Students’ adjustment at school: The role of teachers’ need satisfaction,teacher–student relationships and student well-being

Abstract

This study investigated how teachers’ perceptions of their psychological need stisfaction, teacher-student relationships and students’ perceptions of well-being relate to students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. One-hundred eighty-three elementary teachers with an average of 23 years of teaching experience, completed the Basic Need Satisfaction at Work Scale, the Student-Teacher Relationships Scale, and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Seventy-five students aged 11 years old, completed the Subjective Well-Being measure and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. SEM analyses revealed that teachers’ perceptions of need satisfaction and students’ perceptions of well-being were not associated with students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. Rather, teacher-student relationships were robust predictors of these difficulties. Findings and implications for research and practice are discussed.

Keywords

teachers’ psychological need satisfaction teacher-student relationships students’ well-being students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties

Teaching is a complex profession requiring emotional effort (Hargreaves, 2001) in demanding and challenging situations, but teaching children with emotional and behavioral difficulties is even more of a challenge (Nutbrown & Clough, 2004). Behavior management in the classroom can be frustrating and takes up a great deal of teachers’ time (J. Gray & Richer, 1995; P. Gray et al., 1996). At the same time, one in six students present emotional and behavioral difficulties (Esser et al., 1990; Offord et al., 1991). Under such conditions, the significance of teachers’ psychological functioning becomes a central focus, since teachers’ perceptions may have an effect on teacher-student relationships and students’ adjustment (Poulou & Norwich, 2002; Soodak & Podell, 1994). However, information is somewhat limited concerning how teachers’ own psychological functioning contributes to the building of effective relationships with students and students’ adjustment in the. The present study investigates the relationship among teachers’ psychological need satisfaction, teacher-student relationships and students’ well-being in an attempt to illustrate the potential predictors of students’emotional and behavioral difficulties in elementary schools.

Teachers’ need satisfaction and students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties

Until recently, the significance of teachers’ psychological functioning was generally ignored by the literature (Collie et al., 2018; Korthagen & Evelein, 2016). Now, there is a growing emphasis on the matter in the hope of ensuring student psychological adjustment and well-being in schools (Collie et al, 2018). The concept of need is the term most usually employed to interpret teachers’ behavior at work (Catalan et al., 2018), while Self-Determination Theory (SDT, Deci & Ryan, 1985) provides a sound theoretical foundation for most studies of teachers’ needs. SDT needs serve as “psychological nutriments” of teachers’ personal growth and professional development (Aelterman et al., 2016), and suggests that teachers are motivated in their work when their psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness in their workplace are fulfilled (Janke et al., 2015). Thus, teachers who perceive that they can undertake responsibility for actions related to their teaching process (autonomy need), perceive they have sufficient resources to cope with their working demands (competence need), and feel more connected with their colleagues (relatedness need), may be more intrinsically motivated towards their work.

Teachers’ need satisfaction has been related to a number of variables. These include teaching motivation (Abos et al., 2018), classroom management (Holzberger et al., 2014), teachers’ psychological health (Desrumaux et al., 2015), enjoyment at work (Klassen et al., 2012), engagement (Cheon et al., 2014), psychological empowerment and career commitment (Mabekoje et al., 2016), intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy and innovative behavior (Klaeijsen et al., 2018), adaptation, adjustment, growth and optimal experience (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Teachers are more likely to develop a work-related learning goal orientation when they feel their basic psychological needs are satisfied in their current working environment (Janke et al, 2015). Thwarting teachers’ need for autonomy, competence and relatedness is linked to teachers’ feelings of job pressure and burnout (Bartholomew et al., 2014).

Teachers’ need satisfaction has also been linked to student learning outcomes, such as academic achievement (Collie & Martin, 2017; Marshik et al., 2017). Teachers’ satisfaction of their own needs predicts students’ psychological need satisfaction, which in turn influences students’ reading achievement (Marshik et al, 2017). Teachers who do not feel that their psychological needs are fulfilled are less motivated to do their best work in the classroom (Ostroff, 1992), and impact negatively on students’ well-being and achievement (Hoglund et al., 2015).

Apart from the literature dealing with teachers’ need satisfaction and subsequent student achievement, work on students’ potential adjustment as the result of teacher’s need satisfaction is somewhat limited. It is argued that teachers who perceive that their needs for autonomy, relatedness and competence are being supported at work are more intrinsically motivated, and in turn more likely to support their students’ psychological needs (Reeve, 2010). In addition, there is limited research on the emotional functioning of teachers working with students experiencing emotional and behavioral difficulties (Rae et al., 2017), showing that teachers experiencing emotional exhaustion and burnout respond inadequately to students’ difficult behavior (Klusmann et al., 2016; Yoon, 2002). Thus, emerging research needs to further investigate the impact of teachers’ need satisfaction on student behavior. The present study investigates teachers’ need satisfaction, and the way it relates to students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties.

Teacher–student relationships and students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties

International research has shown unambigious evidence of the link between teacher-student relationships and student behaviour (Birch & Ladd, 1997). Close teacher-student relationships may enhance student adjustment (Hamre et al., 2008) and may lessen student behavioral difficulties (Dominguez et al., 2011). In contrast, conflict in teacher-student relationships may increase behavior problems (Buyse et al., 2008). Although the role of teacher-student relationships is well-stated, nevertheless this parameter should not be ignored in any investigation of students’ behavior in classrooms.

Students’ well-being and emotional and behavioral difficulties

The emotional environment in the classroom is an important contextual factor that influences students’ well-being. The concept of subjective well-being refers to positive affect, which consists of positive emotions (e.g. joy, excitement), and negative affect, which consists of negative emotions (e.g. anger and anxiety) (Diener & Emmons, 1984). The literature has established an association between students’ psychological well-being, achievement and school behavior (Lewis et al., 2011). Well-functioning students are the most engaged group characterized by the highest levels of dedication and absorption (Shu-shen, 2015), compared to their peers. Negative well-being has been found to be an antecedent of peer victimization, (Martin et al., 2008), affect cognitive student engagement (Lewis et al, 2011), and mediate between stressful life events and internalizing or externalizing behaviors (McKnight et al., 2002). Research has so far addressed students’ negative well-being and there has been less research on students’ positive well-being (Lewis et al, 2011). In addition, research dealing with school-related factors and students’ well-being (Suldo et al., 2006) is likewise minimal, despite the amount of time students spend in schools. Finally, few studies on students’ subjective well-being have considered students’ own perspective (Rask et al., 2002), although students are fairly accurate as to how they perceive their behavior (Maag & Rutherford, 1986). I therefore feel that any information on students’ perceptions of their own well-being and on their psychological adjustment and the way these two parameters are associated with teachers’ perceptions of their need satisfaction and teacher-student relationships will add to our understanding of students’ behavior in the classroom.

Teacher–student relationships and students’ well-being as potential mediators

SDT posits that teachers’ need satisfaction is not only related to teachers’ psychological functioning, but also related to teacher-student interactions (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Specifically, teachers who are autonomously motivated invest more in developing close relationships with their students and cultivate a supportive classroom climate (Abos et al, 2018). Korthagen & Evelein (2016) stressed the connection between the personal aspect of need fulfillment in teachers and the professional aspects of teaching, such as teaching behavior and teachers’ relationships with students, thus stressing the connection between the internal and the external aspects of teaching. It seems that if teachers are to be effective in promoting teacher-pupil relationships, they need to be emotionally nurtured themselves (Rae et al, 2017).

The way in which teachers interact with their students is closely related to students’ emotional functioning. Indeed, research has recently shown that teachers’ role in influencing students’ emotional functioning is more important than previously thought (Mainhard, et al., 2018). Worryingly, it has been found that when teachers are overwhelmed with work and disinclined to work with students, students’ behavioral difficulties are likely to increase (Hoglund et al, 2015). This finding confirms that teachers’ perceptions of their own emotional functioning impacts teacher-student relationships (Poulou, 2017a; Roffey, 2012), and makes it even more necessary to examine teachers’ perceptions of their own needs satisfaction in schools, in order to promote positive relationships with students and students’ well-being. Apart from the plethora of research on the relationship between teachers’ perceptions and teaching behavior, there is little research on the possible link between the personal aspect of teachers’ need satisfaction and teacher-student relationships (Korthagen & Evelein, 2016). Moreover, students’ perceptions of their own well-being and behavior outcomes may be determined by the degree of emotional support or discord they experience in their teacher-student relationships (Birch & Ladd, 1997).

Objectives of the study

The purpose of the study was to obtain a greater understanding of students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties, on the basis of both teachers’ and students’ perceptions. The first aim was to identify the unique roles played by teachers’ need satisfaction, teacher-student relationships and students’ perceptions of well-being in predicting students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. The second aim was to examine whether teacher-student relationships and student well-being play a mediating role in the association between teachers’ need satisfaction and students’ difficulties. Figure 1 presents the hypothesized model. Taking the study aims together, we seek to delineate factors related to students’ difficulties. Such factors include teachers’ and students’ personal factors and classroom contextual factors. A third aim of the study was to investigate the hypothesized model on the basis of both teachers’ and students’ perceptions of emotional and behavioral difficulties and to address any points of correspondence between these two agents.

Figure 1.

Hypothetical model.

Method

Participants

The participants consisted of 183 elementary teachers (69.9% female; average teaching experience 23 years, SD = 10) working in schools in central Greece. All participants voluntarily participated in the study and completed questionnaires on themselves and on their students. Teachers completed questionnaires about their classroom students, resulting in two-hundred and eight questionnaires (boys 55%, girls 45%). Subsequently, after consent had been granted by school principals and parents, sixth grade teachers asked a sample of their students (sixth grade students’ age is 11 years old) consisting of a maximum of a randomly selected five from each class to complete self-report questionnaires. Students completed seventy-five questionnaires. Assurances regarding the confidentiality of the information provided were given to both teachers and students.

Measures

Teachers’ measurements

Basic need satisfaction at work scale

Teachers’ perceptions of their need satisfaction were measured with the Basic Need Satisfaction at Work Scale (Deci et al., 2001). Teachers rated their intrinsic needs on 21 items, taxonomized into three subscales: the need for autonomy (7 items: e.g. ‘I feel like a can make a lot of inputs to deciding how my job gets done’), the need for competence (6 items: e.g. ‘On my job I do not get much of a chance to show how capable I am’), and the need for relatedness (8 items, e.g. ‘I really like the people I work with’). Responses are given on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (definitely does not apply) to 7 (definitely applies), with higher scores indicating higher need satisfaction. Previous studies have provided evidence for the validity of the scale (Deci et al., 2001). The scale was translated into Greek, re-translated into English, and piloted by 3 elementary teachers to ensure the accuracy of the Greek version. According to SEM, the fit indices suggested good fit of the model: χ² = 233.26, df = .59, RMSEA = .13, CFI = .87. The alphas in the study ranged from .78 for autonomy, .71 for competence and .89 for relatedness subscales.

Student-Teacher relationships scale (STRS-SF)

Teachers’ perceptions of teacher-student relationships were measured with the Student-Teacher Relationships Scale-Short Form (STRS-SF, Pianta, 2001). STRS-SF includes 15 items taxonomized into two subscales: The closeness subscale, with 8 items measuring teacher’s feelings of warmth, affection and open communication with a student (e.g. “It’s easy to know what this child is feeling”), and the conflict subscale, with 7 items measuring teacher’s feelings of negativity towards a student (e.g. “Dealing with this child drains my energy”). Responses are given on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (definitely does not apply) to 5 (definitely applies), with higher scores indicating teachers report more closeness and less conflict with students. The translation and factorial validity of the STRS-SF in the Greek educational context has been demonstrated by Tsigilis and Gregoriadis (2008). SEM fit indices suggested a good fit of the model: χ² = 188.52, df = .82, RMSEA = .91, CFI = .1. Cronbach alphas for the current study were .89 for closeness, and .85 for conflict subscales.

The strengths and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ) for teachers

Teachers’ perceptions of their students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties were measured with the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, Teacher-Form (SDQ, Goodman, 1999). We administered the four SDQ scales with 5 items each: hyperactivity scale (i.e., restless, overactive, cannot stay still for long), emotional symptoms scale (i.e., often unhappy, down-hearted or tearful), conduct problems scale (i.e., often fights with other children or bullies them), and peer problems scale (i.e., rather solitary, tends to play alone). Each item can be marked as 0, “not true”, 1, “somewhat true”, or 2, “certainly true”, with higher scores indicating more students’ difficulties. Information about the Greek translation of the questionnaire, and validity to teachers’ population, comes from Bibou-Nakou et al (2012). Further evidence of validity has been provided by other studies (Poulou, 2017b). SEM fit indices showed a good fit of the model: χ² = 223.57, df = 121., RMSEA = .07, CFI = . 9. The alphas in the current study ranged from .73 for emotional, .69 for conduct, .83 for hyperactivity, and .65 for peer difficulties.

Students’ measurements

Well-being measure

The subjective well-being measure was used to measure students’ perceptions of well-being (Diener & Emmons, 1984). The measurement included four positive affect items (happy, joyful, enjoyment/fun and pleased) and five negative affect items (depressed, unhappy, frustrated, worried/anxious and angry/hostile). Students had to rate each of the items on the basis of how far they have experienced such feelings over the past few days (1 “I did feel it at all” and 5 “I felt it very much”). Higher scores indicate higher levels of students’ well-being. The scale was translated into Greek, and then re-translated back into English, to ensure the accuracy of the Greek version. The fit indices indicated a good fit of the model: χ² = 44.08, df = 24, RMSEA = .13, CFI = .91. The alphas for positive and negative well-being subscales were .89 and .83 respectively.

The strengths and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ) for students

The self-report version of the SDQ can be completed by children and teenagers aged 11-17 years (Goodman et al., 2004). We administered the four scales of SDQ: hyperactivity scale (i.e., I am restless, I cannot stay still for long), emotional symptoms scale (i.e., I am often unhappy, down-hearted or tearful), conduct problems scale (i.e., I fight a lot. I can make other people do what I want), and peer problems scale, (i.e., I am usually on my own. I generally play alone or keep to myself). Each scale has 5 items, and each item can be marked as 0, “not true”, 1, “somewhat true”, or 2, “certainly true”. Higher scores indicate more students’ difficulties. The translation validity of the measure comes from Bibou-Nakou et al (2012). SEM fit indices indicated a good fit of the model: χ² = 66.77, df = 47, RMSEA = .09, CFI = .9. The alphas in the current study ranged from .43 for emotional, .72 for conduct, .57 for hyperactivity and .59 for peer difficulties.

Results

Preliminary analyses

Data analysis were run in R (R Core Team, 2018) using the R-studio environment (R Studio-v1.0.143, 2009-2016) together with its basic libraries: a) for SEM analysis: (Rosseel, 2012), semPlot (Epskamp & Stuber, 2017), semTools (SEM Tools contributors, 2016), and b) for detecting outliers: MVN (Korkmaz et al., 2014), as well with the psych library (Revelle, 2018) with all its dependencies. Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics, with teachers’ relatedness needs, teachers’ closeness with students, students’ positive well-being and students’ conduct and hyperactivity problems receiving the highest scores among variables under study. Table 2 presents the variable correlations using the whole dataset. On the basis of correlations among the variables of the study, it appears that teachers’ perceptions of autonomy were moderately, albeit significantly, correlated with their perceptions of conflict with their students, and were correlated in an expected direction: that is, higher scores concerning teachers’ autonomy relate to lower scores in regard to teachers’ conflictual relationships with their students. Teachers’ perceptions of competence and relatedness need satisfaction were not significantly correlated with teacher-student relationships, student well-being or with student difficulties, based on both teacher and students’ ratings of students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. Closeness in teacher student relationships was negatively correlated with teachers’ ratings of students’ conduct, hyperactivity and peer difficulties, while conflict in teacher student relationships was positively correlated with teachers’ ratings of students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. Students’ perceptions of well-being (both positive and negative well-being) were not significantly related to teachers’ perceptions of students’ difficulties. Students’ perceptions of negative well-being significantly related to students’ perceptions of their emotional and conduct difficulties, in the expected direction: higher levels of negative well-being were related to higher scores on emotional and conduct difficulties.

Table 1.

Means and standard deviations of the independent and dependent variables.

	Mean	SD
Teachers’ psychological needs
Autonomy	4.71	.93
Competence	5.31	.79
Relatedness	5.49	.87
Teacher-student relationships
STRS closeness	3.32	.69
STRS conflict	1.88	.88
Students’ well being
Positive well being	4.43	.80
Negative well being	1.74	.74
Emotional and behavioural difficulties (teachers’ ratings)
Emotional	.47	.42
Conduct	.44	.43
Hyperactivity	.89	.57
Peers	.42	.40
Emotional and behavioural difficulties (students’ ratings)
Emotional	.36	.32
Conduct	.48	.35
Hyperactivity	.39	.35
Peers	.34	.31

Table 2.

Correlations between independent and dependent variables in the study.

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
Teachers’ psychological needs
1. Autonomy
2.Competence	.42**
3. Relatedness	.21*	.50**
Teacher-student relationships
4. STRS closeness	.07	.05	.09
5. STRS conflict	−.26*	−.12	−.12	.00
Students’ well-being
6. Positive well being	−.13	.11	−.57	.29	.20
7. Negative well being	−.66	−.31	.10	−.28	−31*	−.41*
Students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties (teachers’ SDQ ratings)
8. Emotional	−.11	−.14	−.14	−.13	.28**	−.17	−.10
9. Conduct	−.17	.03	−.01	−.20*	.53**	−.11	−.13
10. Hyperactivity	−.05	.03	.01	−.20*	.33**	−.13	.07
11. Peer problems	−.19	.00	.04	−.30**	.30**	−.10	.06
Students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties (students’ SDQ ratings)
Emotional	−.29	.25	.64	−.11	−.34*	−.09	.45**	−.13	−.24	−.14	−.03
Conduct	−.04	−.60	−.35	−.26	.02	−.08	.27*	.11	.22	.22	.23
Hyperactivity	−.58	−.29	.06	.00	.02	−.01	−.01	.06	.14	.31*	.13
Peer problems	−.40	.07	.02	.08	−.01	.11	.10	−.04	−.08	−.03	−.01

Associations among teachers’ need satisfaction, teacher–student relationships, students’ well-being, and students’ difficulties: Teachers’ ratings

The first analysis examined the extent to which teachers’ perceptions of needs satisfaction, teacher-student relationships and student well-being uniquely predict teachers’ perceptions of students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. In conducting our SEM analysis, we removed nonsignificant paths for reasons of parsimony. SEM fit indices suggested a good fit of the model: χ² = 21.73, df = 15, RMSEA = .18, CFI = .94. Figure 2 shows the model with beta coefficients that were statistically significant at p < .05. Standardized beta coefficients for the model are summarized in Table 3.

Figure 2.

Structural equation model of needs, teacher-student relationships, well-being and emotional and behavioral difficulties teachers’ perceptions of emotional and behavioral difficulties.

Table 3.

Standardized Beta Coefficients for the predictor variables on each outcome variable (teachers’ SDQ ratings).

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1. Autonomy
2.Competence
3. Relatedness
4. STRS closeness	.32*
5. STRS conflict	.-43**
6. Positive well being	.74**			.23**	.67**
7. Negative well being	–	–
8. Emotional	–		–	–
9. Conduct	–	–		–	.50**	−.32*
10. Hyperactivity	–			–	.32**	−.27**	.30**
11. Peer	−.31*			−.30**

To begin with, we examined the significant role of teachers’ need satisfaction as potential determinants of students’ behavior. Of the three psychological needs studied (autonomy, competence and relatedness), autonomy was the only significant predictor of teacher-reported student emotional and behavioral difficulties, in that teachers’ perceptions of autonomy need satisfaction decrease peer problems in students (b = −.31, p ≤.00). We next looked at the extent to which teacher-student relationships and students’ perceptions of well-being have a bearing on teacher-reported student emotional and behavioral difficulties. In this case, an increase in teacher-student closeness was found to significantly relate to decrease in peer difficulties (b = −.30, p ≤.00), whereas increase in teacher-student conflict was significantly related to increase in conduct problems (b = .50, p ≤.00) and hyperactivity (b = .32, p ≤.00). As expected, student perceptions of positive well-being was negatively related to teacher-reported student conduct problems (b = −.32, p = .02) and hyperactivity (b = −.27, p ≤.00). On the other hand, as students’ perceptions of negative well-being increased, so did teacher-reported student hyperactivity (b = .30, p ≤.00).

Teacher student relationships and student well-being as mediators: Teachers’ ratings

Our second aim was to examine how teachers’ perceived need satisfaction relates to teacher-student relationships. Results indicated that the desire for autonomy was the only psychological need significantly related to teacher-student relationships, such as an increase in perceived autonomy satisfaction was related to increase in teacher-student closeness (b = .32, p = .02) and decrease in teacher-student conflict (b = −.43, p ≤.00). Satisfaction of competence and relatedness needs was not significantly associated with teacher-student relationships. We also examined whether teachers’ perceived need satisfaction was related to students’ perceptions of well-being. In this case, it appeared that autonomy need satisfaction was only significantly related to positive well-being (b = .74, p ≤.00), in a rather expected direction: As perceptions of teachers’ satisfaction of autonomy need increased, students’ perceptions of positive well-being increased.

In order to examine the potential mediating role played by teacher-student-relationships, an alternative model was tested, in which teacher-student relationships mediated the link between teachers’ need satisfaction and teacher-reported students emotional and behavioral difficulties. The model was revealed to be adequate, with fit indices: χ² = 37.83, df = 23, p<.05, RMSEA = –. 15, CFI = .91, with teacher-student relationships fully mediating the association linking teachers’ need satisfaction and students’ difficulties (b = .39, p≤ .05).

An alternative model was also tested to examine the role played by student well-being in mediating between teachers’ need satisfaction and teacher-reported students emotional and behavioral difficulties. In this case, the SEM model was not significant: χ² = 21.23, df = 22, p> .05, RMSEA = .00, CFI = . 1.00, and students’ well-being did not mediate the link between teachers’ need satisfaction and students’ difficulties (b = −.02, p = .67).

We examined next the extent to which teacher-student relationships and students’ well-being may be partial mediators, which we did by testing indirect effects on the hypothesized model. This revealed significant effects from autonomy to conduct problems via conflict (β = −.50, p <.00), and from autonomy to hyperactivity via conflict (β = −.32, p <.05). This result shows that conflict in teacher-student relationships is an important mediator for students’ mainly behavioral difficulties. Moreover, significant indirect effects were found from autonomy to conduct problems via students’ positive well-being (β = .56, p <.05), and from autonomy to hyperactivity via students’ positive well-being (β = .47, p <.05), suggesting that, although students’ perceptions of well-being do not fully mediate the association between psychological need satisfaction and teacher-reported student difficulties, they do act as partial mediators.

Associations between teachers’ need satisfaction, teacher–student relationships, students’ well-being, and students’ difficulties: Students’ ratings

As we did in the previous analysis, here we examined the extent to which teachers’ perceptions of need satisfaction, teacher-student relationships and students’ perceptions of well-being uniquely predict student-reported emotional and behavioral difficulties. This time we set students’ perceptions of emotional and behavioral difficulties as the outcome.

The fit indices in SEM analysis indicated a not so good fit of the model (χ² = 88.44, df = 40, p >.00, CFI = .74, RMSEA = .29), following the commonly accepted values for good fit. However, researchers have challenged the universal use of fit indices,without taking into account sample sizes, number of factors, number of measurements, or other critical issues in deciding on the validity of a model (Hu & Bentler, 1998; Marsh et al, 2005). Based on these arguments against the golden rules of fit indices, we argue that the aforementioned model is valid from a theoretical point of view, although the fit indices are not as high as expected in the proposed rules of thumb. Figure 3 shows the model with beta coefficients statistically significant at p < .05. Standardized beta coefficients for the model are summarized in Table 4.

Figure 3.

Structural equation model of needs, teacher-student relationships, well-being and emotional and behavioral difficulties students’ perceptions of emotional and behavioral difficulties.

Table 4.

Standardized beta coefficients for the predictor variables on each outcome variable (students’ SDQ ratings).

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1. Autonomy
2. Competence
3. Relatedness
4. STRS closeness	.36*
5. STRS conflict	−.82**		−.30*
6. Positive well being	–	–	–
7. Negative well being	–	–	–
8. Emotional	–	–	–
9. Conduct	–	–	–
10. Hyperactivity	.30*	–	–	−.58*	.95**	–	–
11. Peer	.81*	–	–	−.52*	.90**	−.31*	−.45**

Firstly, we examined the significant role played by teachers’ need satisfaction as potential predictors of student-reported students emotional and behavioral difficulties. Among the three psychological needs we studied, autonomy was the only significant predictor of students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties, in a way that teachers’ perceptions of autonomy need satisfaction relate to increase in hyperactivity (b = .30, p = .02) and peer problems in students (b = .81, p = .03).

Based on students’ perceptions of emotional and behavioral difficulties, our results show that increases in teacher-student closeness significantly relate to decreases in hyperactivity (b = –.58, p = .04) and peer difficulties (b = −.52, p = .04), whereas increases in teacher-student conflict significantly relate to increases in hyperactivity (b = .95, p = .01) and peer difficulties (b = .90, p = .01). In turn, as expected, students’ perceptions of positive well-being was negatively related to students’ peer difficulties (b = −.31, p = .04), whereas increases in students’ perceptions of negative well-being were related to increases in peer difficulties (b = .45, p < .00).

Teacher–student relationships and students’ well-being as mediators: Students’ ratings

Furthermore, analysis indicated that autonomy was significantly related to teacher-student relationships, just as increases in teachers’ perceived autonomy were related to increases in teacher-student closeness (b = .36, p = .04) and decreases in teacher-student conflict (b = −.82, p < .00). In contrast to teachers’ ratings of students’ difficulties, we now found that relatedness need satisfaction was significantly associated with conflict in teacher-student relationships (b = .−30, p = .02), in a manner indicating that increase in teachers’ relatedness with colleagues were related to decrease in teacher-students’ conflict.

In order to examine the potential mediating role of teacher-student relationships, we tested an alternative model, in which teacher-student relationships mediated the link between teachers’ need satisfaction and student-reported emotional and behavioral difficulties. Fit indices of the model were acceptable: χ² = 48.48, df = 23, p <.05, RMSEA = –.17, CFI = .90, but teacher-student relationships were not found to mediate the link between teachers’ psychological needs and student difficulties (b = −.01, p = .37).

We also examined the mediating role of student well-being between teachers’ need satisfaction and student-reported emotional and behavioral difficulties. In this case, SEM model was not significant: χ² = 38.53, df = 25, p > .05, RMSEA = .12, CFI = .93, suggesting that students’ perceptions of well-being do not mediate the link between teachers’ need satisfaction and students’ difficulties (b = .15, p = .20).

Finally, we examined the extent to which teacher-student relationships and students’ well-being may be partial mediators by testing indirect effects on the hypothesized model. This revealed significant effects from autonomy to peer difficulties via conflict (β = −.74, p = .01), and from autonomy to hyperactivity via conflict (β = −.78, p = .02). These results indicate that conflict in teacher-student relationships is an important partial mediator for students’ peer difficulties and hyperactivity. Moreover, in this analysis, we found no significant indirect effects from autonomy to students’ difficulties, via students’ well-being, which suggests that student perceptions of well-being do not mediate the association between teachers’ need satisfaction and student-reported emotional and behavioral difficulties.

Discussion

The current study extends our understanding of teachers’ psychological functioning at school and takes a closer look at teachers’ psychological need satisfaction, teacher-student relationships and student well-being and adjustment. When examined in terms of the SDT model, the satisfaction of teachers’ need for autonomy, teacher-student relationships and student well-being were associated with students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties, as reported by both classroom teachers and students. The findings also indicated that teacher-student relationships (but not student well-being) were important mediators in the relationship between teachers’ psychological need satisfaction and students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties, at least when viewed on the basis of teachers’ ratings of students’ difficulties. The study employs both teachers and students’ perceptions and its findings contribute to efforts to promote teachers’ need satisfaction for autonomy, positive teacher-student relationships and students’ adjustment, all of which to our knowledge are unrecorded in the literature.

First, our findings corroborate those of previous studies suggesting the importance of satisfying teachers’ psychological needs so as to improve both teacher and student outcomes (Collie et al., 2018). There is support that teachers needs’ fulfillment leads teachers to perform better, bring about positive teacher-relationships and students’ achievement (Collie et al., 2018). In the present study, we have investigated teachers’ perceptions of their autonomy, competence and relatedness with colleagues need satisfaction, as potential predictors of students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. On the basis of teachers’ ratings of students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties, the satisfaction of autonomy needs appeared to be the only significant predictor of students’ difficulties, which agrees with studies that confirm the centrality of autonomy in the SDT framework (Assor et al., 2002). In fact, autonomy was the only significant predictor of student peer difficulties, suggesting that teachers’ perceptions of their autonomy in their workplace relates to students’ relationships with their peers. This finding is important, because it suggests that teachers act as role models, and shape students’ behavior (Nizielski et al., 2012). Teachers’ closeness with students and, above all, conflict with students were important predictors of students’ externalizing problems (conduct and hyperactivity) based on teachers’ratings of students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. Such a finding is consistent with previous research (Hoglund et al, 2015; Poulou, 2017a; Silver et al., 2005) that highlights the deleterious effect of conflict in teacher-student relationships. Student negative well-being was associated with student hyperactivity as rated by teachers, a finding anticipated by previous research on the associations between negative well-being and behaviour at school (Lewis et al, 2011). Our current study adds to the limited research on student perceptions of positive well-being, suggesting that perceptions of positive well-being account to some extent for the lessening of conduct and hyperactivity student problems according to teachers’ ratings.

Second, the present study considers at the same time teachers’ perceptions of their psychological need satisfaction, teacher-student relationships and student well-being in an attempt to explain students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. It demonstrates that teachers’ perceptions of psychological need satisfaction were not directly linked to students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. This was a common finding for both teacher and student ratings of students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. Rather, perceptions of autonomy were linked to teacher-student relationships, suggesting that teachers’ satisfaction of autonomy needs provides them with opportunities to make their own professional choices and decisions about their classroom climate. Similarly, Holzberger et al. (2014) found that intrinsic needs are correlated with the most affective aspect of instructional behaviours, namely teacher-student relationships. They also argued that the failure to satisfy teachers’ needs may lead to feelings of frustration on the part of teachers, which in turn have a negative impact on teacher-student relationships. In fact, in the current study, teacher-student relationships were found to mediate the link between teachers’ autonomy need satisfaction and teacher-reported students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties, implying that teachers who display high levels of autonomous motivation are more likely to display positive teacher-student interactions and bring about positive outcomes in student behaviour. This may be because more autonomous teachers regard their students’ behavior as informational rather than threatening (Weinstein et al., 2010).

Our study show that students’ well-being did not mediate the relationship between teachers’ need satisfaction and student behaviorial outcomes, beside research suggesting that teachers who do not feel that their psychological needs are fulfilled impact negatively on students’ well-being (Hoglund et al., 2015; Ostroff, 1992). Our study however adds to the limited research on school factors related to students’ well-being (Suldo et al., 2006), and helps our understanding of students’ perceptions of mainly positive well-being. It was found that perceptions of positive well-being were partial mediators between teachers’ autonomy and student behavior, at least when seen from the teachers’ perspectives, confirming the connection between the personal aspect of need fulfillment in teachers and the professional aspects of teaching (Korthagen & Evelein, 2016), such as students’ well-being. It may be that teacher-student relationships have an effect on students’ positive well-being, in a manner similar to the way in which teacher-student relationships impact teachers’ well-being (Jennings & Greenberg, 2009). This assumption however, needs to be further investigated.

Finally, the study used the same measurement methods as regards of individual teacher-student dyads to explore the congruence between teacher and students’ perceptions in rating students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. The study revealed similarities in teacher and students’ perceptions of the importance of the satisfaction of teacher autonomy, teacher-student relationships and student well-being as potential predictors of student adjustment at school. However, as was anticipated (Poulou, 2017c; Spilt et al., 2010), there were also differences between teachers’ and students’ perceptions, found in the significant correlation between teachers’ relatedness needs and teacher-student conflict. This finding may suggest that the way teachers’ relate to their colleagues is reflected in teacher-student relationships, thus justifying the important role played by relatedness need satisfaction, at least for the students of the current study. On the other hand, teachers perceived relatedness need satisfaction as a non-significant factor in predicting teacher-student relationships. The second difference between teacher and student perceptions was the mediating role of the teacher-student relationship between teachers’ psychological need satisfaction and students’ behavior, based on teachers’ ratings of students’ behavior, whereas teacher-student relationship had no significant mediating role based on students’ ratings of students’ behavior. This latter finding suggests that other possible variables drawn from the school context should be examined, if we are to take the students’ perspective. Finally, although students’ well-being played an important role in predicting teacher-reported students conduct and hyperactivity difficulties, students’ well-being did not predict teacher-reported student peer difficulties. In contrast, students’ well-being was found to be an important predictor of student-reported peer difficulties, thus contributing to the research evidence that lower levels of well-being are associated with victimization by peers (Martin et al, 2008), or externalizing behaviors (McKnight, et al, 2002).

Limitations

There are several limitations to our study. First, it cannot offer any inferences regarding possible causal relationships. The hypothesized model included directional relationships, formulated on the basis of current literature. Although our findings revealed that the model was consistent with our data, thus providing evidence for the plausibility of this directional relationships, there are also several other plausible models which merit investigation. It is possible for example that rather than psychological needs fulfillment impacting student behaviors, student behaviors could impact perceptions of psychological needs fulfillment. Secondly, our CFI and RMSEA values were not high enough, following the accepted values for good fit. Marsh et al (2005) however noted that CFA goodness of fit criteria are too restrictive when applied to most multifactor rating instruments, especially when analysis is done at the item level and there are multiple factors. A third limitation is that teachers and students voluntarily completed the questionnaires. Finally, although both teacher and students’ self-reports were used to avoid single-source bias, the use of interviews or mixed-method designs, would be a suggestion to overcome this limitation.

Implications

Notwithstanding these limitations, our study contributes to a better understanding of the factors associated with students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties in elementary schools. The findings contribute to emerging research on the emphasis on teachers’ psychological need satisfaction and they confirm the central role played by autonomy need satisfaction. Our findings expand research on the importance of satisfying teachers’ psychological needs in the work place and in successful classroom management, involving such matters as teacher-student relationships and student behavioral outcomes. We believe that high levels of teacher autonomy may bring about positive teacher-student relationships, and above all minimize conflict in teacher-student relationships. In turn, students who experience teachers’ positive interactions are ascribed with less behavioral difficulties by their teachers and by their own account. Current findings also indicate that teachers’ personal characteristics, such as their perceptions of competence and relatedness with colleagues needs, play minor roles in the classroom context. Finally, our study offers new knowledge regarding the contribution made by teacher-student relationships and students’ well-being, in that results suggest that these constructs are associated with students’ behavioral, rather than emotional difficulties.

Our study provides evidence that the fulfillment of teachers’ needs is not just a matter of personal concern to teachers, but is also associated with teaching behavior, and a matter that elementary students do perceive and reflect in their own behavior. Thus professional development programs may help teachers to realize an interchange between their personal and professional characteristics in their classroom practice and so provide them with strategies for coping with the pressure they experience in their profession (Abos et al, 2018). Teacher autonomy is crucial for professional development (Aelterman et al, 2016; Lee, 2008), so principals and teacher educators need to be supportive and to ensure that teachers’ needs are satisfied in an educational context, especially when conflict dominates teacher-student relationships. Janke et al. (2015), for instance, assumed that teachers are more likely to become keener to learn, when they feel their basic psychological needs are satisfied in their current working environment. Our results are relevant to the development of efforts to ensure that teachers’ experience of their work is positive. They are also important in the development of positive relationships with students and for students’ adjustment at school.

Significance of the study

In the present study, we employed the SDT model to extend our knowledge of teachers’ psychological need satisfaction, and to address a number of limitations on our understanding of teachers’ psychological functioning and student outcomes. First, the present study considers teachers’ perceptions of their psychological need satisfaction, teacher-student relationships, and students’ perceptions of well-being, in an investigation of the potential predictors of elementary students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. Contrary to our expectations, with exception the autonomy needs, teachers’ perceptions of psychological need satisfaction and students’ perceptions of well-being were not linked to students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. Rather, teachers’ perceptions of relational conflict were significantly associated with students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties. Second, the present study confirmed the mediating role of teacher-student relationships, but not of students’ well-being, in linking teachers’ perceptions of psychological need satisfaction and students’ difficulties. Third, our study is the first known study to explore the congruence between teacher and students’ perceptions concerning aspects of teachers’ psychological need satisfaction, teacher-student relationships and students’ well being, using students’ behavior measures, in terms of individual teacher-student dyads.

The study has implications for practice. We suggest that if we want to minimize students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties, we need to address teachers’ needs and help teachers to enhance positive teacher-student relationships. Professional development programs may help teachers realize the dynamics of these variables (Abos et al, 2018). The study has implications for research. Our results underline the importance of teachers and students’ personal characteristics and teachers-student relationships in understanding students’ behavior. In order to ensure students’ psychological adjustment and well-being in schools, we need to address teachers’ psychological needs. In fact, students’ well-being and teachers’ well-being are two sides of the same coin (Roffey, 2012).

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author biography

Maria S. Poulou is Associate Professor of Educational Psychology, University of Patras, Greece. Her research interests are: students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties, classroom management, promotion of mental health at schools, and teachers’ professional development. She is the author of articles and books and member of International Associations.

ORCID iD

Maria S. Poulou

References

Abos

Haerens

Sevil

Aelterman

Garcia-Gonzalez

L. N.

(2018). Teachers’ motivation in relation to their psychological functioning and interpersonal style: A variable-and person-centered approach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 74, 21–34.

Aelterman

Vansteenkiste

Van Keer

Haerens

(2016). Changing teachers’ beliefs regarding autonomy support and structure: The role of experienced psychological need satisfaction in teacher training. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 23, 64–72.

Assor

Kaplan

Roth

(2002). Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: Autonomy-enhancing and suppressing teacher behaviours predicting students’ engagement in schoolwork. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 261–278.

Bartholomew

K. J.

Ntoumanis

Cuevas

Lonsdale

(2014). Job pressure and ill-health in physical education teachers: The mediating role of psychological need thwarting. Teaching and Teacher Education, 37, 101–107.

Bibou-Nakou

Stogianidou

Kioseoglou

Papageorgiou

Goodman

(2012). Strengths and difficulties questionnaire. In Stalikas

Triliva

Roussi

(Eds.), Psychometric measures in Greece (pp. 830–831). Pedio.

Birch

S. H.

Ladd

G. W.

(1997). The teacher-child relationship and children’s early school adjustment. Journal of School Psychology, 35, 61–79.

Buyse

Verschueren

Doumen

Damme

J. V.

Maes

(2008). Classroom problem behavior and teacher-child relationships in kindergarten: The moderating role of classroom climate. Journal of School Psychology, 46, 367–391.

Catalan

A. A.

Serrano

J. S.

Clemente

J. A. J.

Lucas

J. M. A.

Garcia-Gonzalez

(2018). Spanish validation of the basic psychological needs at work scale: A measure to predict teachers’ well-being in the workplace. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 18, 127–148.

Cheon

S. H.

Reeve

T. H.

Jang

H. R.

(2014). The teacher benefits from giving autonomy support during physical education instruction. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 36, 331–346. http://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.2013-0231.

10.

Collie

R. J.

Granziera

Martin

A. J.

(2018). Teachers’ perceived autonomy support and adaptability: An investigation employing the job demands-resources model as relevant to workplace exhaustion, disengagement, and commitment. Teaching and Teacher Education, 74, 125–136.

11.

Collie

J., & Martin

A. J.

(2017). Teachers’ sense of adaptability: Examining links with perceived autonomy, support, teachers’ psychological functioning, and students’ numeracy achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 55, 29–39.

12.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum.

13.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

Gagne

Leone

D. R.

Usunov

Kornazheva

B. P.

(2001). Need satisfaction, motivation and well-being in the work organizations of a former Eastern bloc country: A cross cultural study of self-determination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 930–942.

14.

Desrumaux

Lapointe

Sima

M. N.

Boudrias

J. S.

Savoie

Brunet

(2015). The impact of job demands, climate, and optimism on well-being and distress at work: What are the mediating effects of basic psychological need satisfaction? European Review of Applied Psychology, 65, 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2015.06.003

15.

Diener

Emmons

R. A.

(1984). The independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1105–1117.

16.

Dominguez

Vitiello

V. E.

Fuccillo

J. M.

Greenfield

D. B.

Bulotsky-Shearer

R. J.

(2011). The role of context in preschool learning: A multilevel examination of the contribution of context-specific problem behaviors and classroom process quality to low-income children’s approaches to learning. Journal of School Psychology, 49, 175–195.

17.

Epskamp

Stuber

(2017). SEM plot: Path diagrams and visual analysis of various SEM packages’ output. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package = semPlot

18.

Esser

Schmidt

Woerner

(1990). Epidemiology and course of psychiatric disorders in school-aged children—Results of a longitudinal study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 31, 243–263.

19.

Goodman

(1999). The extended version of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire as a guide to child psychiatric caseness and consequent burden. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40, 791–799.

20.

Goodman

Ford

Corbin

Meltzer

(2004). Using the strengths and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ) multi-informant algorithm to screen looked-after children for psychiatric disorders. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 13, 25–31.

21.

Gray

Richer

(1995). Classroom responses to disruptive behaviour. Routledge.

22.

Gray

Miller

Noakes

(1996). Challenging behaviour in schools. Routledge.

23.

Hamre

B. K.

Pianta

R. C.

Downer

J. T.

Mashburn

(2008). Teachers’ perceptions of conflict with young students: Looking beyond problem behaviors. Social Development, 17, 115–136.

24.

Hargreaves

(2001). The emotional geographies of teaching. Teachers College Record, 103, 1056–1080.

25.

Hoglund

W. L. G.

Klingle

K., E.

Hosan

N. E.

(2015). Classroom risks and resources: Teacher burnout, classroom quality and children’s adjustment in high needs elementary schools. Journal of School Psychology, 53, 337–357.

26.

Holzberger

Philipp

Kunter

(2014). Predicting teachers’ instructional behaviors: The interplay between self-efficacy and intrinsic needs. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39, 100–111.

27.

L. T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424–453.

28.

Janke

Nitsche

Dickhauser

(2015). The role of perceived need satisfaction at work for teachers’ work-related learning goal orientation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 184–194.

29.

Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial classroom: Teacher social and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 79, 491–525. doi:10.3102/0034654308325693

30.

Klaeijsen

Vermeulen

Martens

(2018). Teachers’ innovative behavior: The importance of basic psychological need satisfaction, intrinsic motivation, and occupational self-efficacy. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62, 769–782. http://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2017.1306803

31.

Klassen

R. M.

Perry

N. E.

Frenzel

A. C.

(2012). Teachers’ relatedness with students: An underemphasized component of teachers’ basic psychological needs. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 150–165. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026253

32.

Klusmann

Richter

Lüdtke

(2016). Teachers’ emotional exhaustion is negatively related to students’ achievement: Evidence from a large-scale assessment study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108, 1193–1203.

33.

Korkmaz

Goksuluk

Zararsiz

G. M.

(2014). An R package for assessing multivariate normality. The R Journal, 6, 151–162.

34.

Korthagen

F. A. J.

Evelein

F. G.

(2016). Relations between student teachers’ basic needs fulfillment and their teaching behavior. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 234–244.

35.

Lee

(2008). Understanding teachers’ written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 69–85.

36.

Lewis

A. D.

Huebner

E. S.

Malone

P. S.

Valois

R. F.

(2011). Life satisfaction and student engagement in adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 249–262.

37.

Maag

J. W.

Rutherford

R. B.

(1986). Perceived social competence of behaviorally disordered, learning disabled and nonlabelled students. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 13, 10–18.

38.

Mabekoje

S. O.

Azeez

Okunuga

O. O.

Bamgbose

A. O.

(2016). Does basic work needs satisfaction mediate between psychological empowerment and career commitment of teachers? Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 5, 187–199.

39.

Mainhard

Oudman

Hornstra

Bosker

R. J.

Goetz

(2018). Student emotions in class: The relative importance of teachers and their interpersonal relations with students. Learning and Instruction, 53, 109–119.

40.

Marsh

H. W.

Hau

K.-T.

Grayson

(2005). Goodness of fit in structural equation models. In Maydeu-Olivares

McArdle

J. J.

(Eds.), Multivariate applications book series. Contemporary psychometrics: A festschrift for Roderick. P. McDonald (pp. 275–340). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

41.

Marshik

Ashton

P. T.

Algina

(2017). Teachers’ and students’ needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness as predictors of students’ achievement. Social Psychology of Education, 20, 39–67.

42.

Martin

Huebner

E. S.

Valois

R. F.

(2008). Does life satisfaction predict victimization experiences in adolescence? Psychology in the Schools, 45, 705–714.

43.

McKnight

C. G.

Huebner

E. S.

Suldo

S. M.

(2002). Relationships among stressful life events, temperament, problem behavior, and global life satisfaction in adolescents. Psychology in the Schools, 39, 677–687.

44.

Nizielski

Hallum

Lopes

P. N.

Schutz

(2012). Attention to student needs mediates the relationship between teacher emotional intelligence and student misconduct in the classroom. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30, 320–329.

45.

Nutbrown

Clough

(2004). Inclusion and exclusion in the early years: Conversations with European educators. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 19(3), 301–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/0885625042000262479

46.

Offord

Boyle

Racine

(1991). The epidemiology of antisocial behavior in childhood and adolescence. In Pepler

Rubin

(Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 31–54). Lawrence Erlbaum.

47.

Ostroff

(1992). The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 963–974.

48.

Pianta

R. C.

(2001). The student-teacher relationship scale (STRS). Psychological Assessment Resources.

49.

Poulou

(2017a). An examination of the relationship among teachers’ perceptions of social-emotional learning, teaching efficacy, teacher-students interactions and students’ behavioral difficulties. International Journal of School & Educational Psychology, 5, 126–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683603.2016.1203851

50.

Poulou

(2017b). The relation of teachers’ emotional intelligence and students’ social skills to students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties: A study of Greek preschool teachers’ perceptions. Early Education and Development, 28, 996–1010. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2017.1320890

51.

Poulou

(2017c). Social and emotional learning and teacher-student relationships: Preschool teachers and students’ perceptions. Early Childhood Education Journal, 45, 427–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-016-0800-3

52.

Poulou

Norwich

(2002). Cognitive, emotional and behavioral responses to students with emotional and u difficulties: A model of decision making. British Educational Research Journal, 28, 111–138.

53.

R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org.

54.

Rae

Cowell

Field

(2017). Supporting teachers’ well-being in the context of schools for children with social, emotional and behavioural difficulties. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 22, 200–218.

55.

Rask

Paivi

A. K.

Marja-Terttu

Pekka

(2002). Relationships among adolescent subjective well-being, health behavior, and school satisfaction. The Journal of School Health, 72, 243–249.

56.

Reeve

(2010). Teachers are not autonomy supportive: An unfortunate truth [Presentation]. Fourth International Conference on Self-Determination Theory, Ghent, Belgium.

57.

Revelle

(2018). Procedures for personality and psychological research, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych

58.

Roffey

(2012). Pupil well-being-teacher well-being: Two sides of the same coin? Educational and Child Psychology, 29, 8–17.

59.

Rosseel

(2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36. DOI.10.18637/jss.v048.i02

60.

RStudio Team. (2016). RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, Inc., MA. http://www.rstudio.com

61.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2000). The darker and brighter sides of human existence: Basic psychological needs as a unifying concept. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 319–338.

62.

Shu-Shen

(2015). An investigation into academic burnout among Taiwanese adolescents from the self-determination theory perspective. Social Psychology of Education, 18, 201–219. http://10.1007/s11218-013-9214-x

63.

Silver

R. B.

Measelle

J. R.

Armstrong

J. M.

Essex

M. J.

(2005). Trajectories of classroom externalizing behavior: Contributions of child characteristics, family characteristics and the teacher-child relationships during the school transition. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 39–60.

64.

Soodak

Podell

(1994). Teachers’ thinking about difficult-to-teach students. The Journal of Educational Research, 88, 44–51.

65.

Spilt

J. L.

Koomen

H. M. Y.

Mantzicopoulos

P. Y.

(2010). Young children’s perceptions of teacher-child relationships: An evaluation of two instruments and the role of child gender in kindergarten. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 31, 428–438.

66.

Suldo

S. M.

Riley

K. N.

Shaffer

E. J.

(2006). Academic correlates of children and adolescents’ life satisfaction. School Psychology International, 27, 567–582.

67.

Tsigilis, N., & Gregoriadis, A. (2008). Measuring teacher-child relationships in the Greek kindergarten setting: A validity study of the Student-Teacher Relationships Scale-Short Form. Early Education and Development, 19, 816–835.

68.

Weinstein

Hodgins

H. S.

Ryan

R. M.

(2010). Autonomy and control in dyads: Effects on interaction quality and joint creative performance. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1603–1617.

69.

Yoon

J. S.

(2002). Teacher characteristics as predictors of teacher-student relationships: Stress, negative affect, and self-efficacy. Social Behavior and Personality, 30, 485–493.