Forming and Sustaining High-Quality Student–Teacher Relationships to Reduce Minor Behavioral Incidents

Abstract

The quality of the relationship that develops between a student and teacher has been connected to pivotal instructional and behavioral outcomes for students. The student–teacher relationship can specifically be harnessed to reduce minor behavioral infractions. However, it is an element of the learning environment that is often overlooked. This article outlines the importance of the student–teacher relationship and provides specific strategies gleaned from the existing literature that teachers could implement in their daily instruction to improve the quality of their relationships with students.

Keywords

classroom management behavior behavioral strategies positive behavior support interpersonal skills education/training/preparation teacher(s)

Teaching today can be taxing for many educators as a result of the increasing demands placed on teachers to meet the social, emotional, behavioral, and academic needs of every student. These struggles can be intensified by the occurrence of high rates of student misbehavior. Addressing problem behaviors in the classroom can take time away from critical academic instruction and results in increased teacher stress (Amstad & Müller, 2020; Haydon et al., 2018). Moreover, there is a negative relationship between increases in student behavior problems and teacher-reported well-being (Evans et al., 2019). Teachers report that student misbehavior negatively affects the learning environment (Westling, 2010) and the challenge of effectively addressing inappropriate behavior can be especially difficult for novice teachers (Smart & Igo, 2010)

The effectiveness of classroom management strategies may be limited if teachers do not first attend to the affective quality of their relationships with students. In fact, some researchers contend that a high-quality student–teacher relationship is a necessary prerequisite for all future impactful interventions (Marlowe et al., 2017). A high-quality student–teacher relationship is particularly important for students with emotional and behavioral struggles (Poulou, 2017). With this guideline in mind, the following sections will discuss the importance of the student–teacher relationship as it relates to key outcomes and then provide specific behaviors and cognitive strategies that will help educators develop positive relationships with their students. This article provides strategies intended to initially cultivate, maintain, or repair the student–teacher relationship. This conceptualization of the student–teacher relationship was originally outlined by Duong et al. (2018) as well as Cook et al. (2018).

What Is the Student–Teacher Relationship?

Engaging in meaningful attempts to improve the student–teacher relationship has been identified as an effective element of practice for improving the outcomes of students (Sutherland et al., 2019). It is defined as a “teacher engaging in verbal and nonverbal behaviors that convey warmth, closeness, and interest when listening to and interacting directly with a student (not group of students)” (Sutherland et al., 2019, p. 81). It also has been conceptualized as a system within which the teacher and the student engage in reciprocal communication (Cook et al., 2018). The quality of the student–teacher relationship is determined by the quality of interactions as well as teacher and student perceptions of one another and their relationship (Cook et al., 2018) and it is typically measured in terms of closeness/security versus conflict (Pianta, 2001). Student–teacher relationships that are characterized by a high level of closeness and low level of conflict are generally considered high-quality, positive relationships (Pianta, 2001).

Student Outcomes

A high-quality student–teacher relationship results in positive outcomes for students, whereas one that is highly conflictual predicts a student’s later behavior problems, even when controlling for other school factors (Baker, 2006). The quality of the relationship has been connected to numerous student outcomes including school adjustment and prosocial behavior (Birch & Ladd, 1998), relationships with peers (Howes, 2000; Howes et al., 1994), and academic performance (Hamre & Pianta, 2005). Research suggests that markers of the student–teacher relationship may actually better predict later school adaptation than student-level factors such as social skills or behavior problems (Hamre & Pianta, 2001). In addition, a student–teacher relationship that is characterized by high-quality interactions in the early school years has the power to extenuate risks associated with school failure (Hamre & Pianta, 2005). Furthermore, a closer student–teacher relationship can contribute to improvements in appropriate student behavior (McGrath & Van Bergen, 2015), which could subsequently reduce the number of students who require targeted and individualized behavior supports. In this way, a positive student–teacher relationship with all students can serve as a core classroom-level support within a positive behavior interventions and supports (PBIS) framework, as well as a key component of more intensive intervention supports for students with an emotional/behavioral disorder (EBD; Marlowe et al., 2017).

Forming a Positive Student–Teacher Relationship

The following sections present what a positive student–teacher relationship looks like before and during instruction (see Table 1) and how to maintain this relationship throughout the school year (see Table 2). Although these practices have been discussed individually elsewhere in the research literature, they are brought together and placed here in the larger context of forming positive relationships. It is important to engage in intentional practices to promote the development of a positive relationship with all students (Cook et al., 2018). Before and during instruction it is also important to explicitly state clear classroom rules, teach and reteach routines, and clearly communicate expectations and natural consequences of misbehavior. Establishing classroom rules and routines and spending time intentionally teaching students what expected behaviors look like in the classroom setting is an effective way of preventing problem behaviors before they occur (Alter & Haydon, 2017). Sharing with students what consequences for misbehavior will look like before they are needed also contributes to a sense of predictability and fairness in the classroom (Van Loan & Marlowe, 2013).

Table 1.

Strategies for Establishing a Positive Student–Teacher Relationship.

Strategy	Description	Source
Greetings at the door	Teacher greets each student individually when they enter the classroom	Anyon et al. (2018); Cook et al. (2018); Van Loan & Marlowe (2013)
Spending time with individual students	Teacher spends one-on-one time with each student; asks questions about student interests and listens attentively	Cook et al. (2018); Murray & Pianta (2007)
Morning meetings	Teacher dedicates time before instruction to discuss nonacademic topics, listens authentically to students’ voices, and connects with students as a group	Anyon et al. (2018)
Active supervision	Teacher maintains consistent eye contact and interacts frequently with students by having conversations, prompting, and encouraging	Gage et al. (2020); Stevens & Lingo (2013)
Clear communication of rules and routines	Teacher engages in explicit teaching strategies when developing classroom rules and routines and provides reteaching as-needed	Murray & Pianta (2007); Van Loan & Marlowe (2013)
Predictable responses to misbehavior	Teacher addresses instances of minor behavior in a calm tone, reteaches expectations, connects infractions to classroom rules, and avoids power struggles	Van Loan & Garwood (2020)
Genuine compliments	Teacher sporadically provides heartfelt, age-appropriate compliments to individual students	Cook et al. (2018)

Table 2.

Strategies for Maintaining a Positive Student–Teacher Relationship.

Resource/strategy	Description	Source
5-to-1 rule	Teacher provides more praise and positive feedback statements to students than reprimands or corrections	Downs et al. (2019); Sabey et al. (2019)
Positive contacts with guardians	Teacher shares acknowledgment of a student’s positive behavior or accomplishment with guardian(s)	Anyon et al. (2018); Cook et al. (2018)
Monitoring the student–teacher connection	Teacher communicates struggles they think a student is having and engages in ongoing, personal interactions with individual students to maintain positive connection and “check-in” on the state of the student-teacher relationship	Van Loan & Marlowe (2013); Cook et al. (2018)

Beginning of Class

One recommended strategy for building a strong foundation is spending one-on-one time with students to get to know their personal interests (Cook et al., 2018; Murray & Pianta, 2007). For example, at the start of the school year, many teachers direct their students to complete “about me” information sheets or essays. Building in time to review these work samples with individual students to discuss their unique responses and opinions demonstrates a sincere interest in their lives and sets the tone for success. In addition, greeting students at the door before each school day is a powerful tool for establishing a positive relationship (Anyon et al., 2018; Cook et al., 2018; Van Loan & Marlowe, 2013) and reducing off-task behavior (Allday & Pakurar, 2007). This may take the form of a simple, “Good morning, (Student’s name),” or it can include the use of something more individualized like a unique handshake or other greeting. Holding morning meetings or spending time at the start of the school day dedicated to connecting to students as a group and discussing nonacademic items can also support a positive student–teacher relationship (Anyon et al., 2018). These meetings also offer an opportunity for teachers to listen attentively and genuinely to student voice and gather insights from them that can be referenced during later instruction (Van Loan & Garwood, 2020; Van Loan & Marlowe, 2013). These meetings can be embedded into the daily time block that schools often have set aside for PBIS and/or social-emotional learning (SEL) instruction. For example, some teachers begin each Monday morning meeting by allowing each student to share something exciting or interesting from their weekend.

During Class

Teachers can use active supervision to help foster a positive student–teacher relationship. Active supervision refers to the teacher’s ability to maintain consistent eye contact and interaction with students, as well as circulate among students to monitor for instances of appropriate and inappropriate behavior, which can be effective for preventing problem behavior (Gage et al., 2020; Stevens & Lingo, 2013). Active supervisors interact frequently with students by having conversations, providing prompts, or providing encouragement.

Instances of minor misbehavior should be addressed via reteaching of the classroom expectations and calm delivery of specific behavioral feedback about why a behavior does not align with classroom rules (Murray & Pianta, 2007; Van Loan & Marlowe, 2013). For example, instead of responding to instances of calling out with, “No yelling out,” reminders to “raise your hand to speak” and active reference to a corresponding classroom rule are more effective in promoting rule-following behavior. These strategies contribute to a sense of predictability and consistency in the classroom and can support a close relationship. When addressing instances of disruption or misbehavior, it is also important to deliver directions in a calm tone of voice, demonstrate respect for the student, and avoid power struggles (Van Loan & Garwood, 2020). For example, responding to a minor behavioral infraction with calm redirection and reteaching may not have the intended supportive effect if the same infraction is later met with yelling and an office referral. Similarly, public admonishment, impatience, and overuse of punishment do little to effectively promote student compliance. Finally, providing students with genuine heartfelt compliments can help to foster the beginning of a positive student–teacher relationship (Cook et al., 2018). These compliments should be sincere, age-appropriate, and delivered in a manner that does not make a student uncomfortable. For example, some (i.e., often older) students may feel embarrassed by public recognition in which case it would be better to deliver a compliment privately, whereas others may enjoy such public attention (Burnett, 2001). This is a discernment that will become easier as a teacher gets to know students on an individual level.

It is important to remember that it takes about 8 weeks for the student–teacher relationship to begin to take shape (Marlowe et al., 2017) and students will vary in their response to teacher attempts to build closeness. Some students will exhibit feelings of closeness and security very quickly, whereas others who may have significant social-emotional struggles or who have experienced trauma may not outwardly respond at all to these strategies. These students are sometimes identified as those with EBD. While some teachers may find it more difficult to connect easily with students with EBD, their long-term success will be improved if teachers can remain committed to strengthening their relationships with these students, despite challenges or setbacks (Long, 2008; Van Loan & Garwood, 2020).

Long-Term Maintenance

Once a positive student–teacher relationship is established, it is essential to actively attend to the maintenance of this relationship (Cook et al., 2018). It is helpful to remember that it is not a static entity or end goal, but rather something that is constantly formed and redefined via a series of interactions throughout a school year (Van Loan & Garwood, 2020).

The current literature provides several maintenance strategies including the use of the “5-to-1” rule. This guideline suggests the use of five positive/praise statements to every reprimand or correction. In practice, this may take the form of a teacher providing any verbal indication of recognition, positive acknowledgment, or specific behavioral praise (e.g., “Great job cleaning up your desk so quickly!”) 5 times more often than they provide redirection or correction (academic and behavioral). In recent years, this “golden rule” has been reconceptualized as a result of its apparent impracticality in typical classroom settings and the general lack of a research base documenting its efficacy for addressing problem behaviors (Sabey et al., 2019). Rather than striving to meet this predetermined ratio, researchers now assert that whom a teacher praises and reprimands can be more important than how (Downs et al., 2019). It is important for a teacher to strive to include more praise and positive feedback than negative, but it may be more important to monitor how praise or reprimands impact individual student performance and attitude (Sabey et al., 2019). For example, it is not as impactful to provide specific behavioral praise about bringing a pencil to class for a fifth-grade student who has independently exhibited this behavior for an entire school year, whereas this may be an important behavior to acknowledge for a first-grader who struggles to arrive prepared to the classroom. In particular, research has demonstrated that students with EBD are more sensitive to praise and reprimands than typical peers (Downs et al., 2019). These students especially are those whose teachers should make a concerted effort to acknowledge, and for whom corrections should be delivered strategically and predictability.

Another strategy is positive contact with guardians and caregivers (Anyon et al., 2018; Cook et al., 2018). Typically, this takes the form of an email, phone call, or written note in which a student’s success or appropriate behavior is acknowledged and shared with that student’s guardian. In order for this to have the intended effect, this contact should be individualized for each student. Many schools use a school-wide behavior tracking system that permits the reporting of positive behavior in addition to infractions, and this provides teachers with an easy means of sharing instances of appropriate behavior with guardians. In addition, some teachers set a goal of contacting two or three predetermined guardians per week with positive student reports. This establishes a routine of acknowledgment and promotes the noting of positive behaviors for specific students, who may otherwise go unnoticed.

Finally, it is important to try and remain engaged with students on an emotional level. This enables teachers to remain attuned to how a student is feeling and to respond appropriately. It is suggested that teachers communicate struggles or apprehensions they think a student may have (Van Loan & Marlowe, 2013) as well as “check-up” on the state of the relationship via a brief interaction that centers on some topic that is personally important to the student (Cook et al., 2018). In practice this can be done in many ways. Some teachers of older students establish a journal communication system with certain students who prefer to interact in writing. This enables the teacher to respond sincerely to a student’s thoughts at a time that is convenient for the teacher. If a student appears to be struggling emotionally, taking a few minutes during a transition to inquire about their feelings demonstrates empathy and connection to the student. These checks can also occur when no concerns are present and could include a short conversation about something rewarding or interesting to the student. If a teacher senses that her relationship with a student has been stressed in some way, she can explore strategies to mend the student–teacher relationship.

Repairing the Relationship

Despite engaging in consistent and deliberate behaviors to maintain a positive relationship, students will demonstrate inappropriate behaviors to some degree. When addressing these instances, it is suggested that teachers conceptualize misbehavior as an opportunity for reteaching and review of expectations, and that they make a conscious effort to separate the student from his or her misbehavior (Marlowe et al., 2017; Van Loan & Garwood, 2020). In addition, it is inevitable that students will require correction and will experience some form of negative interaction with their teacher. Suggestions follow for how to mend the student–teacher relationship following the application of consequences, punishment, or engagement in a particularly negative interaction that may weaken it. Cook et al. (2018) offered several explicit strategic behaviors to aid in this goal, which are presented in Table 3.

Table 3.

Strategies to Mend the Student–Teacher Relationship.

Resource/strategy	Description	Source
Separating student from behavior	Teacher engages in conscious attempts to reconceptualize misbehavior as opportunities to reteach expectations and understands that students are not defined by their misbehavior	Marlowe et al. (2017); Van Loan & Garwood (2020)
Taking ownership for negative interaction(s)	Teacher acknowledges his or her responsibility for negative event	Cook et al. (2018)
Empathy statement	Teacher communicates empathy for the student via explicit acknowledgment of student’s feelings or struggles	Cook et al. (2018)
Starting fresh	Teacher communicates to student his or her intention to let go of a past conflict and start anew	Cook et al. (2018)
Reaffirming the student–teacher connection	Teacher explicitly communicates to student that he or she cares for the student	Cook et al. (2018)
Joint problem-solving	Teacher seeks input from the student when problem-solving in how to avoid future negative interactions	Cook et al. (2018)
Monitoring and regulating personal feelings	Teacher closely monitors his or her personal emotions about a student or situation and engages in explicit strategies to regulate negative feelings	Chang & Davis (2009); Van Loan & Marlowe (2013)
Perspective-taking	Teacher engages in attempts to view negative interactions and understand a student’s behavior from the viewpoint of the student	Aldrup et al. (2018)

Embedded in each of these strategies is a sense of intentionality and individual attention. While it may be difficult for some teachers to take personal ownership for negative interactions, this approach contributes to the development of a student–teacher relationship that is emotionally close and authoritative, rather than authoritarian (Rose et al., 2019). Taking ownership in this way does not necessarily mean that a teacher admits to wrongdoing with a student, rather it may simply involve the recognition that he or she was feeling frustrated or tired when a negative interaction occurred. A teacher could also ask the student, depending on student age and level of functioning, how the teacher’s actions or behavior made the student feel during a tense interaction. Similarly, empathy statements often include an explicit recognition of a student’s feelings during a negative interaction. Student feelings do not need to “make sense” for the teacher to demonstrate empathy. In addition, communicating to a student that the teacher is ready for a fresh start after a negative interaction can help the student to understand that his or her teacher still cares for them even after an instance of inappropriate behavior. Seeking student input in how to avoid similar issues in the future also helps build feelings of self-efficacy and reinforces teacher recognition of them as an individual. Finally, as a teacher, reiterating to a student that you care for them and are glad they are in the classroom helps to mend a strained relationship. An example of the use of two of these strategies in one statement is

Now that we’ve come up with some ideas of how to work together in the future, let’s agree that we will turn over a new leaf and have a fresh start tomorrow. I am looking forward to seeing you in the morning and having a great day together.

In addition, several cognitive strategies are suggested in the current literature to aid in dealing with the natural frustrations that teachers often feel when addressing consistent inappropriate student behavior. Developing an understanding of one’s own feelings and engaging in purposeful behavior to help regulate those emotions is an essential first step when preventing emotions from having a negative impact (Chang & Davis, 2009; Van Loan & Marlowe, 2013). Engaging in perspective-taking (i.e., trying to understand a situation by “putting yourself in a student’s shoes”) has also been shown to mitigate the relationship between student misbehavior and a decline in the quality of the relationship (Aldrup et al., 2018). Perspective-taking, reflecting on one’s practice, and expressing empathy for students have also been cited as important components of culturally responsive practice (Warren, 2018) and have been shown to reduce implicit biases (Whitford & Emerson, 2019) as well as provide positive support.

Conclusion

The student–teacher relationship is a significant, but often overlooked aspect of the teaching and learning environment that has the potential to improve student behavior and promote teachers’ well-being and job satisfaction (Split et al., 2011). By putting in more time up-front to deliberately nurture the student–teacher relationship, teachers can save time in addressing misbehavior, reduce the use of reprimands, and promote a positive classroom atmosphere. Although there are challenges associated with building these strategies into a school day particularly when teaching students with chronic behavioral struggles, we argue that the time investment is worth it in light of potential positive outcomes.

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.

References

Aldrup

Klusmann

Lüdtke

Göllner

Trautwein

(2018). Student misbehavior and teacher well-being: Testing the mediating role of the teacher-student relationship. Learning and Instruction, 58, 126–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.05.006

Allday

R. A.

Pakurar

(2007). Effects of teacher greetings on student on-task behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40(2), 317–320. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2007.86-06

Alter

Haydon

(2017). Characteristics of effective classroom rules: A review of the literature. Teacher Education and Special Education, 40(2), 114–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406417700962

Amstad

Müller

C. M.

(2020). Students’ problem behaviors as sources of teacher stress in special needs schools for individuals with intellectual disabilities. Frontiers in Education, 4, Article 159. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00159

Anyon

Atteberry-Ash

Yang

Pauline

Wiley

Cash

Downing

Greer

Pisciotta

(2018). It’s all about the relationships: Educators’ rationales and strategies for building connections with students to prevent exclusionary school discipline outcomes. Children and Schools, 40(4), 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1093/cs/cdy017

Baker

J. A.

(2006). Contributions of teacher–child relationships to positive school adjustment during elementary school. Journal of School Psychology, 44(3), 211–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.02.002

Birch

S. H.

Ladd

G. W.

(1998). Children’s interpersonal behaviors and the teacher-child relationship. Developmental Psychology, 34(5), 934–946. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.34.5.934

Burnett

P. C.

(2001). Elementary students’ preferences for teacher praise. The Journal of Classroom Interaction, 36(1), 16–23.

Chang

M. L.

Davis

H. A.

(2009). Understanding the role of teacher appraisals in shaping the dynamics of their relationships with students: Deconstructing teachers’ judgments of disruptive behavior students. In Shutz

P. A.

Zymbylas

(Eds.), Advances in teacher emotion research (pp. 95–127). Springer.

10.

Cook

C. R.

Coco

Zhang

Fiat

A. E.

Duong

M. T.

Renshaw

T. L.

Long

A. C.

Frank

(2018). Cultivating positive teacher–student relationships: Preliminary evaluation of the establish–maintain–restore (EMR) method. School Psychology Review, 47(3), 226–243. https://doi.org/10.17105/SPR-2017-0025.V47-3

11.

Downs

K. R.

Caldarella

Larsen

R. A. A.

Charlton

C. T.

Wills

H. P.

Kamps

D. M.

Wehby

J. H.

(2019). Teacher praise and reprimands: The differential response of students at risk of emotional and behavioral disorders. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 21(3), 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300718800824

12.

Duong

M. T.

Pullmann

M. D.

Buntain-Ricklefs

Lee

Benjamin

K. S.

Nguyen

Cook

C. R.

(2018). Brief teacher training improves student behavior and student-teacher relationships in middle school. School Psychology Quarterly, 34(2), 212–221. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000296

13.

Evans

Butterworth

Law

G. U.

(2019). Understanding associations between perceptions of student behaviour, conflict representations in the teacher-student relationship and teachers’ emotional experiences. Teaching and Teacher Education, 82, 55–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.03.008

14.

Gage

N. A.

Haydon

MacSuga-Gage

A. S.

Flowers

Erdy

(2020). An evidence-based review and meta-analysis of active supervision. Behavioral Disorders, 45(2), 117–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/0198742919851021

15.

Hamre

B. K.

Pianta

R. C.

(2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72(2), 625–638. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00301

16.

Hamre

B. K.

Pianta

R. C.

(2005). Can instructional and emotional support in the first-grade classroom make a difference for children at risk of school failure? Child Development, 76(5), 949–967. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00889.x

17.

Haydon

Stevens

Leko

M. M.

(2018). Teacher stress: Sources, effects, and protective factors. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 31(2), 99–107.

18.

Howes

(2000). Social-emotional classroom climate in child care, child-teacher relationships and children’s second grade peer relations. Social Development, 9(2), 191–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9507.00119

19.

Howes

Hamilton

C. E.

Matheson

C. C.

(1994). Children’s relationships with peers: Differential associations with aspects of the teacher-child relationship. Child Development, 65(1), 253–263. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1994.tb00748.x

20.

Long

N. J.

(2008). Breaking the trust barrier with troubled students. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 17(1), 56–58.

21.

Marlowe

M. J.

Garwood

Van Loan

C. L.

(2017). Psycho-educational approaches for pre-service teachers regarding emotional and behavioral disorders and the relationship-driven classroom. International Journal of Special Education, 32(4), 858–876.

22.

McGrath

K. F.

Van Bergen

(2019). Who, when, why and to what end? Students at risk of negative student-teacher relationships and their outcomes. Educational Research Review, 14, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2014.12.001

23.

Murray

Pianta

R. C.

(2007). The importance of teacher-student relationships for adolescents with high incidence disabilities. Theory Into Practice, 46(2), 105–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840701232943

24.

Pianta

R. C.

(2001). Student–teacher relationship scale. Psychological Assessment Resources.

25.

Poulou

M. S.

(2017). Students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties: The role of teachers’ social and emotional learning and teacher-student relationships. International Journal of Emotional Education, 9(2), 72–89.

26.

Rose

Leverson

Smith

(2019). PBIS forum 18 practice brief: Cultivating positive student-teacher relationships. https://www.pbis.org/resource/cultivating-positive-student-teacher-relationships

27.

Sabey

C. V.

Charlton

S. R.

(2019). The “magic” positive-to-negative interaction ratio: Benefits, applications, cautions, and recommendations. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 27(3), 154–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063426618763106

28.

Smart

Igo

(2010). A grounded theory of behavior management strategy selection, implementation, and perceived effectiveness reported by first-year elementary teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 110(4), 567–584. http://doi.org/10.1086/651196

29.

Split

J. L.

Koomen

H. M. Y.

Thijs

J. T.

(2011). Teacher wellbeing: The importance of teacher-student relationships. Educational Psychology Review, 23(4), 457–477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9170-y

30.

Stevens

K. B.

Lingo

A. S.

(2013). Assessing classroom management: The umbrella approach. Beyond Behavior, 22(2), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/107429561302200205

31.

Sutherland

K. S.

Conroy

M. A.

McLeod

B. D.

Kunemund

McKnight

(2019). Common practice elements for improving social, emotional, and behavioral outcomes of young elementary school students. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 27(2), 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063426618784009

32.

Van Loan

C. L.

Garwood

J. D

. (2020). Facilitating high-quality relationships for students with emotional and behavioral disorders in crisis. Intervention in School and Clinic, 55(4), 253–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451219855740

33.

Van Loan

C. L.

Marlowe

. (2013). Understanding and fostering teacher–student relationships to prevent behavior problems. In Smith

S. W.

Yell

M. L.

(Eds.), A teacher’s guide to preventing behavior problems in the elementary classroom (pp. 60–80). Pearson.

34.

Warren

C. A.

(2018). Empathy, teacher dispositions, and preparation for culturally responsive pedagogy. Journal of Teacher Education, 69(2), 169–183.

35.

Westling

D. L.

(2010). Teachers and challenging behavior: Knowledge, views, and practices. Remedial and Special Education, 31(1), 48–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508327466

36.

Whitford

D. K.

Emerson

A. M.

(2019). Empathy intervention to reduce implicit bias in pre-service teachers. Psychological Reports, 122(2), 670–688.