Content uploaded by Ksenija Krstic
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ksenija Krstic on Jul 08, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
167
UDC 37.064.2
159.942.2/.5
Teaching Innovations, 2015, Volume 28, Issue 3, pp. 167–188 159.9.072
Ksenija Krstić, PhD
Department of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy,
University of Belgrade, Serbia
Original Paper
Attachment in the student-teacher
relationship as a factor of school
achievement
Abstract: e purpose of this study was to nd out how are the quality of student-teacher interac-
tion and teachers’ practices related with school achievement during the primary education. A sample of 366
students attending 4th and 7th grades from Belgrade primary schools participated in the study. We developed
a questionnaire measuring seven dimensions of student-teacher attachment (Proximity seeking, Separation
protest, Particularity, Safe haven, Secure base, Open communication, and Closeness), and six dimensions of
teacher practices (Strict, Leadership, Instructional support, Helping/friendly, Conict, and Dissatisfaction). e
parallel versions of questionnaire, for class teacher in 4th grade, and Math teacher in 7th grade were developed.
Based on exploratory factor analysis these dimensions were reduced on fewer number of factors. As educational
outcomes, we measured students attitude towards school and learning and school marks. Factors Attachment
to teacher, Instructional support, Positive emotional relationship with students, students’ Positive attitudes
towards school and learning and school marks were taken for structural equation modeling, for each grade
separately. Results show that Attachment to teacher aects students Attitudes towards school and learning in
both grades and school marks just in 4th grade. In 4th grade, quality of Instructional support and teachers’ Posi-
tive relationship with students have eect on students’ Attachment and directly, on school marks and students’
Attitudes towards school and learning, respectively. In 7th grade, quality of teachers’ Instructional support has
eect on Math marks, while teachers’ Positive emotional relation with students aects students’ Attachment and
Math marks. Results are discussed in the light of the attachment to teacher and the quality of student-teacher
socio-emotional interaction as factors that foster teaching and learning.
Key words: attachment to teacher, instructional support, school achievement.
1Developmental theory and researches pro-
vide strong support for the idea that it is the daily
interactions that children have with adults and peers
that drive learning and development (Bronfenbren-
1 kkrstic@f.bg.ac.rs
ner & Morris, 1998). Typically, educational research-
es are focused on the cognitive aspects of learning
and student-teacher interaction. Increasing num-
ber of studies has indicated that children’s well-be-
ing in the school and the emotional quality of teach-
Paper received: September 1st 2015
Paper accepted: October 17th 2015
DOI:10.5937/inovacije1503167K
168
Ksenija Krstić
er-student interactions are fundamental for school
adjustment, learning and achievements (Baker et
al., 2003; Catalano et al., 2004; Pekrun, 2005; Sakiz
et al., 2012; Wubbels & Brekelmans, 2005). In this
research we study the importance of teacher-child
emotional relationship from perspective of the at-
tachment theory.
In spite of dierent conceptualization, there
is a growing convergence in the literature about the
importance of emotional and relational constructs
such as children’s sense of relatedness (Connell,
1990), belongingness (Goodenow, 1993a), school
bonding (Catalano et al., 2004), emotional and in-
structional support (Hamre et al., 2013), education-
al emotions (Pekrun, 2000; 2005), positive teacher–
child relationship (Howes & Hamilton, 1992; Pianta,
1999) or student-teacher attachment (Bergin & Ber-
gin, 2009) as contributors to school success. Positive
teacher-child relationships provide children with
the emotional security necessary to engage fully in
learning activities and scaold the development of
key social, behavioral, and self-regulatory compe-
tencies needed in the school environment (Pianta,
1999). Despite its importance, there is little research
examining the nature or signicance of teacher–stu-
dent relationships during the elementary school pe-
riod (Baker, 2006).
In this paper we analyze eects of teacher-
students socio-emotional interaction from the per-
spective of Attachment theory. First, we briey re-
view the concept of attachment. en we analyze
the relationship between attachment to parents and
school achievements. Finally, we discuss a student-
teacher attachment relationship. In the methodol-
ogy, we describe in details present study. en we
present results and discuss their implications for ed-
ucational practice and research.
Attachment
Many studies of teacher–child relationship
quality have their roots in attachment theory. At-
tachment is a system of behaviors aimed at estab-
lishing and maintaining closeness and contact with
an adult gure who is sensible and responsive to the
child needs (Bowlby, 1958). Attachment theorists
posit that when signicant adults provide emotional
support and a predictable, consistent, and safe en-
vironment, children become more self-reliant and
are able to take risks as they explore and learn be-
cause they know that an adult will be there to help
them (Bowlby, 1969). Studies have shown that se-
curely attached children have better early cognitive
development because of activation and maintenance
of exploration, curiosity and early learning through
new experience (ompson, 2008; Weineld et al.,
2008). When children feel safe and comfortable,
complementary exploratory systems, which encour-
age them to explore, are activated. Attachment g-
ure will serve as “secure base” from which a child
can explore the environment. On the other hand,
when children are anxious, distressed or frightened,
their attachment systems are activated enforcing
them to seek for nearness and closeness with their
attachment gures (O’Connor & McCartney, 2007).
All children will establish attachment rela-
tionships with an adult who take care of them, but
the quality of attachment varies, depending on the
quality of adult-child interaction. According to at-
tachment theorists, four attachment types can be
identied: secure, insecure/avoidant, insecure/re-
sistant and insecure/disorganized or controlling
(Main & Cassidy, 1988; Moss & St-Laurent, 2001).
Attachment relationship inuences school
adjustment and achievement in two ways: through
attachment to parents and through attachment to
teachers.
169
Attachment in the student-teacher relationship as a factor of school achievement
Attachment to parents
and school success
Large body of studies has shown that secure
attachment to parents is linked to cognitive skills
and school success (e.g., Van IJzendoorn, Dijkstra,
& Bus, 1995; De Ruiter & Van IJzendoorn, 1993).
Securely attached children at age 7 achieved high-
er school grades than insecure children through-
out primary and secondary school, aer control-
ling for IQ and prior grades (Jacobsen, Edelstein,
& Hofmann, 1994; Jacobsen & Hofmann, 1997). In
another study, it has been found that securely at-
tached children have higher math performance at
age 16 than their insecure peers (Teo et al., 1996).
Researches indicate that secure children have more
advanced cognitive skills, including ability, intelli-
gence, memory, and reasoning than insecure chil-
dren (Spieker, et al., 2003; Van IJzendoorn, Sagi, &
Lambermon, 1992) and higher scores on communi-
cation, cognitive engagement, and mastery motiva-
tion (Moss & St-Laurent, 2001).
In recents studies attachment patterns have
been found to predict developmental quotient
(Spieker, et al., 2003) and IQ, especially verbal IQ
(van Ijzendoorn & Van Vliet-Visser, 1988; Stieve-
nart et al., 2011; O’Connor & McCartney, 2007) and
academic achievement (Jacobsen & Hofmann, 1997;
Moss & St-Laurent, 2001).
In sum, attachment studies suggest that se-
cure children tend to have higher verbal ability,
math ability, reading comprehension, and overall
academic achievement, and exhibit more curiosity
than insecurely attached children (Granot & May-
seless 2001; Pianta & Harbers, 1996; Weineld et
al.,1999). In high school, insecure students, com-
pared to secure students, were more poorly pre-
pared for exams, did not concentrate as well, feared
failure, sought less help from teachers, and gave less
priority to studies (Larose et al., 2005).
Based on empirical ndings, attachment the-
orists have developed hypotheses to explain associa-
tions between attachment and cognitive skills. Spe-
cically, they assume that secure children engage
in more exploration, demonstrate better test-tak-
ing skills, receive higher quality maternal instruc-
tion and have more supportive social relationships
than insecure children (Van IJzendoorn et al., 1995;
O’Connor & McCartney, 2007).
Student-teacher attachment relationship
Attachment has two functions relevant to
classrooms: attachment provides feelings of securi-
ty, so that children can explore freely; and attach-
ment forms the basis for socializing children (Ber-
gin & Bergin, 2009). It might be argued that chil-
dren may use their teacher as a “secure base” for
exploring and learning (Bretherton, 1985), for the
same sort of emotional security that characterizes
the sensitive and responsive parenting (Goosen &
Van Ijzendoorn, 1990; Howes, Phillipsen, & Peisner-
Feinberg, 2000). Similar to parent-child relation-
ships, teacher-child relationships appear to serve a
regulatory function with regard to children’s social
and emotional development (Greenberg, Speltz, &
Deklyen, 1993; Pianta, 1999; Murray & Greenberg,
2000) and therefore have the potential to exert a
positive or negative inuence on children’s ability to
succeed in school.
On the other hand, while they are attach-
ment-like, not all teacher–student relationships
should be characterized as attachment, because they
have some, but not all, of the characteristics and ful-
ll some of the functions of an attachment relation-
ship (Bergin & Bergin, 2009).
Several authors have used concepts from lit-
erature on parent-child attachment to dene quali-
ties or dimensions of the teacher-child relationship:
i.e., secure, avoidant, resistant/ambivalent (Howes
& Hamilton, 1993); optimal, deprived, disengaged,
confused, and average (Lynch & Cicchetti, 1992);
and alternatively, closeness, dependency, and con-
ict/anger (Pianta, Steinberg, & Rollins, 1995).
Decades of study have shown that the qual-
ity of student-teacher relationships , especially en-
170
Ksenija Krstić
couraging and positive interactions, can have an im-
pact on children’s learning, social competences and
school adaptation (Howes, Hamilton, & Matheson,
1994; Howes & Matheson, 1992; Pianta, Steinberg,
& Rollins, 1995; Egeland & Hiester, 1995; Howes &
Smith, 1995; Howes, et al., 1990).
Positive teacher–student relationships acts as
protective factors for children’s social and academ-
ic development (Baker, 2006; Pianta et al., 1997;
Valiente, et al., 2008) and can be as important as a
high quality educational program (Pianta & LaParo,
2003). Positive or “secure” teacher-student relation-
ships are those perceived by teachers to be high in
closeness and low in conict and dependency. ey
are marked by respect and caring, with children
seeing their teachers as sources of security (Pian-
ta, 1999; Rudasill & Rimm-Kaufman, 2009). Teach-
er–student relationship quality predicted academ-
ic indicators of school success during the primary
school. Researchers found out that girls experienced
more closeness and less conict with their teachers
than did boys; and that closeness decrease during
the later years of primary school (Baker, 2006).
In elementary school, distinction is made be-
tween secure and dependent teacher–student rela-
tionships. A secure teacher–student relationship
is “characterized by trust, feeling in tune with the
student, and perceptions that the student feels safe
with the teacher, the student would seek help, and
the teacher could console the student” (Pianta &
Nimetz 1991, p. 384). A dependent relationship (or
resistant, Howes & Ritchie, 1999) is characterized by
teacher perceptions that the student is “constantly
seeking help or reassurance and reacting negative-
ly to separation from the teacher” (Pianta & Nimetz
1991, p. 385).
Evidence suggests that students with warm
and sensitive teacher tend to have greater growth in
math and reading ability (Pianta et al. 2008), higher
scores on achievement tests, more positive attitudes
toward school and more engagement in the class-
room (Birch & Ladd, 1997; Hamre & Pianta, 2001).
In contrast, children who have conicted relation-
ships with teachers tend to like school less, experi-
ence less self-direction, and show lower levels of co-
operation in classroom activities. In sum, empirical
studies suggest that secure teacher–student relation-
ships predict greater knowledge, higher test scores,
greater academic motivation, than insecure teach-
er–student relationships (Bergin & Bergin, 2009).
e antecedents of secure teacher–student re-
lationships are very similar to antecedents of secure
parent–child attachment. Students are more likely to
develop secure relationships when teachers are in-
volved with, sensitive toward, have frequent posi-
tive interactions with children (Howes & Hamilton
1992a), hold high expectations for students (Davis,
2003), and support students autonomy during class-
room assignments (Gurland & Grolnick, 2003).
Another also important concept in classroom
environment research is school bonding or belong-
ingness (Goodenow, 1993b; Sakiz et al., 2012). is
concept refers to a sense of belonging at school and
commitment to academic goals promoted in the
school (Bergin & Bergin, 2009; Catalano et al., 2004).
Students’ sense of belonging involves close relation-
ships with peers and teachers, a commitment to suc-
ceed in school, participation in extracurricular ac-
tivities. School bonding is similar to attachment in
the way that it makes children feel secure and val-
ued, allowing them to take intellectual and social
challenges and explore new ideas. Empirical studies
suggest that school bonding is linked to higher aca-
demic achievements (Hawkins et al., 2001; March-
ant et al., 2001; Battin-Pearson et al., 2000), less de-
linquent behaviors (O’Donnell et al., 1995; Simons-
Morton et al., 1999), less participation in school
bullying or violence (Cunningham, 2007) and rare
dropout (Hawkins et al., 2001). School bonding and
positive attitudes towards school and learning, can
also be seen as an important educational outcome,
beside cognitive outcomes like knowledge, skills
and competencies, especially from a life long learn-
171
Attachment in the student-teacher relationship as a factor of school achievement
ing perspective (Gutman & Schoon, 2013; Rychen &
Salganik, 2003).
Study rational and aims
In research on emotions in education, what
prevail are researches addressing single emotions
(like test anxiety) (e.g., Zeidner, 1988), or emo-
tions of teacher or emotions of students, and their
function and impact on cognitive processes, teach-
ing and learning (e.g., Ashby, Isen, & Turken, 1999).
More relational approaches are lacking: approach-
es that will consider emotional relationship between
teacher and students as an aspect of psychosocial
environment for teaching and learning.
On the other hand, numerous researches are
focused on the dynamics of student-teacher instruc-
tional/pedagogical interactions and how students
learn through that interaction. A new direction in
contemporary educational studies are qualitative re-
searches focused on the process of student-teacher
interaction and specic acts of students and teach-
ers in that interaction. What these researches lack
is perspective on more general emotional relation-
ship between students and teacher. is emotional
relationship is relatively stable and enduring factor
aecting not only the dynamics of student-teacher
relationship and interaction, but also the process of
teaching and learning.
e main purpose of this study was to nd
out how emotional quality of interaction, specical-
ly teacher-student attachment, and characteristics
of teachers’ practices are related with two important
educational outcomes during the primary educa-
tion: school achievements and students’ positive re-
lationship towards school and learning.
Method
is study was focused on students’ interac-
tion with and attachment to teachers at the end of
IV and VII grade of a primary school. In the Ser-
bian educational system, during the rst four years
in primary school, children have one class teacher
and from V to VIII grade they have dierent subject
teachers. Taking into consideration that Math is one
of the key subject in the curriculum, and that previ-
ous studies shown that Math class provoke more stu-
dents’ anxiety (Radišić & Baucal, 2012; Videnović &
Radišić, 2011) this study was focused on students’
interaction with class teacher in IV grade and with
Math teacher in VII grade.
Sample
e questionnaire was administered to a
sample of 366 students from ve Belgrade primary
schools.
Table 1. Number of students according to gender and
grade
Gender Grade
4th 7th Total
Female 95 91 186
Male 92 88 180
Total 187 179 366
Instrument
ere are several instruments assessing dif-
ferent aspects of teacher-student social-emotional
relationship and interaction in the classroom. Based
on the literature review, for the purpose of this re-
search, we developed a self-reporting questionnaire
designed to assess students’ perception of teacher
behavior in the classroom and of quality of teachers’
interaction with their students. Items were adapted
from several related scales:
1) e Questionnaire on Teacher Interaction
(QTI) (Wubbels & Brekelmans, 1998;
Wubbels & Levy, 1993; Lourdusamy & Swe
Khine, 2001).
2) e Classroom Assessment Scoring System
(CLASS; Pianta, LaParo & Hamre, 2008)
3) e Student Teacher Relationship Scale
(STRS; Pianta & Nimetz, 1991)
172
Ksenija Krstić
4) e Components of Attachment
Questionnaire (CAQ; Parish, 2000; Parish
& Eagle, 2003)
is new questionnaire encompasses follow-
ing dimensions:
1) e Attachment to teacher scale is modi-
ed the Components of Attachment Questionnaire
(Parish, 2000) to measures the degree to which a
student perceives her/his teacher as an attachment
gure. We used ve dimensions of the CAQ:
1.1) Proximity seeking (4 items)
measures student’s need to be near and close to the
teacher (e.g. Sometimes I miss my teacher when she is
not around).
1.2) Particularity (2 items) meas-
ures degree to which a student perceives his/her
teacher as a unique, special and irreplaceable gure
(e.g. My teacher is more important to me than most
other people are).
1.3) Separation protest (3 items)
measures degree to which student feels anxious or
distress upon separation from teacher as attachment
gure (e.g. I feel anxious when our teacher is away).
1.4) Safe haven (7 items) measures
degree to which student perceives his/her teacher as
a gure to whom she/he can return for comfort and
safety when upset in the school (e.g. e teacher is
available when I need her).
1.5) Secure base (4 items) measures
degree to which student perceives his/her teacher as
a secure base for exploration in the school (e.g. My
teacher helps me to explore new ideas).
Beside these, two dimensions complementary
to attachment were added:
1.6) e Closeness –(4 items, from
STRS) measures degree to which a student experi-
ences aection, warmth and open communication
with a teacher (e.g. I openly share my feelings and ex-
periences with the teacher).
1.7) e Open communication (5
items) developed for this research to measure de-
gree to which student perceive that his/her com-
munication with the teacher is open and trusty, that
teacher is available and shows understanding (e.g.
When I talk to a teacher, I see that she carefully listens
and understands me).
As antecedents of secure teacher-student re-
lationship, several characteristics of teachers’ prac-
tices were measured:
1) e Leadership (QTI) measures degree to
which a student perceives his/her teacher
as a person who notices what is happening,
leads, organizes, sets tasks, structures the
classroom situation, explains, holds the
attention (e.g. is teacher knows everything
that goes on in the classroom).
2) e Instructional Support (10 items; CLASS,
TIMSS, PISA) measures degree to which
student perceives pedagogical support that
teacher provides to them and perceives
teacher’s feedback as focused on expanding
learning and understanding ( e.g. When I
answer in the class, teacher explains what
was good and what was wrong).
3) e Strict (3 items; QTI) describes teacher
who is demanding, who checks, judges,
maintains silence, is strict and sets rules
and norms (e.g. e teacher is severe when
marking papers).
4) e Helping and Friendly (QTI) describes
teacher who assists, behaves in a friendly or
considerate manner, is able to make a joke
(e.g. e teacher helps us with our work).
5) e Conict (5 items; STRS) measures
degree to which a student perceives her or
his relationship with a teacher as a negative
and conictual (e.g. Teacher and I always
seem to be struggling with each other).
6) e Dissatised (QTI) describes teacher
who wait for silence, considers pros and
cons, keeps quite, shows dissatisfaction,
looks glum, questions, criticizes (e.g. e
teacher thinks that we don’t know anything).
173
Attachment in the student-teacher relationship as a factor of school achievement
e parallel versions of the questionnaire,
for class teacher and math teacher were made.
Younger students responded on a three-
point Lickert scale to indicate agreement with each
statement (Incorrect, Don’t know, and Correct)
while older student responded on the ve-point
Lickert scale (from Totally incorrect to Totally
correct).
As a measure of students’ achievements, two
educational outcomes were measured:
1) e school marks: Because students in 4th
grade get all marks from one class teacher,
in order to obtain a greater variability of
marks, a composite measure was made
based on their marks in Math, Serbian
language and nal mark at the end of the
previous school year. For students in 7th
grade only Math mark was used.
2) e positive attitude towards school and
learning (Popović Ćitić, 2012): this subscale
encompasses 7 items that measure: Students’
dedication to school and school obligations
(I try to achieve as better grades in school);
School bonding ( I’m happy to spend time
in school); Participation in school activities
(I participate in school sections, additional
classes or other extracurricular activities
in school); Respect of the school norms (I
respect the school rules); Positive attitudes
towards learning (ings I learn in school
are important and useful).
Data on reliability of all subscales are shown
in Table 2. As we can see, except two, the rest of the
subscales have moderate to high reliability. Due to
the low reliability of subscales Strict and Leadership,
they were excluded from further analysis.
Table 2. Reliability of subscales for 4th and 7th grade
sample
Cronbach’s Alpha
4th grade 7th grade
Attachment to teacher .919 .930
Positive attitudes towards school and
learning
.650 .723
Strict .324 .318
Leadership .361 .543
Instructional support .601 .719
Positive emotional relationship with
students
.548 .555
Procedure
Aer the students’ agreement to participate
in this research was obtained, the questionnaire
was administered to all students during the class.
Completion of questionnaire lasted less than 45
minutes in both 4th and 7th grades.
Results
e current study focused on the relations
among dimensions of students’ attachment to teach-
er, and students’ perception of teachers’ behaviors
and interaction on one side, and on the other side,
students’ school achievements, measured through
school marks and students’ positive attitude towards
school and learning. Separate analyses were done
for student from 4th and 7th grade. Considering a
large number of dimensions, in order to determine
relationship between these dimensions, several EFA
were done.
Structure of relationship between
attachment dimensions
e EFA for seven dimensions of attachment
to teacher has shown that these dimensions togeth-
er make one factor in both age groups, as it was hy-
pothesized based on conceptual meaning of these
dimensions. Using principal component analysis
one factor with eigenvalue larger than one was ex-
174
Ksenija Krstić
tracted explaining 64% of variance in 4th grade (ei-
genvalue=4.47) and 65% of variance in 7th grade (ei-
genvalue=4.56). is factor is called Attachment to
teacher and its structure is shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Component matrix of the rst factor of
seven attachment dimensions
Dimension Component 1
4th grade
Component 1
7th grade
Safe haven .870 .897
Secure base .857 .866
Proximity seeking .826 .807
Closeness .804 .870
Open communication .793 .795
Particularity .720 .671
Separation protest .711 .716
Students who have high scores on this factor,
perceive their teacher as a gure which can comfort
them, to whom they can return if they are distressed
in school, and also who is secure base for explora-
tion and learning in classroom environment. ey
seek for nearness and closeness with the teacher,
have open communication with her/him, and are
dissatised when teacher is not around.
Structure of relationship between dimensions
of teachers’ practices
Second analysis on the dimensions of stu-
dents’ perception of teachers’ practices, has shown
that dimension Instructional support stands as an
independent variable, while dimensions Helping
and friendly, Dissatised and Conict make one
factor, which explains 68% of variance in 4th grade
(eigenvalue=2.028) and 72% of variance in 7th grade
(eigenvalue=2.159).
Based on the meaning of these dimensions,
this factor is called Positive emotional relationship
with students (Table 4).
e Positive emotional relationship factor de-
scribes students’ perception of their teacher as help-
ful and friendly, with whom they have rare conicts
and who exhibits satisfaction with his/her relation-
ship with students.
Table 4. Component matrix of factor Positive
emotional relationship with students
Dimensions Component 1
4th grade
Component 1
7th grade
Conict -.864 -.873
Dissatised -.814 -.841
Helping and
Friendly
.786 .830
Relationship between attachment
to teacher, school achievements
and teachers’ practices
e current study focused on the relations
among primary school students’ Attachment to
teacher, students’ perceptions of teachers’ behaviors
and interactions assessed by Instructional support
and Positive emotional relationship with students’ di-
mensions, and students school marks and Positive
attitude towards school and learning. e relations
among these variables were tested using structural
equation modeling (SEM) (Byrne, 2001).
In the theoretical model we hypothesized
that students’ Attachment to teacher will inuence
his/her school marks and Positive attitude towards
school and learning. Besides that, we assumed that
students’ perception of teachers’ practices assessed
through dimensions Instructional support, and Pos-
itive emotional relationship with student will aect
students’ attachment to teacher and, independently
students marks and Positive attitude towards school
and learning. is model is shown in Figure 1.
175
Attachment in the student-teacher relationship as a factor of school achievement
e SEM model (4th grade)
SEM analysis shows that this theoretical
model ts to empirically obtained data (χ²(3) = .991,
p = .803, χ²/df = .330, RMR = .026, GFI = .998, RM-
SEA = .000) allowing us to analyze individual rela-
tions within the model.
As it can be seen from the Figure 2 not all
theoretically assumed relationships between varia-
bles are statistically signicant. Dimension Instruc-
tional support does not have direct eect on posi-
tive attitudes towards school; and dimension Posi-
tive emotional relationship has no eect on school
marks. Model in Figure 2 depicts just statistically
signicant relationships between variables (param-
eters are shown in Table 10).
As we can see, Attachment to teacher in 4th
grade, has a direct eect on both measures: stu-
dents’ school marks and Positive attitudes towards
school and learning. Students in the 4th grade who
have warm, close and secure relationship with their
teacher have better school achievements as well as
they perceive school as something useful and inter-
esting, and themselves as more dedicated to school.
On the other hand, students will have more positive
and secure relationships with a teacher if a teach-
er has more positive emotional relationship towards
Figure 1: eoretical model of assumed relationships between dimensions
Table 10. Standardized regression coecients of the model for 4th grade
Relation Standardized
regression coecients Critical ratio p
Attachment to teacher -----> Positive attitudes towards
school and learning .111 4.810 .000
Attachment to teacher -----> School marks .619 4.126 .000
Instructional support -----> Attachment to teacher .297 4.692 .000
Instructional support -----> School marks .404 2.691 .007
Positive emotional
relationship -----> Attachment to teacher .420 6.646 .000
Positive emotional
relationship -----> Positive attitudes towards
school and learning .122 5.315 .000
176
Ksenija Krstić
students and oers them more instructional sup-
port.
Teachers’ positive emotional relationship to-
wards students and a quality of instructional support
have also a direct inuence on students’ positive atti-
tudes towards school and school marks, respective-
ly, beside their indirect eect through the students’
attachment to teacher. If a teacher has more posi-
tive emotional relationships with students, students
will have more positive attitudes towards school and
learning. But this positive emotional relationship
will have no inuence on students’ marks. If teacher
gives more instructional support and higher quality
of feedback to students, they will have better school
marks, but it will not inuence their attitudes to-
wards school.
Model in Figure 2 also shows that dimensions
of teacher behavior are correlated. Dimension Pos-
itive emotional relationship is correlated with In-
structional support. Teachers who have more posi-
tive emotional relationships with students will give
more instructional support.
e SEM model (7th grade)
e same theoretical model of relations be-
tween variables was applied on data from 7th grade
students. is theoretical model ts to empirically
obtained data on older sample, which means that
this model can reproduce matrix of covariances of
tasted variables (χ²(6) = 6.372, p = .383, χ²/df =
1.062, RMR = .050, GFI = .986, RMSEA = .019).
Model obtained for 7th grade sample data also
has theoretically assumed relationships between
variables that are not statistically signicant. Attach-
ment to Math teacher has no eect on Math marks,
Instructional support does not aect neither At-
tachment to teacher and Positive attitudes towards
school. Dimension Positive emotional relationship
with students have no eect on Positive attitudes to-
wards school.
Model in Figure 3 depicts just statistically sig-
nicant relationships between variables. Values of
statistically signicant parameters of the model for
7th grade are shown in Table 11.
Figure 2: Parameters of the model of relations between students attachment to teacher, dimensions
of teacher behavior and students school achievements in 4th grade (standardized regression coecients)
177
Attachment in the student-teacher relationship as a factor of school achievement
Table 11: Standardized regression coecients of the model for 7th grade
Relation
Standardized
regression
coecients
Critical ratio p
Attachment to teacher -----> Positive attitudes towards
school and learning .331 6.270 .000
Instructional support -----> Math marks .303 4.211 .000
Positive emotional
relationship -----> Math marks .370 5.134 .000
Positive emotional
relationship -----> Attachment to teacher .554 8.870 .000
Figure 3: Parameters of the model of relations between students attachment to teacher, dimensions of teacher behavior and
students school achievements in 7th grade (standardized regression coecients)
178
Ksenija Krstić
Attachment to Math teacher in 7th grade
has a direct eect only on a students’ Positive
attitudes towards school and learning, but not on
students’ Math marks. An emotional relationship
with a teacher will have eect on general emotional
attitude towards school, but will not aect school
achievements.
On the other hand, students will develop at-
tachment relationship with Math teacher if they per-
ceive him/her as helpful, friendly and satised.
On this age level, Math marks are under the
inuence of two dimensions of teachers’ behavior:
teachers’ Positive emotional relationship with stu-
dents and quality of Instructional support. Students
in 7th grade will have better Math marks if a teacher
is giving more or better instructional support, and
she/he is helping and friendly, satised and has rare
conicts with students.
Model in Figure 3 shows that there is no re-
lations among dimensions of teacher behavior. Ac-
cording to seventh grade students, teachers’ positive
emotional relationship with students have no rela-
tion with the quality of teachers’ instructional sup-
port.
Interpretation and discussion
e goal of this study was to analyze direct
and indirect relations between teachers’ behaviors
and practices, student-teacher attachment relation-
ship and educational outcomes. e ndings extend
our understanding of relationships between the stu-
dent-teacher attachment and students school marks
and attitudes towards school and learning in pri-
mary school. Results show that attachment to class
teacher in 4th grade has inuence on both school
marks and attitudes towards school, while, in 7th
grade, attachment to Math teacher has inuence just
on students’ attitudes towards school and learning
and not on the Math marks.
e ndings about eect of the attachment to
teacher on school marks in 4th grade suggest that,
in warm, supportive, “secure” environment students
achieve better school results. is nding is in con-
cordance with ndings from other researches indi-
cating that secure teacher-student relation support
learning and exploration in school, as the relation
of the same quality with parents does (Hamre et al.,
2013; Krstic, 2012; Bergin & Bergin, 2009; Pianta
et al., 2008). If students perceive their teacher as a
warm, sensitive, responsive, supporting, if they feel
secure and valued, that can encourage them to take
on intellectual and social challenges, to explore new
ideas and to learn.
e ndings also suggest that there are some
age dierences in eect of student-teacher attach-
ment. Math marks in 7th grade are not under the in-
uence of students’ attachment with Math teacher.
Students will have better Math marks if Math teach-
er has just positive emotional relation with them. So,
in 7th grade, math teacher does not have to be an at-
tachment gure for students, to comfort and to be
a secure base for them, but just to be helpful and
friendly, satised and non-conictual. is nding
is in concordance with results of earlier studies sug-
gesting that association between the teacher-stu-
dent relationship and cognitive outcomes is not as
consistent as association between that relationship
and emotional outcomes (motivation, positive at-
titudes) (Wubbels & Brekelmans, 2005). Howev-
er, this nding can also reect key developmental
changes typical for the transition from the middle
childhood to the adolescence. For rst four years of
primary school, students have one class teacher for
all subjects. In the same time, they still have a need
for a stable, warm and sensitive adult gure. A class
teacher can serve as a “parent” in the school and if a
class teacher is warm and sensitive, student will de-
velop attachment relationship. From 5th grade, stu-
dents have dierent teachers for every subject. Sub-
ject teacher spend less time with particular students
and develop dierent relation with them, less warm
and sensitive. Besides that, students in 7th grade, be-
ing adolescents, have a less need for attachment g-
179
Attachment in the student-teacher relationship as a factor of school achievement
ure than younger students. In that age they seek for
peer attachments. In their relation with teachers,
they make more dierentiation between emotional
relations and pedagogical support from teachers. So,
the quality of instructional support and quality of
feedback from teacher aect their marks, but emo-
tional relation with teachers aects only general at-
titudes towards school.
Our ndings show that the positive and se-
cure relation with teacher, aects not only school
marks, but also aects development of positive at-
titudes towards school and learning. Students’ posi-
tive attitudes towards school and learning, as an im-
portant educational outcome, is under the inuence
of students’ attachment to teacher on both ages. On
younger age, these positive attitudes are also aect-
ed by teachers’ positive emotional relationship with
students, while on older age, there is no such eect. If
younger students have positive and secure relation-
ship with their teacher, if they feel safe to explore and
learn, that will aect their overall perception and ex-
perience with a school. is nding supports Cor-
nelius-White (2007) claim, that most students who
dislike school do so primarily because they dislike
their teacher. is is also important because, sever-
al studies have linked school bonding to academic
achievement (Hawkins, et al., 2001; Marchant et al.,
2001; Battin-Pearson et al., 2000). Children who feel
a sense of attachment to school and who develop a
commitment to succeed in school are more success-
ful academically.
As the antecedents of student-teacher attach-
ment, this study has highlight positive emotional re-
lationship with students on both ages. On younger
age, instructional support also aect students’ at-
tachment with teacher, while in 7th grade, quality
of teachers’ instructional support has no inuence
on students’ emotional relation with a teacher. Ear-
lier studies have pointed out teacher characteristics
such as caring, interest in, respectful encouraging,
fair as associated with several positive educational
outcomes: school achievement and attitudes (Bak-
er et al., 2003), increased self-esteem (Reddy et al.,
2003); academic achievement (Goodenow, 1993a);
academic eort (Wentzel, 1997); classroom engage-
ment (Tucker et al., 2002); school motivation (Stipek
et al., 1998). Several studies reported that students
prefer teachers who care and hold high academic ex-
pectations (Muller, Katz, & Dance, 1999; Murdock,
1999; Davis, 2003; Sakiz et al., 2012). ese teacher
characteristics may improve the psychological cli-
mate of the classroom and increase the feeling of
safety, which encourage students’ classroom engage-
ment and learning. In a meta-analysis on 119 stud-
ies, Cornelius-White (2007) found a moderate cor-
relation across several person-centered teacher vari-
ables (such as empathy, warmth, encouraging) and
student achievement and attitudes. Another meta-
analysis of classroom climate, found that a common
attributes that optimize student learning are goal
directedness, positive interpersonal relations, and
social support (Hattie, 2009). So, we can conclude
that student-teacher attachment will develop when
a teacher has a positive emotional relationship with
students: when he/she is helpful, friendly, satised
and non-conictual.
One more important characteristic of teach-
ers’ practices that inuence students’ achievements
and quality of relationship with the teacher is in-
structional support. A quality of teachers’ instruc-
tional support-pedagogical support and quality
of teachers’ feedback, has direct inuence on both
school marks in 4th grade and Math marks in 7th
grade. Hamre and her colleagues also found that
teachers’ instructional support predict students’ ac-
ademic functioning and engagement in classroom
activities (Hamre et al., 2013). In 4th grade, instruc-
tional support has also important eect on student-
teacher attachment.
At the end, based on these ndings we can
conclude that in the 4th grade secure student-teacher
attachment aects both measured educational out-
comes, school marks and positive attitudes towards
school and learning. Students will develop secure at-
180
Ksenija Krstić
tachment to teacher if a teacher has a positive emo-
tional relationship with students and gives them a
high-quality instructional support. In 7th grade, stu-
dents do not need an attachment gure to have good
Math marks. At this level, attachment to teacher will
aect students’ positive attitudes towards school and
learning. Math marks in 7th grade depend on teach-
ers’ instructional support and positive emotional re-
lationship with students.
e positive relations between attachment
to teacher and students educational outcomes found
in this study provide evidence for the importance
of developing positive emotional relationship in
a classroom and creating warm, sensitive and
supporting learning environment in schools. is
study suggests that more attention should be paid
on emotional relationships between students
and teachers. In a context of positive emotional
relationship with the teacher, a large number of
students will develop positive attitudes towards
school and learning, and in lower grades, they will
achieve better school marks. is research also
indicates that emotional interaction and attachment
are important and fruitful domain for educational
researches. Teachers’ relationship with students
and their practices can be described and measured
through large number of dierent dimensions, in this
research we cover just few of them. Also, as our study
reveal, there are some age dierences that should
be taken into consideration. Our understanding of
student-teacher interaction and relations could be
extended with a qualitative researches which would
reveal mechanisms in the base of those relations.
References
•Ashby, F. G., Isen, A. M., & Turken, A. U. (1999). A neuropsychological theory of positive aect and its inu-
ence on cognition. Psychological Review, 106, 529–550.
•Baker, J.A. (2006). Contributions of teacher–child relationships to positive school adjustment during el-
ementary school. Journal of School Psychology (44); 211–229.
•Baker, J. A., Dilly, L. J., Aupperlee, J. L., & Patil, S. A. (2003). e developmental context of school satisfac-
tion: Schools as psychologically healthy environments. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, 206–221.
•Battin-Pearson, S., Newcomb, M.D., Abbott, R.D., Hill, K.G., Catalano, R.F. & Hawkins, J.D. (2000). Predic-
tors of Early High School Dropout: A Test of Five eories. Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 92, No. 3.
568-582.
•Bergin, C., & Bergin, D. (2009). Attachment in the Classroom. Educational Psychology Review (21):141–170.
•Birch, S. H., & Ladd, G. W. (1998). Children’s interpersonal behaviors and the teacher-child relationship.
Developmental Psychology, 34, 934-946.
•Birch, S., & Ladd, G. (1997). e teacher–child relationship and children’s early school adjustment. Journal
of School Psychology, 35(1), 61–79.
•Bowlbi, J. (1958). e Nature of Child’s Tie to His Mother. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 39, 350-
373.
•Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss. Vol 1. Attachment. New York: Basick Books.
•Bretherton, I. (1985). Attachement theory: Retrospect and prospect. In I. Bretherton & E. Waters (Eds.)
Grownig Points of Attachement eory and Research. Monographs of the Society for Research on Child De-
velopment, 50(1-2) No. 209, 3-38.
181
Attachment in the student-teacher relationship as a factor of school achievement
•Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (1998). e ecology of developmental processes. In W. Damon & R. M.
Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1. eoretical models of human development (5th ed., pp.
993–1029). New York: Wiley.
•Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and program-
ming. New Jersey: Erlbaum.
•Catalano, R. F., Haggerty, K. P., Oesterle, S., Fleming, C. B., & Hawkins, J. D. (2004). e importance of bond-
ing to school for healthy development: Findings from the Social Development Research Group. Journal of
School Health, 74(7), 252-261.
•Connell, J. P. (1990). Context, self, and action: A motivational analysis of self-system processes across the
life- span. In D. Cicchetti, & M. Beeghly (Eds.), e self in transition: From infancy to childhood (pp. 61–97).
Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
•Cornelius-White, J. (2007). Learner-centered teacher-student relationships are eective: A meta-
•analysis. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 113–143.
•Cunningham, N. J. (2007). Level of bonding to school and perception of the school environment by bullies,
victims, and bully-victims. e Journal of Early Adolescence, 27(4), 457-478.
•Davis, H. (2003). Conceptualizing the role and inuence of student–teacher relationships on children’s social
and cognitive development. Educational Psychologist, 38(4), 207–234.
•De Ruiter, C., & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1993). Attachment and cognition: A review of the literature. Inter-
national Journal of Educational Research, 19, 525-540.
•Den Brok, P., Brekelmans, M. & Wubbels, T. (2006). Multilevel issues in research using students’ perceptions
of learning environments: e case of the Questionnaire on Teacher Interaction. Learning Environment Re-
search 9:199–213.
•Egeland, B. and Hiester, M. (1995), e Long-Term Consequences of Infant Day-Care and Mother-Infant
Attachment. Child Development, 66, (2), 474-485.
•Fisher, D., Fraser, B., & Cresswell, J. (1995). Using the “Questionnaire on Teacher Interaction” in the Profes-
sional Development of Teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 20 (1), 8-18.
•Goodenow, C. (1993a). e psychological sense of school membership among adolescents: Scale develop-
ment and educational correlates. Psychology in the Schools, 30, 79–90.
•Goodenow, C. (1993b). Classroom belonging among early adolescent students: Relationships to motivation
and achievement. Journal of Early Adolescence, 13, 21–43.
•Goossens, F. & Van Ijzendoorn, M. (1990). Quality of infants’ attachments to professional caregivers: Rela-
tion to infant-parent attachment and day-care characteristics. Child Development, 61, 832-837.
•Granot, D., & Mayseless, O. (2001). Attachment security and adjustment to school in middle childhood.
International Journal of Behavioral Development, 25(6), 530–541.
•Greenberg, M. T., Speltz, M. L., & Deklyen, M. (1993). e role of attachment in the early development of
disruptive behavior problems. Development and Psychopathology, 5, 191-213.
•Gurland, S., & Grolnick, W. (2003). Children’s expectancies and perceptions of adults: Eects on rapport.
Child Development, 74(4), 1212–1224.
182
Ksenija Krstić
•Gutman, L.M & Schoon, I. (2013). e impact of non-cognitive skills on outcomes for young people. Education
Endowment Foundation. Retreived August 10, 2015. from https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/
uploads/pdf/Non-cognitive_skills_literature_review_2.pdf
•Hamre, B., & Pianta, R. (2001). Early teacher–child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school out-
comes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72(2), 625–638.
•Hamre, B.K., Pianta, R.C., Downer, J.T., DeCoster, J., Mashburn, A.J. Jones, S.M., Brown, J.L., Cappella, E.,
Atkins, M., Rivers, S.E., Brackett, M.A., & Hamagami, A. (2013). Teaching through Interactions: Testing a
Developmental Framework of Teacher Eectiveness in over 4,000 Classrooms. e Elementary School Jour-
nal, Vol. 113, No. 4, 461-487.
•Hattie, J. (2009) Visible learning: a synthesis of meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge, NY.
•Hawkins, J. D., Guo, J., Hill, K. G., Battin-Pearson, S., & Abbott, R. D. (2001). Long-term eects of the social
development intervention on school bonding trajectories. Applied Developmental Science, 5(4), 225-236.
•Howes, C., & Hamilton, C. E. (1992a). Children’s relationships with caregivers: Mothers and child care teach-
ers. Child Development, 63, 859–866.
•Howes, C., & Hamilton, C. E. (1992b). Children’s relationships with child care teachers: Stability and con-
cordance with parental attachments. Child Development, 63, 867–878.
•Howes, C., & Matheson, C. C. (1992). Contextual constraints on the concordance of mother-child and teach-
er-child relationships. New Directions far Child Development, 57, 25-40.
•Howes, C., & Ritchie, S. (1999). Attachment organizations in children with dicult life circumstances. De-
velopment and Psychopathology, 11, 251–268.
•Howes, C., & Smith, E. (1995). Relations among child care quality, teacher behavior, children’s play activities,
emotional security, and cognitive activity in child care. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 10, 381–404.
•Howes, C., Hamilton, C. E., & Matheson, C. C. (1994). Children’s relationships with peers: Dierential as-
sociations with aspects of the teacher-child relationship. Child Development, 65, 253-263.
•Howes, C., Phillipsen, L.C., & Peisner-Feinberg, E. (2000). e consistency of perceived teacher-child rela-
tionships between preschool and kindergarten. Journal of School Psychology, 38 (2), 113-132.
•Howes, C., Rodning, C., Galluzzo, D. C., & Myers, L. (1990). Attachment and child care: Relationships with
mother and caregiver. In N. Fox & G. G. Fein (Eds.), Infant day care: e current debate (pp.169-182). Nor-
wood, NJ: Ablex.
•Jacobsen, T., & Hofmann, V. (1997). Children’s attachment representations: Longitudinal relations to school
behavior and academic competency in middle childhood and adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 33,
703–710.
•Jacobsen, T., Edelstein, W., & Hofmann, V. (1994). A longitudinal study of the relation between attachment
representations in childhood and cognitive functioning in childhood and adolescence. Developmental Psy-
chology, 30, 112-124.
•Krstic, K. (2012). School learning and student-teacher attachment. Patchwork. Learning diversities, Bel-
grade, 30.08. - 1.09. 2012. Conference proceedings: full papers, pp. 164-172. http://www2.unine.ch/les/
content/sites/patchworks2012/les/CONFERENCE_PROCEEDINS.pdf
183
Attachment in the student-teacher relationship as a factor of school achievement
•Larose, S., Bernier, A., & Tarabulsy, G. (2005). Attachment state of mind, learning dispositions, and aca-
demic performance during the college transition. Developmental Psychology, 41(1), 281–289.
•Lourdusamy, A., & Swe Khine, M. (2001, December). Self-evaluation of interpersonal behavior and classroom
interaction by teacher trainees. Paper presented at e International Education Research Conference, Univer-
sity of Notre Dame, Fremantle Western Australia. Retrieved Maj 25, 2015. from e Australian Association
for Research in Education: http://www.aare.edu.au/01pap/atp01465.htm
•Lynch, M., & Cicchetti, D. (1992). Maltreated children’s reports of relatedness to their teachers. New Direc-
tions for Child Development, 57, 81-108.
•Main, M., & Cassidy, J. (1988). Categories of response to reunion with the parent at age six: Predictable from
infant attachment classications and stable over a 1-month period. Developmental Psychology, 24, 415-526.
•Marchant, G. J., Paulson, S. E., & Rothlisberg, B. A. (2001). Relations of middle school students perceptions
of family and school context with academic achievement. Psychology in the Schools, 38(6), 505-519.
•Moss, E. & St-Laurent, D. (2001) Attachment at School Age and Academic Performance. Developmental
Psychology Vol. 37, No. 6, 863-874.
•Muller, C., Katz, S. R., & Dance, L. J. (1999). Investing in teaching and learning. Dynamics of the teacher–
student relationship from each actor’s perspective. Urban Education, 34, 292–337.
•Murdock, T. B. (1999). e social context of risk: Status and motivational predictors of alienation in middle
school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 62–75.
•Murray, C. & Greenberg, M.T. (2000). Children’s relationships with teachers and bonds with school: An
investigation of patterns and correlates in middle childhood. Journal of School Psychology, 38 (5), 423-445.
•O’Connor, E., & McCartney, K. (2007). Attachment and cognitive skills: An investigation of mediating
mechanisms. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 28, 458–476.
•O’Donnell, J., Hawkins, J. D., & Abbott, R. D. (1995). Predicting serious delinquency and substance use
among aggressive boys. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63(4), 529-537.
•Parish, M. (2000). e nature of the patient’s tie to the therapist (Doctoral dissertation, Adelphi University,
1999). Dissertation Abstracts International, 60, 6378-B.
•Parish, M. and Eagle, M.N. (2003). Attachment to the therapist. Psychoanalytic Psychology Vol. 20, No. 2,
271–286.
•Pekrun, R. (2000). A social cognitive, control-value theory of achievement emotions. In J. Heckhausen (Ed.),
Motivational psychology of human development. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
•Pekrun, R. (2005). Progress and open problems in educational emotion research. Learning and Instruction,
15, 497–506.
•Pianta, R. C. (1999). Enhancing relationships between children and teachers. Washington, DC: American Psy-
chological Association.
•Pianta, R. C., & Harbers, K. (1996). Observing mother and child behavior in a problem-solving situation at
school entry: Relations with academic achievement. Journal of School Psychology, 67, 307–322.
•Pianta, R. C., & Nimetz, S. (1991). Relationship between children and teachers: Associations with classroom
and home behavior. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 12, 379–393.
184
Ksenija Krstić
•Pianta, R.C. e Student Teacher Relationship Scale; Professional Manual. Retreived February 21, 2014.
from http://curry.virginia.edu/uploads/resourceLibrary/STRS_Professional_Manual.pdf
•Pianta, R. C., Belsky, J., Vandergri, N., Houts, R. M., & Morrison, F. J. (2008). Classroom eects on children’s
achievement trajectories in elementary school. American Educational Research Journal, 45 (2), 365–397.
•Pianta, R. C., LaParo, K. M., & Hamre, B. K. (2008). Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) Manual,
Pre-K. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.
•Pianta, R. C., Nimetz, S. L., & Bennett, E. (1997). Mother-child relationships, teacher–child relationships,
and school outcomes in preschool and kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 263–280.
•Pianta, R. C., Steinberg, M. S., & Rollins, K. (1995). e rst two years of school: Teacher-child relationships
and deections in children’s classroom adjustment. Development & Psychopathology, 7, 295-312.
•Pianta, R. C., Steinberg, M. S., & Rollins, K. B. (1995). e rst two years of school: teacher–child relation-
ships and deections in children’s classroom adjustment. Development and Psychopathology, 7, 295–312.
•Pianta, R.C. & La Paro, K. (2003). Improving early school success. Educational Leadership, April, 24-29.
•Popović Ćitić, B. (2012). Vezanost za školu kod učenika koji imaju različite uloge u vršnjačkom nasilju. Speci-
jalna edukacija i rehabilitacija, vol. 11, br. 4. 547-564.
•Radišić, J. & Baucal, A. (2012). Understanding practice of mathematics and language teachers from their own
perspective, paper presented at the 25th International Congress for School Eectiveness and Improvement,
Malmo 5th-8th January 2012. http://www.icsei.net/leadmin/ICSEI/icsei_2012/papers/1791918_ABS.pdf
•Reddy, R., Rhodes, J. E., & Mulhall, P. (2003). e inuence of teacher support on student adjustment in the
middle school years: A latent growth curve study. Development and Psychopathology, 15, 119–138.
•Rudasill, K.M & Rimm-Kaufman, S.E. (2009) Teacher–child relationship quality: e roles of child tempera-
ment and teacher–child interactions. Early Childhood Research Quarterly (24), 107–120.
•Rychen, D.S. & Salganik, L.H. (2003). Key Competencies for a Successful Life and Well-Functioning Society.
Hogrefe & Huber, USA.
•Sakiz, G., Pape, S.J., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2012) Does perceived teacher aective support matter for middle
school students in mathematics classrooms? Journal of School Psychology 50 (2012) 235–255.
•Simons-Morton, B. G, Crump, A. D., Haynie, D. L., & Saylor, K. E. (1999). Student-school bonding and ado-
lescent problem behavior. Health Education Research, 14(1), 99-107.
•Spieker, S. J., Nelson, D. C., Petras, A., Jolley, A., & Barnard, C. (2003). Joint inuence of child care and infant
attachment security for cognitive and language outcomes of low-income toddlers. Infant Behavior & Devel-
opment, 26, 326-344.
•Stievenart, M., Roskam, I., Meunier, J.C., & van de Moortele, G. (2011) e reciprocal relation between
children’s attachment representations and their cognitive ability. International Journal of Behavioral Develop-
ment 35(1) 58–66.
•Stipek, D., Salmon, J. M., Givvin, K. B., Kazemi, E., Saxe, G., & MacGyvers, V. L. (1998). e value (and con-
vergence) of practices suggested by motivation research and promoted by mathematics education reformers.
Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 465–488.
•Teo, A., Carlson, E., Mathieu, P., Egeland, B., & Sroufe, L.A. (1996). A prospective longitudinal study of psy-
chosocial predictors of achievement. Journal of School Psychology, 34, 285-306.
185
Attachment in the student-teacher relationship as a factor of school achievement
•ompson, R. (2008). Early Attachment and Later Development: familiar questions, new answers; In J. Cas-
sidy & P. Shaver (Eds.). Handbook of Attachment: eory, Research and Clinical Aplication, (pp. 348-365).
New York: e Guilford Press.
•Tucker, C. M., Zayco, R. A., Herman, K. C., Reinke, W. M., Trujillo, M., Carraway, K., et al. (2002). Teacher
and child variables as predictors of academic engagement among low-income African American children.
Psychology in the Schools, 39, 477–488.
•Valiente, C., Lemery-Chalfant, K., Swanson, J., & Reiser, M. (2008). Prediction of children’s academic com-
petence from their eortful control, relationships, and classroom participation. Journal of Educational Psy-
chology, 100, 67–77.
•Van IJzendoorn, M. H., & Vliet-Visser, S. (1988). e relationship between quality of attachment in infancy
and IQ in kindergarten. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 149, 23-28.
•Van IJzendoorn, M. H., Sagi, A., & Lambermon, M. W. E. (1992). e multiple caretaker paradox: Data from
Holland and Israel. In R. C. Pianta (Ed.), Beyond the parent: e role of other adults in children’s lives. New
directions for child development, Vol. 57 (pp. 5–24). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
•Van IJzendoorn, M., Dijkstra, J., & Bus, A. (1995). Attachment, intelligence, and language: A meta-analysis.
Social Development, 4, 115-128.
•Videnović, M. & Radišić, J. (2011). Anksioznost u vezi sa učenjem matematike: Matematika - bauk ili ne?
Psihološka istraživanja, Vol. 14. str.157-177.
•Walberg, H.J. (1981). A psychological theory of educational productivity. In F. Farley & N.J. Gordon (Eds.),
Psychology and education: the state of the union (pp. 81–108). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
•Weineld, N. S., Sroufe, A., Egeland, B., & Carlson, E. (1999). e nature of individual dierences in infant–
caregiver attachment. In J. Cassidy & P. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: eory, research, and clinical
applications (pp. 68–88). New York: Guilford.
•Weineld, N. S., Sroufe, L. A., Egeland, B., & Carlson, E. (2008). Individual dierences in infant-caregiver
attachment: conceptual and empirical aspects of security. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of
attachment: eory, Research and Clinical Application (2nd ed.). (pp. 78-101) New York: Guilford.
•Wentzel, K. R. (1997). Student motivation in middle school: e role of perceived pedagogical caring. Jour-
nal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 411–419.
•Wubbels, T. & Brekelmans, M. (2005) Two decades of research on teacher–student relationships in class.
International Journal of Educational Research (43), 6–24.
•Wubbels, ., & Levy, J. (1991). A comparison of interpersonal behavior of Dutch and American teachers.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 15, 1-18.
•Wubbels, ., & Levy, J. (Eds.). (1993). Do you know what you look like: Interpersonal relationships in educa-
tion. London, England: Falmer Press.
•Wubbels, ., Creton, H. A., & Hooymayers, H. E (1992). Review of research on teacher communication
styles with use of the Leary model. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 27, 1-12.
•Zeidner, M. (1998). Test anxiety. e state of the art. New York: Plenum.
•TIMSS (2011). TIMSS and PIRLS 2011: Relationships Among Reading, Mathematics and Science Achieve-
ment at the Fourth Grade – Implications for Early Learning. Retrieved Octobar 6., 2014. from http://timss.
186
Ksenija Krstić
bc.edu/timsspirls2011/downlouds/TP11_Relationship_Report.pdf & Instruction to Engage Students in
Learning Scale. Retrieved Octobar 6., 2014. from http://timss.bc.edu/methods/pdf/T11_G4_G_Scales_IES.
pdf
•PISA (2012). Technical Report. Retrieved Octobar 6., 2014. from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/
PISA-2012-techinical-report-nal.pdf
др Ксенија Крстић
Одељење за психологију, Филозофски факултет, Универзитет у Београду, Србија
Везаност ученика и наставника као фактор школског постигнућа
Традиционална струја истраживања у психологији образовања фокусирана је на изучавање
когнитивних аспеката учења, наставе и интеракције ученика и наставника. Све већи број истраживања
указује да с у социоемоционално доброс тање ученика у школи и квалитет интеракције ученик-наставник
суштински значајни за прилагођавање школи, учење и школско постигнуће. У овом раду бавимо се
значајем социоемоционалног односа ученика и наставника из перспективе теорије везивања. Основна
идеја овог истраживања јесте да везаност ученика за наставника, као основа њихове социоемоционалне
интеракције, може поспешити учење и развој.
Велики број истраживања је показао да подржавајућа и топла интеракција са наставником
може имати утицај на учење, социјалне компетенције и прилагођавање школи. Наставник може бити
„сигурна база“ за истраживање и учење у школи, пружајући исту емоционалну сигурност и подршку
које карактеришу и сензитивно и респонзивно родитељство. Студије су показале да сигурна везаност за
родитеље има значајне импликације за развој когнитивних способности, бољу школску прилагођеност,
виша школска постигнућа, развијеније социјалне компетенције. На сличан начин и сигурна везаност
за наставника повезана је са вишим школским постигнућем, позитивнијим ставовима према школи,
већим залагањем и учешћем у активностима на часу и ређим понављањем разреда.
У истраживањима о улози емоција у образовању доминирају истраживања која су фокусирана
на значај појединих емоција (на пример, испитна анксиозност) или на ученичке или наставничке
емоције и њихову функцију и утицај на когнитивне процесе, наставу и учење. Истраживања која
се баве интеракцијом најчешће испитују педагошку интеракцију наставника и ученика и начине на
које ученици стичу знања и вештине током те интеракције. Нову струју истраживања у образовању
чине студије које се баве микроанализом процеса интеракције и специфичним поступцима ученика
и наставника. Оно што недостаје су истраживања фокусирана на емоционални однос и интеракцију
ученика и наставника. Тај емоционални однос је релативно стабилан и трајан фактор који утиче не
само на динамику односа и интеракција ученика и наставника већ и на процес наставе и учења.
Основни циљ овог истраживања јесте да утврди како су емоционални квалитет интеракције
наставника и ученика, специфични однос везаности и карактеристике наставничке праксе повезани са
два важна образовна исхода: школским успехом и позитивним односом ученика према школи и учењу.
187
Attachment in the student-teacher relationship as a factor of school achievement
Рад је усмерен на истраживање у ченичке интеракције и везаности за учитељиц у на крају четвртог,
односно наставника математике на крају седмог разреда основне школе. Истраживањем је обухваћено
триста шездесет шест ученика из пет београдских основних школа. За потребе овог истраживања
упитник је конструисан адаптацијом неколико постојећих скала којима се мере различите димензије
односа ученик–наставник. Упитником су обухваћене следеће димензије: димензије социоемоционалног
односа наставника и ученика – тражење близине, посебност, протест због одвајања, уточиште, сигурна
база (димензије везаности), отворена комуникација и блискост; димензије наставничке праксе –
педагошка подршка, вођство, захтевност, помоћ/ пријатељски однос, задовољство, конфликтност. Као
меру образовног постигнућа узели смо ученички позитиван однос према школи и учењу и оцене из
српског језика, математике и просечну оцену на крају претходног разреда.
Анализа поузданости скала показала је да две скале (захтевност и вођство) имају ниску
поузданост, због чега су искључене из даљих анализа. Факторском анализом утврђено је да се димензије
социоемоционалног односа групишу око једног фактора који је назван везаност за наставника.
Димензије наставничке праксе: помоћ/ пријатељски однос, задовољство и конфликтност такође чине
један фактор, назван позитиван емоционални однос према ученицима. Ове димензије, уз димензије
педагошка подршка и позитиван однос према школи и учењу, и школске оцене биле су основа за SEM
анализу (structural equation modeling) на подузорцима ученика четвртог и седмог разреда.
У теоријском моделу претпостављено је да везаност за наставника утиче на школске оцене и
позитиван однос према школи и учењу, а да наставничка педагошка подршка и позитиван емоционални
однос са ученицима утичу на везаност за наставника, али и директно на оба образовна постигнућа. SEM
анализом утврђено је да, на оба узраста, теоријски модел одговара емпиријски добијеним подацима,
али и да постоје везе међу варијаблама/димензијама које нису значајне.
На узорку ученика четвртог разреда утврђено је да везаност за учитељицу утиче и на позитиван
однос према школи и учењу и на школске оцене. С друге стране, везаност за учитељицу зависи од обе
димензије наставничке праксе – од педагошке подршке и позитивног емоционалног односа према
ученицима. Истовремено, педагошка подршка утиче и директно на школске оцене, док позитиван
емоционални однос са ученицима утиче на њихов општи однос према школи и учењу. Осим тога, ове
две димензије наставничке праксе су повезане, што значи да ученици опажају да учитељица која има
позитивнији емоционални однос са њима даје и квалитетнију педагошку подршку.
На узрасту ученика седмог разреда везаност за наставника математике утиче само на позитиван
однос ученика према школи и учењу, али не и на оцене из математике. Везаност за нас тавника математике
зависи само од наставничког позитивног емоционалног односа према ученицима, не и од квалитета
педагошке подршке коју пружа. На оцене из математике утичу и квалитет педагошке подршке коју
наставник пружа, али и позитиван емоционални однос према ученицима. Осим тога, на овом узрасту
нема међусобне везе између ове две димензије наставничке праксе.
На основу ових резултата, може се закључити да на оба узраста постоји везаност ученика за
учитељицу, односно наставника математике и да та везаност утиче на један од образовних исхода,
позитиван однос према школи и учењу. На млађем узрасту учитељица је важна као фигура везаности
и топао, сигуран, подржавајући однос са учитељицом повољно утиче и на школско постигнуће
мерено оценама ученика. Ученици ће развити сигурну везаност за учитељицу која има позитиван
емоционални однос са ученицима, што значи да је пријатељски расположена, помаже им, задовољна је
својим ученицима и ретко је са њима у сукобу; и истовремено пружа квалитетну педагошку подршку
188
Ksenija Krstić
и фидбек. На старијем узрасту, везаност за наставника математике имаће утицај само на генерални
позитиван однос према школи и учењу. На овом узрасту ученици имају мање потреба, али, имајући
у виду да се ради о предметном наставнику, и мање прилика да развију однос везаности са једним
предметним наставником. Оно што одређује њихов успех из математике, су позитиван емоционални
однос наставника и квалитет педагошке подршке.
Утицај везаности за наставника на образовне исходе, утврђен у овом истраживању, указује на
значај успостављања позитивног емоционалног односа у учионици и развијања топлог, сензитивног и
подржавајућег окружења за учење у школи.
Кључне речи: везаност за наставника, педагошка подршка, емоционални однос, образовна
постигнућа.
