in the morning, she goes ‘I liketeaching—you are great kids.’ ”

DISCUSSION

The student participants in this study enjoyed the novel game-like focus group procedure inwhich each child was able to participate as much or as little as he or she wanted. By keepingthem engaged, the approach proved to be effective in generating insightful and open discussion.At the same time, the students understood that we were seriously interested in their perceptions:as one 10-year-old boy said to us: “I think it’s awesome that you are asking us what we think,‘cos no one ever does that!” Trust was built through the process of the students and their teachermeeting the primary interviewer several times before the actual data gathering, and asking asmany questions as they needed.

Although the selected age range of 8- to 12-year-olds was quite narrow, three identifiabledevelopmental differences emerged (Denham, 1998). The younger children had some difficultytalking about their nominated teacher’s feelings and could seldom see intention or reasoningbehind the teacher’s interactions with them. The middle age group realized that their teacherhad feelings and could easily describe instances as exemplars and the likely reasons for manyfeelings, including making reasonable inferences. The oldest children were articulate and enthu-siastic in their responding, recognizing their teacher’s intentions as supportive, and could see anoverall pattern to their teacher’s emotional responding.

These indications of growing emotional competence closely match the more formal empiricalevidence on children’s emotional development (Pons, Harris, & de Rosnay, 2004). To what extentthis competence was shaped by the “emotional intelligence” of these teachers we cannot answerfrom this study, but we suspect that the opportunity to observe authentic emotional responsesin teachers does provide an important learning opportunity for the students. Certainly, teachers’emotional responses are closely observed by children who are in their classrooms for most of theschool day, and the perspicacity of all the children, even the younger ones, was one of the morestriking findings of the study.

Many decades of research on classroom climate have yielded three broad dimensionsof classroom ecologies: management/disciplinary, instructional/curricular, and student-teacherrelationships (Evans et al., 2009; Pianta et al., 2007). Not surprisingly, these same overarchingthemes emerged from the focus groups, partly because the questions posed also related to behav-ior management, teaching style, how feelings were dealt with in student-teacher interpersonalinteractions, and general teachers’ affect. Unlike most previous research, which has focused onteachers’ reflections (e.g., Hargreaves, 2000), our approach has emphasized the emotional rela-tionship issues that permeate every aspect of the classroom as experienced by the children. Thesespecific details of affective process were readily revealed in the children’s descriptions of theirclassroom experiences. Their one overriding feeling was that these current teachers, in compari-son to some others in their experience, actually enjoyed working with students, which is an acuteobservation to come from children.

What the children had to say about behavior management was of interest because it is pos-sibly one of the most visible aspects of how a classroom, as a whole, operates. Due to their

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


tangible nature, disciplinary strategies are typically clearly observable in a short amount of time.The students explained how their feelings were closely tied to whether discipline was reward-orpunishment-based. When punishments were deemed necessary, positive teachers gave warningsand gave the students ample opportunity to self-correct. Rules were clear and were enforcedconsistently. Predictability was considered important. Teachers would make explicit how the stu-dents’ misbehavior actually made them feel, and thus relied to some extent on the students’ likingand respect for the teacher to ensure that reprimands were meaningful. Students often commentedon their teachers being fair.

It was quite fascinating to hear from the students how aware they were of the quality of theirteachers’ instructional skills, although possibly this comes from listening to parental discussionof such matters, as well as the fact that the teachers themselves comment on teaching abilitythemes. It also must be noted that these children will have had, after three or more years ofschooling, ample opportunity to have experienced different instructional or pedagogical stylesfrom different teachers, and were thus able to make comparisons. Children’s perceptions ofteaching ability are closely linked to affect-related themes. In classrooms where students feelsafe and supported, it is expected that their learning would be of a higher level. This is, in fact,what these students reported. Students judged emotionally aware teachers as actually being goodat teaching. The teachers understood the students’ individual learning needs as well as theirdifferences, setting realistic goals and being demanding enough to motivate the students with-out intimidating them. Teachers were seen as people who endeavored to make the learning asinteresting and fun as possible. The students felt that their teachers liked helping children learn.

The students understood and valued the emotional relationship these teachers had with themas individuals. Feeling accepted by one’s teacher—who is interested in you as a person—seemsto be of great importance for a child’s experience of schooling. We have always noted that whenparents in New Zealand are asked how their child is getting on in primary school, the mostcommon answer is some paraphrase of “just fine this year, he/she really likes his/her teacher.”

It is a challenge for teachers, however, to be equally closely attached to all of their pupils, andit is the overall classroom atmosphere that allows children to feel comfortable, learn about theirown emotions, and closely observe and thus learn about the emotions of adults other than theirparents. To achieve such an atmosphere, teachers have to pay attention to fairness, to individualdifferences in the children, to take advantage of emotional situations to express and coach appro-priate affect. With respect to this overall climate, students in this study believed that everyonein the class was equally valued and that they worked well together as a supportive team. Thesefeelings relate to the category we have identified in previous research as emotional interpersonalguidelines (Harvey & Evans, 2003). These classrooms seemed to have few internal disruptionsor negativity, and any issues were dealt with directly.

There are limitations to this study. There are obvious limits to generalizability, given the smallnumber of teachers viewed by the students in just one region of a small country. Although atleast 11 students participated from each class (average class size was 25), these children wereself-selected and likely to be more aware of emotional issues. However, the purpose was not toprovide normative data but rather to explore the dimensions of classroom emotional climatethat were most salient to the children—the classroom insiders. The broad themes identifiedreflected dimensions of classroom climate (discipline, pedagogy, and overall affect) that havebeen described in the literature, and within emotional climate the themes identified reflected theelements of a model we have previously proposed. It must be remembered that the framing of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


the questions to the students was influenced by both of these prior sets of assumptions. However,our goal was not to validate a model but to ascertain what students saw and understood.

Because the students are so perceptive, we consider the implications for teacher developmentto be considerable, if rather obvious. Across teacher education, professional development, andschool policies, it is useful to think of students not as passive recipients of disciplinary andpedagogical practices, but as active observers and participants in ongoing affective interactionswith their teachers, which shape and are shaped by teachers’ emotional sensitivities. Our studentparticipants linked all their impressions of their teachers to interpersonal relationships and inti-macy. In many instances provided by the students, mutual regard was confirmed when teacherswould open up their own personal lives and feelings and invited the students to do likewise.

REFERENCES

Anderson, C. S. (1982). The search for school climate: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 52,368–420.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.Cohen, J. (2006). Social, emotional, ethical, and academic education: Creating a climate for learning, participation in

democracy, and well-being. Harvard Educational Review, 76, 201–237.Denham, S. (1998). Emotional development of young children. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Evans, I. M., Harvey, S. T., Buckley, L., & Yan, E. (2009). Differentiating classroom climate concepts: Academic,

management, and emotional environments. Kotuitui: The New Zealand Journal of Social Science, 4, 131–146.Fraser, B. J. (1989). Twenty years of classroom climate work: Progress and prospect. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 21,

307–327.Goh, S. C., & Fraser, B. J. (2000). Teacher interpersonal behaviour and elementary students’ outcomes. Journal of

Research in Childhood Education, 14, 216–231.Gottman, J. M., Katz, L. F., & Hooven, C. (1997). Meta-emotion: How families communicate emotionally. Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum.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, 625–638.Hargreaves, A. (1998). The emotional practice of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14, 835–854.Hargreaves, A. (2000). Mixed emotions: Teachers’ perceptions of their interactions with students. Teaching and Teacher

Education, 16, 811–826.Harvey, S., & Evans, I. M. (2003). Understanding the emotional environment of the classroom. In D. Fraser &

R. Openshaw (Eds.), Informing our practice (pp. 182–195). Palmerston North, New Zealand: Kanuka Grove Press.Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial classroom: Teacher social and emotional competence in

relation to student and classroom outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 79, 491–525.Kasen, S., Johnson, J., & Cohen, P. (1990). The impact of school emotional climate on student psychopathology. Journal

of Abnormal Child Psychology, 18, 165–177.Pianta, R. C., La Paro, K. M., & Hamre, B. K. (2007). Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS). Baltimore, MD:

Paul H. Brookes.Pons, F., Harris, P. L., & de Rosnay, M. (2004). Emotion comprehension between 3 and 11 years: Developmental periods

and hierarchical organization. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 1, 127–152.Raskauskas, J. L., Gregory, J., Harvey, S. T., Rifshana, F., & Evans, I. M. (2010). Bullying among primary school children

in New Zealand: Relationships with prosocial behaviour and classroom climate. Educational Research, 52, 1–13.Salmon, K., Dadds, M. R., Allen, J., & Hawes, D. (2009). Can emotion language be taught during parent training for

conduct problem children? Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 40, 485–498.Van Bergen, P., Salmon, K., Dadds, M. R., & Allen, J. (2009). Training mothers in emotion-rich elaborative reminiscing:

Facilitating children’s autobiographical memory and emotion knowledge. Journal of Cognition and Development,10, 162–187.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5


Wareham, P., & Salmon, K. (2006). Mother-child reminiscing about everyday experiences: Implications for clinicalinterventions in the preschool years. Clinical Psychology Review, 26, 535–554.

Welsh, W. N. (2000). The effects of school climate on school disorder. Annals of the American Academy of Political andSocial Science, 567, 88–107.

Wilson, D. (2004). The interface of school climate and school connectedness and relationships with aggression andvictimization. Journal of School Health, 74, 293–299.

Yan, E. M., Evans, I. M., & Harvey, S. T. (2011). Observing emotional interactions between teachers and students inelementary school classrooms. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 25, 82–97.

Zullig, K. J., Koopman, T. M., & Huebner, E. S. (2009). Beyond GPA: Toward more comprehensive assessments ofstudents’ school experiences. Child Indicators Research, 2, 95–108. doi:10.1007/s12187-008-9029-z

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mas

sey

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

8:36

09

Febr

uary

201

5