Understanding Teacher-Student Relationships, StudentStudent Relationships, and Conduct Problems in China and the United States

Abstract

Several previous studies have found that Chinese students perceive teacher-student relationships and student-student relationships more favorably than American students. In this study we examined if the same holds true with respect to teachers’ perceptions. Also examined were both students’ and teachers’ perceptions of conduct problems. The sample included 3,253 students and 345 teachers in China and 2,192 students and 540 teachers in the U.S. Results of a multivariate analysis of variance revealed the greatest differences in mean scores between countries were in teachers’ and students’ perceptions of student-student relationships and student conduct problems. American students perceived their schools much less favorably, and particularly so in middle school and high school. Students tended to report less favorable relationships and greater conduct problems than their teachers, especially in the U.S. than China. Cultural differences are discussed that may account for the findings, including differences in the valuing of education, filial piety, social harmony, self and peer regulation of behavior, classroom management, and the socialization of cultural values.

Full text

This article was downloaded by: [164.104.104.195]
On: 15 December 2014, At: 10:45
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Click for updates
International Journal of School & Educational
Psychology
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/usep20
Understanding Teacher-Student Relationships, Student-
Student Relationships, and Conduct Problems in China
and the United States
George G. Beara, Chunyan Yanga, Joseph Gluttinga, Xishan Huangb, Xianyou Heb, Wei Zhangb
& Dandan Chena
a School of Education, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, USA
b School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, Guangdon Province,
People's Republic of China
Published online: 12 Dec 2014.
To cite this article: George G. Bear, Chunyan Yang, Joseph Glutting, Xishan Huang, Xianyou He, Wei Zhang & Dandan Chen
(2014) Understanding Teacher-Student Relationships, Student-Student Relationships, and Conduct Problems in China and the
United States, International Journal of School & Educational Psychology, 2:4, 247-260, DOI: 10.1080/21683603.2014.883342
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21683603.2014.883342
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 to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and 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 Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial 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

Understanding Teacher-Student Relationships,
Student-Student Relationships, and Conduct Problems
in China and the United States
George G. Bear, Chunyan Yang, and Joseph Glutting
School of Education, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, USA
Xishan Huang, Xianyou He, and Wei Zhang
School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, Guangdon Province, People’s Republic of China
Dandan Chen
School of Education, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, USA
Several previous studies have found that Chinese students perceive teacher-student
relationships and student-student relationships more favorably than American students.
In this study we examined if the same holds true with respect to teachers’ perceptions. Also
examined were both students’ and teachers’ perceptions of conduct problems. The sample
included 3,253 students and 345 teachers in China and 2,192 students and 540 teachers in the
United States. Results of a multivariate analysis of variance revealed the greatest differences
in mean scores between countries were in teachers’ and students’ perceptions of student-
student relationships and student conduct problems. American students perceived their
schools much less favorably, and particularly so in middle school and high school. Students
tended to report less favorable relationships and greater conduct problems than their teachers,
especially in the United States compared with China. Cultural differences are discussed that
may account for the findings, including differences in the valuing of education, filial piety,
social harmony, self and peer regulation of behavior, classroom management, and the
socialization of cultural values.
Keywords: Teacher-student relationships, student relationships, conduct problems, school
climate, Chinese schools
Multiple studies have shown that the quality of students’
relationships with their teachers and peers are related to a
number of important academic and social-emotional
outcomes for schools and students. Students’ perceptions
of positive teacher-student relationships relate positively
to school completion (Croninger & Lee, 2001), on-task
behavior (Battistich & Hom, 1997), academic initiative or
engagement (Danielsen, Wiium, Wilhelmsen, & Wold,
2010; Hughes, Luo, Kwok, & Loyd, 2008), academic
achievement (Curby, Rimm-Kaufman, & Ponitz, 2009;
Gregory & Weinstein, 2004; Hughes, Wu, Kwok, Villarreal,
& Johnson, 2012; Valiente, Lemery-Chalfant, Swanson, &
Reiser, 2008), peer acceptance (Hughes, Cavell, & Wilson,
2001; Ladd, Birch, & Buhs, 1999) and motivation to act
responsibly and prosocially (Wentzel, 1996). They relate
negatively to oppositional and antisocial behaviors (Bru,
Stephens, & Torsheim, 2002;Hamre, Pianta, Downer, &
Mashburn, 2008; Meehan, Hughes, & Cavell, 2003; Resnick
et al., 1997), including bullying (Gregory et al., 2010).
Additionally, studies show that close teacher-student
relationships serve as a protective moderating factor in
children’s development, buffering negative effects of risk
Correspondence should be addressed to George G. Bear, School of
Education, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19709, USA. E-mail:
gbear@udel.edu
International Journal of School & Educational Psychology,2, 247–260, 2014
Copyright qInternational School Psychology Association
ISSN 2168-3603 print/ISSN 2168-3611 online
DOI: 10.1080/21683603.2014.883342
Downloaded by [164.104.104.195] at 10:45 15 December 2014

factors and promoting positive mental health, including
among children with internalizing and externalizing
problems (Hughes, 2013; Sabol & Pianta, 2012).
Similarly, studies show that positive relationships between
students are associated with a number of favorable academic
and social-emotional outcomes. For example, students with
positive peer relationships experience greater academic
initiative and achievement, liking of school, and school
completion, and they experience less school avoidance
(Brand, Felner, Shim, Seitsinger, & Dumas, 2003; Danielsen
et al., 2010). They also experience less depression, greater
self-esteem, and fewer delinquent and aggressive behaviors
(Brand et al., 2003).
With the exception of the Danielsen et al. (2010) study,
which was conducted in Norway, all of the studies cited
above were conducted in the United States. This is not
uncommon: As noted recently by Jia et al. (2009), over 98%
of developmental research has been conducted in the United
States (Arnett, 2008) and thus we know little about teacher-
student and student-student relationships in other countries.
This includes the People’s Republic of China, which has
20% of the world’s population. China and the United States
differ in many ways. Among them are that class sizes in
China are much larger (Ding, Li, Li, & Lulm, 2008;
Romanowski, 2006; Shen et al., 2009) and schools and the
families of students attending them have much less wealth.
The gross national income per capita in China is less than
10% of that in the United States (World Bank, 2012).
Despite those differences, compared to American students,
Chinese students demonstrate higher academic achievement
(Fleischman, Hopstock, Pelczar, & Shelley, 2010).
Given that teacher-student and student-student relation-
ships have consistently been found to correlate positively
with academic achievement, one might predict that with
their higher academic achievement, students in China have
more favorable teacher-student and student-student
relationships than students in the United States. However,
several cross-cultural researchers have noted that factors
other than academic achievement might lead one to predict
otherwise: that relationships in Chinese schools, especially
between teachers and students, would be less favorable than
in American schools because of larger class sizes (with
fewer opportunities for individual teacher-student bonding)
and Chinese teachers’ greater use of controlling classroom
management (Jessor et al., 2003; Zhou, Lam, & Chan,
2012). However, in studying differences between Chinese
and American students in conduct problems and students’
perceptions of the classroom management strategies used by
teachers to control student behaviors, those researchers did
not directly examine the impact of class size and classroom
management strategies on teacher-student and student-
student relationships.
In our review of the research literature published in both
Western and Chinese journals, we found only two studies
that have examined differences between the United States
and China in teacher-student and student-student relation-
ships. Both were studies of students’ perceptions of
differences in school climate that included teacher-student
and student-student relationships among the factors of
school climate measured. In their study of students’
perceptions of school climate in grades 3 – 12, Yang et al.
(2013) found that Chinese students had more favorable
perceptions of both teacher-student and student-student
relationships. Chinese students also scored higher on the
two other factors of school climate that they measured,
which were Liking of School and Fairness of Rules. Across
the four factors, effect sizes tended to be smallest in
elementary school and largest in middle school. In their
study of seventh graders, Jia and colleagues (2009) found
more favorable perceptions of teacher-student relationships
and student-student relationships among Chinese students,
as well as more favorable perceptions of support for
autonomy.
In both of the studies above, the findings were attributed
to three general cultural differences: (a) Chinese students’
greater valuing of education, and greater respect of and
desire to please their parents, teachers, and others in
positions of authority; (b) an emphasis in Chinese culture on
maintaining social harmony, which greatly influences how
Chinese students view and regulate their own behavior and
that of their peers; and (c) the greater emphasis that Chinese
teachers place on building and maintaining positive
relationships as a means of managing student behavior,
and how Chinese schools otherwise promote the socializa-
tion of traditional Chinese cultural values. Each of those
cultural differences is addressed later in the discussion
section and in the context of the present study’s findings.
The primary purpose of the present study was to examine
if more favorable perceptions of teacher-student and
student-student relationships are found not only among
Chinese students compared to American students but also
among Chinese teachers compared to American teachers.
Thus, we attempted to replicate the findings of Jia et al.
(2009) and Yang et al. (2013) on perceptions among
Chinese and American students and extend them to Chinese
and American teachers. Given the findings above on
differences between Chinese and American students, and
the three general cultural differences that explained them,
we hypothesized that Chinese teachers would hold more
favorable perceptions than American teachers. Consistent
with the findings of Yang et al. (2013), we expected to find the
greatest differences in middle school and the smallest in
elementary school. Finding similar results across two
different informants, students and teachers, would strengthen
the evidence that teacher-student and student-student
relationships are more favorable in China than the United
States.
In predicting that Chinese teachers would perceive
relationships more favorably, we also expected to find that
within both countries, teachers’ perceptions of teacher-student
248 BEAR ET AL.
Downloaded by [164.104.104.195] at 10:45 15 December 2014

and student-student relationships would be more favorable
than those of students. This would be consistent with research
on school climate indicating that teachers in the United States
perceive school climate more favorably than students
(Booren, Handy, & Power, 2011; Skiba, Simmons, Peterson,
& Forde, 2006).
A secondary purpose of the study was to examine the
extent to which students’ conduct problems differ between
China and the United States. Parents of children in China
report far fewer behavioral problems than parents of
children in the United States. In an analysis of studies of
parent ratings of children’s behavior across 31 countries,
Rescorla et al. (2007) reported that China ranked 4th with
respect to the fewest behavior problems, and the United
States ranked 20th. In our review of the literature, we found
very few studies that have more directly compared conduct
problems in China to those in the United States.
As discussed below, those studies have not always been
consistent in their results. Nevertheless, they suggest that
whereas minor behavior problems, such as nonattention and
talking out of turn, are widely reported in both countries,
more serious conduct problems—those that are harmful to
others, such as fighting, bullying, stealing, and cheating—
are more common in the United States.
Based on interviews with 18 Chinese teachers of grades
1– 6, Shen et al. (2009) identified 10 categories of students’
behavior problems in Chinese schools. Six of those
categories entailed behaviors that interfered with an
individual student’s learning and/or the learning of others
but were not likely to harm others, either physically or
emotionally. The six categories were nonattention, talking
out of turn, overactive, not following the task, uncoopera-
tive, and withdrawn. Four other categories included
physically or emotionally harmful behaviors: laughing at
others (e.g., “saying things like ‘stupid’”), disruptive
behavior (e.g., “taking others’ things” and “pushing
others”), noncompliance (e.g., criticizing others and not
accepting responsibility), and emotional disturbance (e.g.,
“attacking or fighting with others”). Using those categories,
the researchers surveyed 527 Chinese teachers of grades 1 –
6 in 27 schools in five provinces and found that teachers
ranked nonattention, talking out of turn, and being
overactive as the most frequent and troublesome behavior
problems. The least frequent and troublesome were
emotional disturbance, noncompliance, and disruptive
behavior.
In a survey of 244 Chinese teachers of grades 1 –12, Ding
et al. (2008) reported similar findings. They found
nonattention, or daydreaming, to be the most frequent and
troublesome behavior problem reported by teachers, with
46.3% agreeing that it was the behavior problem occurring
most frequently. Those teachers reported that the next most
frequent behavior problems were talking out of turn (18.4%
reporting), playing with personal stuff (9.8%), chatting or
joking (7%), sleeping or looking out of the window (4.9%),
and reading unrelated books (2.9%). In comparing their
findings to studies conducted in Western countries, the
researchers noted that nonattention and talking out of turn
also are commonly reported in Western countries. However,
they also noted that teachers in Western countries typically
viewed behavior problems in general to be a much greater
concern. For example, whereas 65.6% of Chinese teachers
in their study (72% in high schools) viewed classroom
management as not a major concern, the researchers noted
that other studies in Western countries have reported the
opposite to be true. That is, those studies (e.g., Little, 2005;
Wheldall & Merrett, 1988) reported that a high percentage
of teachers in Western countries, about 55%– 65%, viewed
classroom management as a major concern. A likely reason
why behavior problems are less of concern among Chinese
teachers is that they are uncommon in their schools,
particularly behaviors that harm others, such as fighting,
bullying, and stealing.
Of the few studies that have directly examined
differences in conduct problems between schools in China
and the United States, results have been mixed. In a study of
7th and 8th graders, Chen, Greenberger, Lester, Dong, and
Gao (1998) found no significant differences between
Chinese and American schools in students’ self-reported
misconduct and antisocial behavior. Likewise, in a study of
students of ages 6 – 13, Weine, Phillips, and Achenbach
(1995) found no differences in teachers’ reports of students’
conduct problems. In contrast to those two studies, in a
study of 11th graders, Greenberger, Chen, Beam, Whang,
and Dong (2000) found that compared to their Chinese
counterparts, American students reported greater physical
aggression and school misconduct (including cheating). For
example, 52% of the American students, compared to 11%
of Chinese students, reported that they had “hit or threatened
to hit someone.” Smaller differences were found for
cheating (i.e., copying homework), with 94% of American
and 70% of Chinese students reporting cheating. Differ-
ences between China and the United States in conduct
problems also were reported by Jessor et al. (2003) in their
study of students in grades 7 – 9. They found that scores on
self-reported delinquent behavior (including fighting and
stealing) were significantly higher among American
students.
A possible reason for the inconsistent findings in
differences in conduct problems between China and the
United States is that such differences across studies are a
function of the age or grade level of students. That is, in the
two studies that reported no differences in conduct problems
(Chen et al., 1998; Weine et al., 1995), all students were
below the 9th grade, but in the two studies that reported
significant differences (Greenberger et al., 2000; Jessor
et al., 2003) all students were above the 7th grade. Thus, it
appears that differences in conduct problems are not found
in elementary school but in high school. Differences in
middle school are less clear; whereas Chen et al. (1998)
RELATIONSHIPS AND CONDUCT PROBLEMS 249
Downloaded by [164.104.104.195] at 10:45 15 December 2014

reported no differences in grades 7 – 8, Jessor et al. reported
greater conduct problems in American than Chinese schools
for grades 7 – 9.
In the current study we examined differences in conduct
problems between China and the United States across
elementary, middle, and high schools. Consistent with the
findings above, we predicted that differences in conduct
problems, as reported by both teachers and students, would not
be found in elementary school—in both countries, few
conduct problems would be reported. However, also
consistent with previous research, at the high school level
we predicted greater conduct problems in the United States.
With respect to middle school, we predicted that teachers and
students in both countries would report greater conduct
problems than in elementary school, which would be
consistent with research showing increased conduct problems
in early adolescence (Furlong, Morrison, & Jimerson, 2004).
However, we also predicted that conduct problems in middle
school would be greater in the United States than China.
Predicting greater conduct problems among American
students in middle school is consistent with the findings of
Jessor et al. (2003) rather than Chen et al. (1998).
Finally, although we predicted that teachers and students
in the United States and China would report a similar pattern
of greater conduct problems in middle school and high
school than in elementary school, we also predicted that
across grade levels, students in both countries would report
more conduct problems than would teachers. This is
consistent with findings of previous studies, with research-
ers finding that students are more likely than teachers to
observe and report low incidence yet serious conduct
problems, such as fighting, bullying, stealing, and cheating
(Booren et al., 2011; Skiba et al., 2006).
In sum, guided by previous research showing more
positive perceptions of teacher-student and student-student
relationships among students in China than the United States,
we predicted that perceptions of those relationships would be
more favorable among Chinese teachers than American
teachers, with the greatest differences between countries
being in middle school and the smallest in elementary school.
We also examined differences in conduct problems between
the two countries. Consistent with predicting more positive
relationships among teachers and students in China, we
predicted that teachers and students in China, compared to
teachers and students in the United States, would report fewer
conduct problems, but not in elementary school.
METHOD
Participants
Students were drawn from a larger study (Yang et al., 2013)
of 86 schools (61elementary, 15 middle, and 10 high school)
throughout the state of Delaware in the United States, and
22 schools (10 elementary, 8 middle, and 8 high schools) in
the city of Foshan, Guangdong Province, China.
1
Although
Foshan is a city with a population of 5.68 million, it includes
many schools that would likely be considered suburban by
American standards. The city’s economic level is the 11th
highest among cities in China. Schools volunteered to
participate upon invitation from either the Delaware or
Foshan departments of education.
The same American and Chinese students included in the
2013 study were included here in order to compare the
perceptions of teachers with those of students. Of the 107
American and Chinese schools in the 2013 study of students’
perceptions of school climate, 30 were included in the current
study: 5 elementary schools, 5 middle schools, and 5 high
schools in each country. Five schools at each grade level were
selected because that was the highest numberof schools across
countries and grade levels for which at least 10% of the student
population and 50% of the teacher population in each school
completed the surveys. For comparative purposes, we desired
an equal number of schools across grade levels and countries.
Among those American schools with greater than 10% of the
students and 50% of the teachers completing the surveys, we
chose those schools with the greatest percentages in both
categories. Of the 15 schools in the United States sample, the
percentage of teachers completing the surveys ranged from 43
to 98 with a median of 70, and the percentage of students
completing the surveys ranged from 11 to 59, with a median of
23.5. In each school in the United States, all teachers were
administered the survey; however, only 200 students were
sampled. Of those 200 students in each school, the response
rate for completion of the surveys ranged from 64% to 96%,
with a median of 81%.
It was not possible to determine the percentage of
Chinese students and teachers completing the surveys
because enrollment data were not collected, including the
number of students and teachers in each school in China.
However, as reported in the study by Yang et al. (2013),
a total of 4,800 student surveys were administered in 22
Chinese schools (15 of which were included in the current
study), and 4,542 (95%) were completed. A total of 490
teacher surveys also were administered in the same 22
schools, of which 448 (91%) were completed.
The study included a total of 540 teachers and 2,192
students in the United States and 345 teachers and 3,253
students in China, in grades 3– 5, 7–8, and 10–12. The racial/
ethnicity and gender composition of students by grade level
1. The purpose of the previous study (Bear et al., 2011) was to validate
the Delaware School Climate Survey-Student with Chinese students and
compare the scores of American and Chinese students on its four factors
(Teacher Student Relationships, Student-Student Relationship, Fairness of
Rules, and Liking of School). Teachers were not included in that published
study, although data on their perceptions of teacher-student relationships,
student-student relationships, and conduct problems were collected in most
of the same schools. Likewise, differences in student conduct problems
between countries were not investigated.
250 BEAR ET AL.
Downloaded by [164.104.104.195] at 10:45 15 December 2014

are shown in Table 1. Due to U.S. teachers’ concerns about
potentially identifying teachers based on gender and race/
ethnicity, this demographic information was not collected in
the United States. Likewise, race/ethnicity information was
not collected in China because the Chinese researchers of the
study insisted that 99%– 100% of teachers and students in the
Chinese sample were of Chinese decent. In the United States,
elementary schools included grades 3–5, middle schools
included grades 6–8, and high schools included grades 9– 12.
In China, elementary schools included grades 3– 6, middle
schools included grades 7– 9, and high schools included
grades 10– 12. To include students and teachers of the same
grades, in both countries those in grades 6 and 9 were not
included in the analyses of group differences.
Instruments
The teacher and student versions of the measures of teacher-
student relationships, student-student relationships, and
conduct problems are described below. For each of these
measures, a 4-item Likert scale was used, with 1 ¼Strongly
Disagree,2¼Disagree,3¼Agree,and4¼Strongly Agree.
The total score for each scale consisted of the sum of scores
across the respective scale’s items divided by the number of
items for the scale. Thus, a score of 3.0 reflects that, on
average, respondents agreed to the items on the scale. All
items on the Chinese versions of both surveys were first
translated from English into Chinese and then back-translated
into English by a different translator.
Students’ perceptions of teacher-student
relationships, student-student relationships,
and conduct problems
Students’ perceptions of relationships were measured using
items from the student-student relationships and teacher-
student relationships subscales of the Modified Delaware
School Climate Survey – Student (MDSCS-S; Yang et al.,
2013). In the current study, the teacher-student relationships
subscale consisted of four items on the MDSCS-S that
measure students’ perceptions of the quality of adults’
interactions with students in the school: “Teachers care
about their students,” “Teachers listen to you when you have
a problem,” “Adults in this school treat students fairly,” and
“Adults who work in this school care about the students.”
Although the original MDSCS-S consists of six items, we
deleted two items from our analyses because those items do
not appear on the teacher version of the survey (i.e., “I like
my teachers” and “Teachers let you know when you’re
doing a good job.”).
The student-student relations subscale consists of four
items that measure students’ perceptions of the quality of
interactions among students: “Students get along with one
another.” “Students are friendly toward most other
students.” “Students really care about each other.”
“Students treat each other with respect.” In previous studies
of students’ perceptions of school climate in the United
States (Bear, Gaskins, Blank, & Chen, 2011) and in both the
United States and China (Yang et al., 2013) confirmatory
factor analysis (CFA) supported the integrity and reliability
of the teacher-student and student-student subscales,
including across country, gender, race/ethnicity, and grade
level (elementary, middle, and high school). The MDSCS-S
consists of two additional factors, Liking of School (4 items)
and Fairness of School rules (3 items), but those factors
were excluded from the analyses because they were not the
focus of the current study. Moreover, items on the Liking of
School factor are not the same on the teacher and student
versions, precluding meaningful comparisons between
teachers and students (furthermore, the internal consistency
coefficient for the Chinese elementary students was only
.55).
TABLE 1
Demographic Information
American sample Chinese sample
Elementary Middle High Elementary Middle High
Students
Total 770 734 688 886 984 1,383
Gender
Boys 405 366 322 471 446 651
Girls 365 368 366 415 538 732
Race/ethnicity
Caucasian 393 (51.0%) 306 (41.7%) 392 (57.0%)
African American 185 (24.0%) 301 (41.0%) 173 (25.1%)
Hispanic 127 (16.5%) 65 (8.9%) 61 (8.9%)
Asian 22 (2.9%) 15 (2.0%) 30 (4.4%)
Other 43 (5.6%) 47 (6.4%) 32 (4.7%)
Teachers 157 162 221 108 118 119
RELATIONSHIPS AND CONDUCT PROBLEMS 251
Downloaded by [164.104.104.195] at 10:45 15 December 2014

In assessing students’ and teachers’ perceptions of
conduct problems in their school, we used four items that
were originally intended to comprise a school climate factor
on the DSCS-S (Bear et al., 2011).
2
Those four items were:
“Fights are a problem in this school.” “Students threaten and
bully others in this school.” “Stealing is a problem in this
school.” “Students cheating is a problem in this school.” In
examining the factor structure of the DSCS-S, Bear et al.
(2011) found that those four items constituted a factor distinct
from school climate. Although the items emerged as a separate
factor, scores on that factor correlated very weakly with most
other factors (2.02 with Teacher-Student Relations, 2.02
with Fairness of Rules, 2.10 with Liking of School, and 2.24
with Student-Student Relations). Moreover, several items had
loadings below .30 on the general factor. Together, results
indicated that the Conduct Problems factor did not measure the
same construct (i.e., school climate) as measured by the other
factors, and thus the facto r was deleted from the DSCS-S in that
study. Nevertheless, in support of the conduct problem scale’s
criterion-related validity, scores among elementary schools
and middle/high schools (aggregated at the school level) were
found to correlate .50 and .51, respectively, with suspension/
expulsion rates, 2.72 and 2.37, respectively, with English
Language Arts scores on state achievement tests, and 2.68 and
2.42, respectively, with math scores on the same tests. Thus,
although the factor was deleted in that study, which focused
specifically on school climate, it was included in the present
study as a separate measure of students’ and teachers’
perceptions of conduct problems in their school.
Because the factorial integrity and reliability of the
conduct problem factor had not been examined previously
with students in China, and had not been examined in either
country when used in combination with teacher-student
relationships and student-student relationship subscales, we
used CFA to confirm the structure of items on the three scales.
Mplus software (Muthe
´n & Muthe
´n, 1998– 2011) was used
for this purpose, including the full information maximum
likelihood estimator procedure for estimating parameters
with incomplete data. The following criteria were employed
to determine a good fit: comparative fit index (CFI) $.95, a
root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) #.06,
and the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR)
#.08. Fit statistics for the American student sample
were: x
2
¼284.34 (df ¼39), p,.001; CFI ¼.968,
RMSEA ¼.037, RMR ¼.043. For the Chinese sample
they were: x
2
¼247.37 (df ¼51), p,.001; CFI ¼.974,
RMSEA ¼.033, RMR ¼.028. Standardized loadings on the
factors ranged from .45 to .81 for American student sample
and from .56 to .75 for the Chinese student sample, with all
coefficients being statistically significa nt ( p,.001). In the
American sample, Teacher-Student Relationships correlated
.62 with Student-Student Relationships and 2.30 with
Conduct Problems, whereas Student-Student Relationships
correlated 2.64 with Conduct Problems. In the Chinese
sample, Teacher-Student Relationships correlated .77 with
Student-Student Relationships and 2.49 with Conduct
Problems, whereas Student-Student Relationships correlated
2.47 with Conduct Problems. In the American sample,
internal consistency coefficients were .85 for Teacher-
Student Relationships, .82 for Student-Student Relation-
ships, and .66 for Conduct Problems. In the Chinese sample,
they were .76, .74, and .74, respectively.
Teachers’ perceptions of teacher-student
relationships, student-student relationships,
and conduct problems
Teachers’ perceptions of relationships were measured using
items from the student-student relationships and teacher-
student relationships subscales of the Delaware School
Climate Survey – Teacher surveys (DSCS-T; Bear, Yang,
Gaskins, & Pell, 2014). To allow for comparisons in
responses between students and teachers, we used only
those items on the DSCS-T that were the same as those on
the MDSCS-S (as listed earlier). In a previous study of
teachers’ perceptions of school climate in the United States
(Bear et al., 2014), CFA supported the integrity and
reliability of the two subscales. However, because the
factorial integrity and reliability of the conduct problem
factor had not been examined previously with teachers in
either the United States or China and the teacher-student and
student-student relationships factors had not been estab-
lished with Chinese teachers, CFA was conducted for the
current study to test if the three factors fit the teacher survey
for both Chinese and American teachers. Using the same
criteria reported previously, CFA results supported an
adequate fit for the three-factor model. Fit indices for
American teachers were: x
2
¼119.75 (df ¼51), p,.001;
CFI ¼.973, RMSEA ¼.031, RMR ¼.048. For Chinese
teachers the fit indices were: x
2
¼86.21 (df ¼51),
p,.001; CFI ¼.950, RMSEA ¼.044, RMR ¼.047.
Standardized loadings on the factors ranged from .61 to
84 for the American teacher sample and from .53 to .76 for
the Chinese teacher sample, with all coefficients being
statistically significant ( p,.001). Internal consistency
coefficients were .80 for Teacher-Student Relationships, .86
for Student-Student Relationships, and .81 for Conduct
Problems in the American teacher sample, and .71, .68, and
.74, respectively, in the Chinese teacher sample.
Survey Procedures
Teachers were given procedures to administer the survey to
students, which included assuring students of confidentiality
(neither names nor identification numbers were used).
Likewise, to protect teachers from identification, no method
2. A fifth item, “Drugs are a problem in this school,” also was included
in the earlier study, but was not included in this study because researchers in
China insisted that drugs were not a problem in Chinese schools.
252 BEAR ET AL.
Downloaded by [164.104.104.195] at 10:45 15 December 2014

was used to identify classrooms or teachers, including
collection of data on race/ethnicity (this was not an issue in
China, however, as all teachers were Chinese). All surveys
were given between late February and late April, with the
teacher and student versions administered at the same point
in time in each school. The study was approved by human
subjects research committees of the American and Chinese
universities conducting the research.
RESULTS
A 2 (country) £2 (respondent) £3 (grade level) multi-
variate analysis of variance (MANOVA), using Pillai’s
criterion, revealed that all main effects and two-way
interactions were statistically significant (all six ps,.001).
Those effects were qualified by a statistically significant
three-way multivariate interaction, which showed that the
12 groups were affected by variation in scores on the
surveys (Pillai’s Trace ¼.01, F¼10.53, df [6: 12,6340],
p¼.001). Given the three-way interaction, a separate
analysis of variance (ANOVA) was completed for each of
the three dependent variables, with the family-wise error
rate apportioned within each ANOVA using Tukey’s
adjustment. Results of those comparisons are summarized
below. Means and standard deviations for student-student
relationships, student-teacher relationships, and conduct
problems are presented in Table 2, and according to
descending order for each variable.
Student-Student Relationships
As shown in Table 2 (first column), students and teachers in
China, in general, viewed student-student relationships
more favorably than students and teachers in the United
States. The eta squared for the model was .30, which is a
large effect size (Cohen, 1988). Across grade levels,
Chinese students had significantly more favorable percep-
tions than American students and Chinese teachers had
significantly more favorable perceptions than American
teachers. The only exception was that there were no
significant differences between Chinese and American
teachers in elementary school—both groups held very
favorable perceptions. Within the U.S. sample, and
irrespective of respondent, perceptions were significantly
higher in elementary than middle school and high school,
and significantly lower in middle school than high school.
At each grade level, American teachers held significantly
more favorable perceptions of student-student relationships
than did students. The same pattern did not emerge in the
Chinese sample, and differences between grade levels and
respondents tended to be much smaller than in the U.S.
sample. Among Chinese students, scores in elementary
school were significantly higher than those in middle and
high school but there were no significant differences in
scores between middle and high school. Among Chinese
teachers, scores in elementary school did not differ
significantly from those in middle and high school but
scores were significantly higher in high school than middle
school.
Teacher-Student Relationships
The eta squared for the model comparing differences in
teacher-student relationships was .32, which is a large effect
size. As shown in the second column of Table 2, the most
striking finding was that among the 12 contrasting groups,
the 4 with the least favorable perceptions were middle and
high school students, with the U.S. students scoring
significantly lower than all other 10 groups and holding
TABLE 2
Rank Orderings and Distributional Statistics for Student-Student Relationships, Teacher-Student Relationships, and Conduct Problems
Student-student relationships Teacher-student relationships Conduct problems
Group Mean & SD Group Mean & SD Group Mean & SD
China, Student, ES (n¼886) 3.22 (.54) U.S., Teacher, ES 3.52 (.38) U.S., Student, MS 2.77 (.61)
China, Teacher, HS (n¼119) 3.04 (.29) China, Student, ES 3.41 (.46) U.S., Student, HS 2.62 (.58)
China, Student, HS (n¼1383) 3.03 (.48) U.S., Student, ES 3.35 (.58) U.S., Teacher, MS 2.59 (.59)
China, Teacher, ES (n¼108) 3.03 (.29) U.S., Teacher, MS 3.29 (.44) U.S., Teacher, HS 2.54 (.49)
China, Student, MS (n¼984) 3.02 (.53) U.S., Teacher, HS 3.23 (.40) China, Student, MS 2.49 (.62)
U.S., Teacher, ES (n¼157) 2.98 (.54) China, Teacher, HS 3.20 (.37) U.S., Student, ES 2.41 (.82)
China, Teacher, MS (n¼118) 2.94 (.32) China, Teacher, ES 3.19 (.42) China, Student, HS 2.35 (.57)
U.S., Student, ES (n ¼770) 2.71 (.72) China, Teacher, MS 3.17 (.31) China, Teacher, MS 2.18 (.49)
U.S., Teacher, HS (n¼221) 2.66 (.47) China, Student, MS 3.05 (.50) China, Teacher, HS 1.98 (.48)
U.S., Teacher, MS (n¼162) 2.50 (.51) China, Student, HS 2.96 (.50) U.S., Teacher, ES 1.89 (.61)
U.S., Student, HS (n¼688) 2.30 (.57) U.S., Student, MS 2.65 (.66) China, Student, ES 1.85 (.67)
U.S., Student, MS (n¼734) 2.16 (.60) U.S., Student, HS 2.59 (.56) China, Teacher, ES 1.85 (.44)
Note: For each variable, mean scores are listed in rank order; SD ¼Standard Deviation (in parentheses); ES ¼Elementary School, MS ¼Middle School,
HS ¼High School. nis the same for each respective group across the 3 variables.
RELATIONSHIPS AND CONDUCT PROBLEMS 253
Downloaded by [164.104.104.195] at 10:45 15 December 2014

markedly unfavorable perceptions. In elementary school,
students’ perceptions were quite favorable and equally so
across countries, but American teachers had significantly
more favorable perceptions than Chinese teachers.
In middle and high school, Chinese students scored
significantly higher than American students, but there
were no significant differences between American and
Chinese teachers—teachers in both countries held favorable
perceptions.
Within countries, teachers at each grade level tended to
view teacher-student relationships more favorably than did
students. The one exception was in elementary school where
Chinese teachers had significantly less favorable perceptions
than their students. Also within countries, teachers’ percep-
tions differed little between grade levels. Indeed, there were no
significant differences between grade levels in perceptions of
Chinese teachers. Likewise, American teachers had similar,
and favorable, perceptions between grade levels, with the
exception of American elementary school teachers having
significantly more favorable perceptions than middle school
and high school teachers.
Conduct Problems
Means and standard deviations for conduct problems are
presented in the third column of Table 2. The eta squared for
the model was .17, which is a large effect size. As predicted,
in middle and high school, and irrespective of respondent,
greater conduct problems were reported in the United States
than China. Indeed, of the 12 contrasting groups, the 4
highest scoring were American students and teachers in
middle and high school. In both countries, significantly
fewer conduct problems were reported in elementary than
middle and high school. Nevertheless, in elementary school
Chinese students reported significantly fewer conduct
problems than did American students. Significant differ-
ences were not found between American and Chinese
elementary teachers, however.
Within both countries, and irrespective of respondent,
significantly fewer conduct problems were reported in
elementary school than middle school. However, different
patterns emerged within each country with respect to other
grade level differences, with the differences being largely a
function of respondent. That is, American students reported
significantly more conduct problems in middle school than
high school, but American teachers reported similar degrees
of conduct problems at those two grade levels. Chinese
students reported significantly more conduct problems in
middle school than high school (and fewer conduct
problems in elementary than middle and high school).
Chinese teachers, however, reported significantly fewer
conduct problems in elementary than middle school, but no
fewer conduct problems in elementary school than in high
school.
DISCUSSION
There were two primary purposes of this study. First, we
examined if teacher-student and student-student relationships
are viewed more favorably by Chinese than American
teachers. Iffound, results would replicate two previous studies
showing more favorable perceptions among Chinese than
American students, and thus would provide further evidence
that more positive relationships—a key element of school
climate (Bear et al., 2011)—exist in Chinese schools. Second,
we examined if Chinese students exhibit fewer conduct
problems than American students, and if grade level
differences are similar across countries. With respect to the
first purpose of the study, we found that Chinese teachers in
both middle and high school have significantly more favorable
perceptions of student-student relationships than American
teachers. Those findings are consistent with other studies of
differences in student-student relationships reported by
students at the middle and high school levels (Jia et al.,
2009; Yang et al., 2013). We know of no previous studies that
examined such differences as reported by teachers. The
finding of more favorable student-student relationships, as
reported by teachers, also was found in the student sample, and
across all grade levels. However, results also indicate that
whereas Chinese students and teachers in middle school and
high school view student-student relationships more favorably
than do American students and teachers, the same is not found
in elementary school. That is, Chinese students in elementary
school in China view student-student relationships more
favorably than American students, but elementary teachers in
China view student-student relationships similarly to Amer-
ican teachers (and favorably).
In contrast to differences in student-student relationships,
the findings indicate that American and Chinese teachers in
middle and high school differ little in perceptions of
teacher-student relationships. In both countries teacher-
student relationships are viewed positively, as was revealed
in all scores being above 3.00 on the 4-point scale.
In elementary schools, however, results indicate that
American teachers have significantly more favorable
perceptions than Chinese teachers (3.52 versus 3.19).
In examining perceptions of relationships within
countries, we found that American teachers and students
perceive both student-student and teacher-student relation-
ships more favorably in elementary school than in middle
and high school, and least favorably in middle school. The
same pattern is not found in Chinese schools: In Chinese
schools, differences between grade levels and between
students and teachers are much smaller and not always in
the same direction. For student-student relationships, the
perceptions of Chinese elementary school teachers do not
differ significantly from those of middle and high school
teachers. Teachers’ perceptions of student-student relation-
ships are more favorable in high school than middle school;
however, this is not true for teacher-student relationships.
254 BEAR ET AL.
Downloaded by [164.104.104.195] at 10:45 15 December 2014

For teacher-student relationships, Chinese teachers’ percep-
tions are similar (and favorable) across grade levels. This
was not found for Chinese students: We found that whereas
Chinese students view teacher-student relationships more
favorably in elementary school than in middle and high
school, students’ perceptions of teacher-student relation-
ships are similar in middle and high school.
Consistent with previous research (Booren et al., 2011;
Skiba et al., 2006), we predicted that within both countries
the perceptions of teachers would be more favorable than
those among students. Our results indicate that in each grade
level, American teachers hold more favorable perceptions of
both student-student and teacher-student relationships than
their students. In China, this appears to be true only in high
school and only for teacher-student relationships, and the
opposite is found in elementary schools (i.e., students have
more favorable perceptions). For middle school in China,
teachers and students share similar perceptions of student-
student and teacher-student relationships.
Regarding the second focus of the study—differences in
conduct problems between the two countries—in general, a
greater number of conduct problems exist in Chinese than
American schools, as reported by both Chinese students and
teachers. This was found consistently at the middle and high
school levels. However, at the elementary school level we
found that American students, but not teachers, perceive
greater conduct problems than their Chinese counterparts.
We also found that within both countries, students and
teachers alike perceive greater conduct problems in middle
school than elementary school. Students also perceive
greater conduct problems in middle school than high school.
However, whereas American teachers report a similar
degree of conduct problems in middle school and high
school (and higher than in elementary school), Chinese
teachers report significantly fewer conduct problems in high
school than middle school (with conduct problems in
elementary and high school not differing significantly).
Despite these differences, a general pattern of students’
perceptions of increasing conduct problems from elementary
school to secondary school is found in both countries, and
this pattern likely mirrors a general decrease in students’
perceptions of the quality of relationships. Such a decline in
the quality of relationships, and its link to conduct problems,
has been reported or discussed often in the school climate
literature (e.g., Reddy, Rhodes, & Mulhall, 2003; Roeser,
Eccles, & Sameoff, 2000; Wang & Dishion, 2012; Way,
Reddy, & Rhodes, 2007). For example, in a recent
longitudinal study of American students in grades 6 –8,
Wang and Dishion (2012) found that students’ perceptions of
teacher support, peer support, and behavior management
decline through the middle school years, and those declines
are associated with increases in students’ behavior problems.
Their findings, and those of the current study, are consistent
with theory and research on a similar decline in student
motivation and academic expectation (Eccles et al., 1993).
In sum, results are most consistent in indicating that
American teachers and students in middle school and high
school have the least favorable perceptions of student-
student and teacher-student relationships and the greatest
conduct problems. This is true when perceptions of
American teachers and students in middle school and high
school are compared to their Chinese counterparts, as well
as when they are compared to the perceptions of American
teachers and student in elementary school. Although
perceptions of teachers are more favorable than those of
their students, American middle and high school teachers
tend to corroborate their students’ unfavorable perceptions
of student-student relationships and conduct problems.
However, whereas American teachers perceive student-
student relationships and conduct problems similarly to
their students (although not as poorly), they view teacher-
student relationships significantly more favorably than their
students and view them similarly to their Chinese
counterparts.
As noted previously in the introduction, and discussed
below, three general cultural factors are likely to account for
more favorable perceptions of relationships and fewer
conduct problems among Chinese than American students:
(a) Chinese students’ views of education and teachers; (b)
social harmony and behavior regulation; and (c) classroom
management and socialization.
How Chinese Students View Education, Teachers,
and Their Parents
High academic achievement and few behavior problems in
Chinese schools are often attributed to students’ internal-
ization of cultural norms that reflect Confucian values of
respect of parents and honor to family (Hui, Sun, Chow, &
Chu, 2011; Jia et al., 2009; Teddlie & Liu, 2008). In Chinese
culture, filial piety, which incorporates respect of parents
and honor to the family, is widely viewed as the foremost
traditional value that serves to regulate student behavior, as
well as to promote another important Confucian value, self-
perfection (Zhou et al., 2012). At home, and throughout
Chinese society, it is expected that children will conform to
and comply with their parents’ expectations. To do
otherwise would show lack of respect and failure to honor
the family as well as lack of self-perfection. Chinese parents
emphasize that compliance and obedience are important in
learning self-discipline and achieving self-perfection, but
also are necessary for a positive parent-child relationship
(Yau, Smetana, & Metzger, 2009). As Tseng Tzu, a famous
Chinese ancient philosopher, said: “I question myself three
times a day to check my behavior.” This traditional idea
encourages Chinese people to regulate their daily behavior.
As is true in American society, over the past century
there have been marked changes in Chinese society.
However, many traditional norms and values have changed
little, and indeed increased emphasis on academic
RELATIONSHIPS AND CONDUCT PROBLEMS 255
Downloaded by [164.104.104.195] at 10:45 15 December 2014

excellence in Chinese culture has been seen in recent years
in light of China’s one-child policy and increased
recognition that economic prosperity depends on a highly
educated population (Gao, 2008). As reflected in a Chinese
proverb, “The worth of other pursuits is small, the study of
books excels them all,” it is expected that Chinese students
will pursue academic excellence.
The concept of filial piety applies not only to parents and
the home but also to teachers and the school (Hui et al.,
2011). This is reflected in the old Chinese idiom “once my
teacher, forever my parents.” Students are expected to
demonstrate the same respect toward teachers as they do
toward their parents, which includes showing compliance
and obedience. In turn, assuming the role of parents,
teachers are expected to provide their students with the
caring, support, and structure needed to promote learning,
development, and self-perfection (Jia et al., 2009; Ning,
Lam, & Chan, 2012). Teachers assume responsibilities of
parents, as seen in teachers often being described as
“silkworms” who tirelessly spin silk thread till death,
“candles” who selflessly burn themselves to light others, and
“soul engineers” who carefully cultivate the mental as well
as physical well-being of students (Gao, 2008). In viewing
teachers as similar to parents, and as fulfilling similar roles
in promoting important Chinese values in society,
traditionally teachers have been highly respected not only
among students in the classroom but throughout Chinese
society (Gao, 2008). In 1985 the Chinese government chose
September 10 as “Teachers’ Day” to demonstrate the
importance of teachers, and since then that day has been
celebrated throughout China every year. There are signs,
however, that such reverence of teachers may be declining
as one-child only Chinese parents become more inclined to
demand even more effective schools and to thus question
the educational system (Gao, 2008).
Related to respect of teachers, gratitude, which is a
characteristic of collectivist cultures, is likely to play a role
in teacher-student relationships. That is, Chinese students
also are more likely than students in less collectivistic
cultures to express greater gratitude, or indebtedness and
obligation to reciprocate with others (Cohen, 2006).
A Chinese proverb states that“a drop of water shall be
returned with a burst of spring.” When Chinese teachers
demonstrate commitment and excellence in teaching,
students are expected to reciprocate with excellence in
achievement and behavior. Several recent studies have
shown that high gratitude among Chinese students is related
positively to academic achievement and negatively to
internalizing and externalizing behavior problems (Dai,
Zhang, Li, Yu, & Wen, 2010; Li, Zhang, Li, Li, & Ye,
2012). No studies, however, have examined differences in
gratitude between Chinese and American students.
Greater respect of and gratitude toward teachers in
Chinese culture, especially when combined with an
emphasis on academic excellence, is likely to lead to
students’ greater bonding with teachers and with school in
general. As noted previously, ample research has shown a
strong relation between school connectedness, or bonding,
and student behavior. Our findings suggest that in both
China and the United States these effects are apparent in
elementary school, but thereafter they are found more in
Chinese than American schools. That is, whereas highly
favorable teacher-student relationships and few conduct
problems exist in elementary school in both countries,
marked differences between countries on both variables are
found in middle school and high school. In a more direct test
of the relationship between these two variables, Jang (2002)
compared non-Asian American students and Chinese
American students. He found that Chinese American
students felt more bonded, or attached, with their schools.
Commitment to education and respect of teachers accounted
the greatest for less deviant school behavior among Chinese
American students.
Social Harmony and How Chinese Students View
and Regulate Their Own Behavior and That
of the Peer Group
In addition to filial piety and self-perfection, social harmony
is highly valued in traditional and contemporary Chinese
culture (Chen & French, 2008; Chen, Huang, Chang, Wang,
& Li, 2010). These three values are highly interrelated.
Respect of adults and self-perfection, which are reflected in
students striving for academic excellence and in self-
regulation of behavior, will promote social harmony, but so
too does social harmony foster respect of teachers and self-
perception. This is supported by research showing fewer
behavior problems and greater academic achievement in
classrooms with positive teacher-student relationships
(Hughes, 2013; Sabol & Pianta, 2012) and in research
showing that students are inclined to internalize the values
of teachers that they highly respect (Wentzel, 1997,2006;
Zhou et al., 2012).
In recognizing social harmony as a cultural value that
greatly influences teacher-student relationships, Jia and
colleagues (2009) noted that Chinese teachers and students
spend more time together than American teachers and
students, which they argued promotes greater connected-
ness. Chinese students often have the same teacher for more
than one year. Referred to as “looping,” this practice has
been shown to enhance relationships and academic
achievement (Rodriguez & Arenz, 2007). Other practices
in Chinese schools that likely enhance relationships and
school connectedness, or at least provide greater opportu-
nities for such, are longer school days, after-school tutoring,
and greater time students spend studying together (Tian,
Liu, Huang, & Huebner, 2012; Jester et al., 2003). Instead of
students changing classes in middle school and high school,
teachers typically change classes, which keeps cohorts more
intact, as well as reduces classroom transitions—a context
256 BEAR ET AL.
Downloaded by [164.104.104.195] at 10:45 15 December 2014

in which behavior problems often occur (Zumbrunn, Doll,
Dooley, LeClair, & Wimmer, 2013).
For sake of social harmony, as well as out of respect of
their teachers, Chinese students are expected to regulate not
only their own behavior, but also that of their peers (Chen &
French, 2008; Chen et al., 2010). Peer norms against
aggression, which research has shown to be critical in
preventing bullying and aggression (Dishion, Piehler, &
Myers, 2008; Espelage, Holt, & VanAcker, 2003), are
common in Chinese schools (Chen, Kaspar, Zhang, Wang,
& Zheng, 2004). Students who disrupt learning, harm
others, or otherwise compromise social harmony in the
classroom or school are likely to experience negative, and
public, evaluations from peers and teachers, as well as peer
rejection (Chang, 2004; Chen et al., 2010). Research
indicates that this occurs much more often in Chinese than
American schools (Chen, 2010). In addition to preventing
behavior problems, the norm of social harmony promotes
academic motivation and achievement, positive attitudes
toward school, and prosocial behavior (Chuang-Hall &
Chen, 2010; Ran, 2001). Findings of the current study
suggest that the norm of social harmony may serve to help
prevent conduct problems throughout the school years,
stifling (albeit not eliminating) the tendency for conduct
problems to increase greatly during adolescence.
How Teachers Manage Their Classrooms and Student
Behavior, and Otherwise Promote the Socialization
of Traditional Chinese Cultural Values
Social support and structure, referred to as responsiveness
and demandingness in the parenting literature, are two critical
dimensions of effective classroom management and school
discipline (Gregory et al., 2010), school climate (Bear et al.,
2011), and parenting (Baumrind, 2013). Social support is
seen in close teacher-student relationships and student-
student relationships, whereas structure is seen primarily in
adults using teacher-centered practices that curtail misbeha-
vior and promote academic engagement and prosocial
behavior. Research indicates that Chinese teachers are high
on both of these dimensions. As suggested in the present
findings, and discussed earlier, Chinese teachers build and
maintain positive relationships to help prevent behavior
problems. Other studies have shown Chinese teachers to be
more highly structured and efficient than American teachers,
relying more upon whole-group instruction than small-group
or individualized instruction and making greater use of
proactive, rather than reactive, corrective techniques (Lan
et al., 2009; Teddlie & Liu, 2008). Also related to increased
structure, Chinese teachers are expected to directly teach and
promote Chinese values via a national moral education
curriculum designed not only to promote those values, but
also to prevent behavior problems and enhance student
motivation (Camicia & Zhu, 2011; Li, Taylor, & Yang, 2004).
Finally, as discussed above, teachers expect students
themselves to play an active role in managing their behavior
and that of their peers. This extends to care of their physical
environment, as seen in Chinese students commonly
assuming responsibilities that are assigned to adult custodians
and cafeteria workers in American schools, such as cleaning
classrooms and serving meals. Whether or not the above
cultural differences are found more so in middle school and
high school than in elementary school, and largely account
for grade-level differences found in the current study, remains
to be determined.
Limitations
Limitations of this study should be noted. Firstly, data were
from schools in only one state in the United States and one
city in China; thus, generalization of findings to other
schools is limited. Secondly, although both student and
teacher informants were included (and we know of no other
studies of school climate that have done the same), data
were based on self-reports. There are limitations to self-
reports, and primary among them is informant bias,
particularly social desirability bias. It is unknown if social
desirability bias is more prevalent among Chinese than
American students, which might be expected in light of
Chinese culture being more collectivistic (and thus students
and teachers desiring to shed a favorable light on their
school) and its greater respect and deference to authority
(and thus students responding as they expect their
teacher would desire, and teachers responding as adminis-
trators would desire). However, the fact that Chinese
elementary school Chinese teachers reported less favorable
perceptions (although still highly favorable) than American
teachers runs counter to this possible limitation. Moreover,
there is a lack of empirical objective evidence to counter the
general finding that teacher-student relationships and
student-student relationships are more favorable and
conduct problems less prevalent in China than in the
United States. Clearly, direct observational data are needed
in this area.
Thirdly, each measure consisted of a small number of
items, which restricts reliability and the extent to which
teacher-student relationships, student-student relationships,
and conduct problems are measured sufficiently. Relatedly,
items on those three scales were originally developed and
standardized on American students and based on American
research and theory in the respective areas measured.
As such, the measures may not have included aspects of
relationships and types of conduct problems more specific to
the Chinese culture. As discussed by Yang et al. (2013),
however, this limitation is not unique to the measures in the
current study, as the use of American instruments is common
in studies of school climate and student behavior in China
whether conducted by Western or Chinese researchers.
Fourthly, the study did not entail multilevel analyses of
data, but only analyses at the individual level and not the
RELATIONSHIPS AND CONDUCT PROBLEMS 257
Downloaded by [164.104.104.195] at 10:45 15 December 2014

classroom and school levels. Obtaining classroom-level
data is problematic in middle and high schools, where
students change classes and teachers (especially in the
United States). Moreover, greater issues of confidentiality
arise in collecting classroom-level data (e.g., identifying
teachers); although this can be avoided, participation rates
often suffer. School-level effects were not included in the
analyses given that there were only five schools at each
grade level in each country. Nevertheless, it is important to
note that effects of teacher-student relationships, student-
student relationships, and conduct problems occur not only
at the individual level but also at the classroom and school
levels, although the individual-level effects are consistently
found to be the greatest (Bierman et al., 2007; Koth,
Bradshaw, & Leaf, 2008).
A final limitation, which is related to the preceding
limitation, is that we did not examine different cultures
between schools in the same country or within classrooms.
This is perhaps more relevant to American schools than
Chinese schools, given the greater racial/ethnic and
socioeconomic diversity in American schools, including
those in the current study. Research shows significant
differences in school climate, including behavior problems,
as a function of the racial and ethnic composition and
average socioeconomic status of a school and its community
(Gottfredson, Gottfredson, Payne, & Gottfredson, 2005).
Thus, caution is warranted in generalizing the findings to
other American schools, and in concluding that results
reflect a singular and pervasive American culture.
CONCLUSION
As found in several previous studies of differences in
students’ perceptions of teacher-student and student-
student relationships between China and the United
States, results demonstrate that similar differences are
reported by teachers. In general, students and teachers,
but especially students, perceive relationships to be more
favorable in Chinese schools than in American schools.
They also report fewer conduct problems. Differences are
greatest after elementary school. Thus, it is increasingly
clear, based on multiple informants and measures, that
middle and high schools in China are more pleasant and
conducive to learning than those in the United States, at
least as perceived by students and teachers. It remains to
be determined whether or not differences in students’ and
teachers’ perceptions are supported by actual observed
differences in behavior, such as the frequency of positive
interactions and preventive and corrective classroom
management techniques, and especially in middle and
high school. Nevertheless, multiple cultural differences,
as discussed in this article, likely account for the
differences in school climate between Chinese and
American schools.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Parts of the data (student data only, and only for the variables of
teacher-student and student relationships) were published pre-
viously: Yang, C., Bear, G. G., Chen, F. F., Zhang, W., Blank,
J. C., & Huang, X. (2013). Students’ perceptions of school climate
in the U.S. and China. School Psychology Quarterly, 28, 7–24.
doi:10.1037/spq0000002.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Dr. George Bear is a professor of school psychology at the
University of Delaware. His research interests are in school climate
and discipline.
Chunyan Yang is a doctoral student of school psychology at the
University of Delaware, with research interest in school climate.
Dr. Joseph Glutting is a professor of school psychology at the
University of Delaware, with research interests in applied
psychometric theory and multivariate statistics.
Dr. Xishan Huang is an assistant professor in the School of
Psychology at South China Normal University, with research
interest in adolescent development and school psychology.
Dr. Xianyou He is a professor in the School of Psychology at South
China Normal University. His research interests concern factors
that contribute to the students’ learning and development.
Dr. Wei Zhang is a professor and director of the School of
Psychology at South China Normal University, with research
interest in adolescent development and school psychology.
Dandan Chen is a doctoral student of school psychology at the
University of Delaware, with a research interest in school climate.
REFERENCES
Arnett, J. J. (2008). The neglected 95%: Why American psychology needs
to become less American. American Psychologist,63, 602, doi:10.1037/
0003-066X.63.7.602
Battistich, V., & Hom, A. (1997). The relationship between students’ sense
of their school as a community and their involvement in problem
behaviors. American Journal of Public Health,87, 1997– 2001. doi:10.
2105/AJPH.87.12.1997
Baumrind, D. (2013). Authoritative parenting revisited: History and current
status. In R. E. Larzelere, A. S. Morris, & A. W. Harrist (Eds.),
Authoritative parenting: Synthesizing nurturance and discipline for
optimal child development (pp. 11– 34). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/13948-002
Bear, G. G., Gaskins, C., Blank, J., & Chen, F. F. (2011). Delaware school
climate Survey—Student: Its factor structure, concurrent validity, and
reliability. Journal of School Psychology,49, 157–174. doi:10.1016/j.
jsp.2011.01.001
Bear, G., Yang, C., Pell, M., & Gaskins, C. (2014). Validation of a brief
measure of teachers’ perceptions of school climate: Relations to student
achievement and suspensions. Learning Environments Research. E-pub
ahead of print. doi: 10.1007/s10984-014-9162-1
Bierman, K. L., Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., Foster, E. M., Greenberg, M. T.,
Lochman, J. E., ... Pinderhughes, E. E. (2007). Fast track randomized
controlled trail to prevent externalizing psychiatric disorders: Findings
from grades 3 to 9. Journal of the American Academy of Child
258 BEAR ET AL.
Downloaded by [164.104.104.195] at 10:45 15 December 2014

and Adolescent Psychiatry,46, 1250– 1262. doi:10.1097/chi.
0b013e31813e5d39
Booren, L. M., Handy, D. J., & Power, T. G. (2011). Examining perceptions
of school safety strategies, school climate, and violence. Youth Violence
and Juvenile Justice,9, 171– 187. doi:10.1177/1541204010374297
Brand, S., Felner, R., Shim, M., Seitsinger, A., & Dumas, T. (2003). Middle
school improvement and reform: Development and validation of a
school-level assessment of climate, cultural pluralism, and school safety.
Journal of Educational Psychology,95, 570. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.
3.570
Bru, E., Stephens, P., & Torsheim, T. (2002). Students’ perceptions of class
management and reports of their own misbehavior. Journal of School
Psychology,40, 287– 307. doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(02)00104-8
Camicia, S. P., & Zhu, J. (2011). Citizenship education under discourses
of nationalism, globalization, and cosmopolitanism: Illustrations from
China and the United States. Frontier in Education in China,6, 602–619.
doi:10.1007/s1156-011-0147-x
Chang, L.(2004). The role of classroom norms in contextualizingthe relations
of children’s social behaviors to peer acceptance. Developmental
Psychology,40, 691–702. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.40.5.691
Chen, X., & French, D. C. (2008). Children’s social competence in cultural
context. Annual Review of Psychology,59, 591–616. doi:10.1146/
annurev.psych.59.103006.093606
Chen, C., Greenberger, E., Lester, J., Dong, Q., & Guo, M. (1998). A cross-
cultural study of family and peer correlates of adolescent misconduct.
Developmental Psychology,34, 770–781. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.34.4.
770
Chen, X., Huang, X., Chang, L., Wang, L., & Li, D. (2010). Aggression,
social competence, and academic achievement in Chinese children:
A 5-year longitudinal study. Development and Psychopathology,22(3),
583– 592. doi:10.1017/S0954579410000295
Chen, X. Y., Kaspar, V., Zhang, Y., Wang, L., & Zheng, S. (2004). Peer
relationships among Chinese boys: A cross-cultural perspective.
In N. Way & J. Y. Chu (Eds.), Adolescent boys: Exploring diverse
cultures of boyhood. New York, NY: University Press.
Chung-Hall, J., & Chen, X. (2010). Aggressive and proscocial peer group
functioning: Effects on children’s social, school, and psychological
adjustment. Social Development,19, 659– 680. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-
9507.2009.00556.x
Cohen, A. B. (2006). On gratitude. Social Justice Research,19, 254– 276.
doi:10.1007/s11211-006-0005-9
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Croninger, R. G., & Lee, V. E. (2001). Social capital and dropping out of
high school: Benefits to at-risk students of teachers’ support and
guidance. Teachers College Record,103, 548– 581. doi:10.1111/0161-
4681.00127
Curby, T. W., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Ponitz, C. C. (2009). Teacher–
child interactions and children’s achievement trajectories across
kindergarten and first grade. Journal of Educational Psychology,101,
912, doi:10.1037/a0016647
Danielsen, A. G., Wiium, N., Wilhelmsen, B. U., & Wold, B. (2010).
Perceived support provided by teachers and classmates and students’
self-reported academic initiative. Journal of School Psychology,48,
247– 267. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2010.02.002
Ding, M., Li, Y., Li, X., & Kulm, G. (2008). Chinese teachers’ perceptions
of students’ classroom misbehaviour. Educational Psychology,28,
305– 324. doi:10.1080/01443410701537866
Dishion, T. J., Piehler, T. F., & Myers, M. W. (2008). Dynamics and
ecology of adolescent peer contagion. In M. Prinstein & K. Dodge (Eds.),
Understanding peer influence in children and adolescents (pp. 72– 93).
New York, NY: Guilford.
Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C., Wigfield, A., Buchanan, C. M., Reuman, D.,
Flanagan, C., & MacIver, D. (1993). Development during adolescence:
The impact of stage-environment fit on young adolescents’ experiences
in schools and in families. American Psychologist,48, 90– 101. doi:10.
1037/0003-066X.48.2.90
Espelage, D. L., Holt, M. K., & Henkel, R. R. (2003). Examination of peer-
group contextual effects on aggression during early adolescence. Child
Development,74, 205– 220. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00531
Fleischman, H. L., Hopstock, P. J., Pelczar, M. P., & Shelley, B. E. (2010).
Highlights from PISA 2009: Performance of US 15-year-old students
in reading, mathematics, and science literacy in an international
context (NCES 2011-004). U.S. Department of Education, National
Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: Government Printing
Office.
Furlong, M. J., Morrison, G. M., & Jimerson, S. R. (2004). Externalizing
behaviors of aggression and violence and the school context. In R. B. Jr.,
Rutherford, M. M. Quinn, & S. R. Mathur (Eds.), Handbook of research
in emotional and behavioral disorders (pp. 243–261). New York, NY:
Guilford.
Gao, X. (2008). Teachers’ professional vulnerability and cultural tradition:
A Chinese paradox. Teaching and Teacher Education,24, 154–165.
doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.011
Gottfredson, G. D., Gottfredson, D. C., Payne, A. S., & Gottfredson, N. C.
(2005). School climate predictors of school disorder: Results from a
national studyof delinquency prevention in schools. Journal of Research in
Crime and Delinquency,42, 412– 444. doi:10.1177/0022427804271931
Greenberger, E., Chen, C., Beam, M., Whang, S. M., & Dong, Q. (2000).
The perceived social contexts of adolescents’ misconduct:
A comparative study of youths in three cultures. Journal of Research
on Adolescence,10, 365– 388. doi:10.1207/SJRA1003_7
Gregory, A., Cornell, D., Fan, X., Sheras, P., Shih, T. H., & Huang, F.
(2010). Authoritative school discipline: High school practices associated
with lower bullying and victimization. Journal of Educational
Psychology,102, 483. doi:10.1037/a0018562
Gregory, A., & Weinstein, R. S. (2004). Connection and regulation at home
and in school: Predicting growth in achievement for adolescents. Journal
of Adolescent Research,19, 405– 427. doi:10.1177/0743558403258859
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. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00301
Hughes, J. N. (2013). Teacher-student relationships and school adjustment:
Progress and remaining challenges. Attachment & Human Development,
14, 319–327. doi:10.1080/14616734.2012.672288
Hughes, J. N., Luo, W., Kwok, O. M., & Loyd, L. K. (2008). Teacher-
student support, effortful engagement, and achievement: A 3-year
longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology,100, 1 – 14.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.1
Hughes, J. N., Wu, J. Y., Kwok, O., Villarreal, V., & Johnson, A. Y. (2012).
Indirect effects of child reports of teacher– student relationship on
achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology,104, 350. doi:10.1037/
a0026339
Hughes, J., Cavell, T., & Wilson, V. (2001). Further support for the develop-
mental significance of thequality of teacher– child relationships. Journalof
School Psychology,29, 281–301.doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(01)00074-7
Hui, E. K. P., Sun, R. C. F., Chow, S. S. Y., & Chu, M. H. T. (2011).
Explaining Chinese students’ academic motivation: Filial piety and
self-determination. Educational Psychology,31, 377–392. doi:10.1080/
01443410.2011.559309
Jang, S. J. (2002). Race, ethnicity, and deviance: A study of Asian and non-
Asian adolescents in America. Sociological Forum,17, 647 –680. doi:10.
1023/a:1021081524775
Jessor, R., Turbin, M. S., Costa, F. M., Dong, Q., Zhang, H., & Wang, C.
(2003). Adolescent problem behavior in China and the United States:
A cross-national study of psychosocial protective factors. Journal of
Research on Adolescence,13, 329–360. doi:10.1111/1532-7795.1303004
Jia, Y., Way, N., Ling, G., Yoshikawa, H., Chen, X., Hughes, D., ... Lu, Z.
(2009). The influence of student perceptions of school climate on
socioemotional and academic adjustment: A comparison of Chinese and
RELATIONSHIPS AND CONDUCT PROBLEMS 259
Downloaded by [164.104.104.195] at 10:45 15 December 2014

American adolescents. Child Development,80, 1514– 1530. doi:10.
1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01348.x
Koth, C. W., Bradshaw, C. P., & Leaf, P. J. (2008). A multilevel study of
predictors of student perceptions of school climate: The effect of
classroom-level factors. Journal of Educational Psychology,100,
96–104. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.96
Ladd, G. W., Birch, S. H., & Buhs, E. S. (1999). Children’s social and
scholastic lives in kindergarten: Related spheres of influence? Child
Development,70, 1373– 1400. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00101
Lan, X., Ponitz, C. C., Miller, K. F., Li, S., Cortina, K., Perry, M., & Fang,
G. (2009). Keeping their attention: Classroom practices associated with
behavioral engagement in first grade mathematics classes in China and
the United States. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,24, 1981–1211.
doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.03.002
Li, M., Taylor, M. J., & Yang, S. (2004). Editorial moral education in
Chinese societies: Changes and challenges. Journal of Moral Education,
33, 405–428. doi:10.1080/0305724042000327975
Li, D., Zhang, W., Li, X., Li, N., & Ye, B. (2012). Gratitude and suicidal
ideation and suicide attempts among Chinese adolescents: Direct,
mediated, and moderated effects. Journal of Adolescence,35, 55– 66.
doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.06.005
Little, E. (2005). Secondary school teachers’ perceptions of students’
problem behaviours. Educational Psychology,25, 369–377. doi:10.
1080/01443410500041516
Meehan, B. T., Hughes, J. N., & Cavell, T. A. (2003). Teacher – student
relationships as compensatory resources for aggressive children. Child
Development,74, 1145– 1157. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00598
Muthe
´n, L. K., & Muthe
´n, B. O. (1998 –2011). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.).
Los Angeles, CA: Authors.
Ran, A. (2001). Travelling on parallel tracks: Chinese parents and
English teachers. Educational Research,43, 311– 328. doi:10.1080/
00131880110081062
Reddy, R., Rhodes, J. E., & Mulhall, P. (2003). The influence of teacher
support on student adjustment in the middle school years: A latent
growth curve study. Development and Psychopathology,15, 119–138.
doi:10.1017.S09545794030000075
Rescorla, L., Achenbach, T., Ivanova, M. Y., Dumenci, L., Almqvist, F.,
Bilenberg, N., ... Verhulst, F. (2007). Behavioral and emotional
problems reported by parents of children ages 6 to 16 in 31 societies.
Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders,15, 130–142. doi:10.
1177/10634266070150030101
Resnick, M. D., Bearman, P. S., Blum, R. W., Bauman, K. E., Harris, K. M.,
Jones, J., ... Udry, J. R. (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm:
Findings from the national longitudinal study on adolescent health.
Journal of the American Medical Association,278, 823– 832. doi:10.
1001/jama.278.10.823
Roeser, R. W., Eccles, J. S., & Sameroff, A. J. (2000). School as a context
of early adolescents’ academic and social-emotional development:
A summary of research findings. Elementary School Journal,100,
443– 471. doi:10.1086/499650
Romanowski, M. H. (2006). A changing nation: I ssues facing Chinese teachers.
Kappa Delta Pi Record,42, 76–81.doi:10.1080/00228958.2006.10516438
Sabol, T., & Pianta, R. C. (2012). Recent trends in research on teacher-child
relationships. Attachment & Human Development,14, 213– 231. doi:10.
1080/14616734.2012.672262
Shen, J., Zhang, N., Zhang, C., Caldarella, P., Richardson, M. J., & Shatzer,
R. H. (2009). Chinese elementary school teachers’ perceptions of
students’ classroom behaviour problems. Educational Psychology,29,
187– 201. doi:10.1080/01443410802654909
Skiba, R., Simmons, A. B., Peterson, R., & Forde, S. (2006). The SRS safe
schools survey: A broader perspective on school violence prevention.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Teddlie, C., & Liu, S. (2008). Examining teacher effectiveness within
differentially effective primary schools in the People’s Republic of
China. School Effectiveness and School Improvement,19, 387 – 407.
doi:10.1080/09243450802535182
Tian, L., Liu, B., Huang, S., & Huebner, E. S. (2012). Perceived social
support and school well-being among Chinese early and middle
adolescents: The mediational role of self-esteem. Social Indicators
Research,113, 991– 1008. doi:10.1007/s11205-012-0123-8
Valiente, C., Lemery-Chalfant, K., Swanson, J., & Reiser, M. (2008).
Prediction of children’s academic competence from their effortful
control, relationships, and classroom participation. Journal of Edu-
cational Psychology,100, 67. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.67
Wang, M.-T., & Dishion, T. J. (2012). The trajectories of adolescents’
perceptions of school climate, deviant peer affiliation, and behavioral
problems during the middle school years. Journal of Research on
Adolescence,22, 40–53. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2011.00763.x
Way, N., Reddy, R., & Rhodes, J. (2007). Students’ perceptions of
school climate during the middle school years: Associations with
trajectories of psychological and behavioral adjustment. American
Journal of Community Psychology,40,194–213.doi:10.1007/s10464-
007-9143-y
Weine, A. M., Phillips, J. S., & Achenbach, T. M. (1995). Behavioral and
emotional problems among Chinese and American children: Parent and
teacher reports for ages 6 to 13. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,
23(5), 619– 639.
Wentzel, K. R. (1996). Social and academic motivation in middle
school concurrent and long-term relations to academic effort. Journal
of Early Adolescence,16, 390–406. doi:10.1177/027243169
6016004002
Wentzel, K. R. (1997). Student motivation in middle school: The role of
perceived pedagogical caring. Journal of Educational Psychology,89,
411– 419. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.411
Wentzel, K. R. (2006). A social motivation perspective for classroom
management. In C. M. Evertson & C. S. Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of
classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues
(pp. 619–643). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wheldall, K., & Merrett, F. E. (1988). Which classroom behaviours do
primary school teachers say they find most troublesome? Educational
Review,40, 13–17. doi:10.1080/0013191880400102
World Bank. (2012). GNI per capita, Atlas method (current US$). Retrieved
from The World Bank website: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.
GNP.PCAP.CD
Yang, C., Bear, G. G., Chen, F. F., Zhang, W., Blank, J. C., & Huang, X.
(2013). Students’ perceptions of school climate in the U.S. and China.
School Psychology Quarterly,28, 7 – 24. doi:10.1037/spq0000002
Yau, J., Smetana, J. G., & Metzger, A. (2009). Young Chinese children’s
authority concepts. Social Development,18, 210– 229. doi:10.1111/j.
1467-9507.2008.00463.x
Zhou, N., Lam, S.-F., & Chan, K. C. (2012). The Chinese classroom
paradox: A cross-cultural comparison of teacher controlling behaviors.
Journal of Educational Psychology,104, 1162–1174. doi:10.1037/
a0027609
Zumbrunn, S., Doll, B., Dooley, K., LeClair, C., & Wimmer, C. (2013).
Assessing student perceptions of positive and negative social interactions
in specific school settings. International Journal of School &
Educational Psychology,1(2), 82 – 93.
260 BEAR ET AL.
Downloaded by [164.104.104.195] at 10:45 15 December 2014