Do caring teachers protect African American youth with adverse adolescent experiences from risky behaviors?

Abstract

The current study aims to fill the existing research gaps by investigating the role of teacher care in protecting African American adolescents in under-resourced neighborhoods from negative outcomes of adverse life events. The study included 638 adolescents from four under-resourced neighborhoods in Chicago’s Southside who were assessed to determine the moderating role of caring teachers on the relationship between adverse adolescent experiences and risky sexual behaviors, substance use, bullying perpetration, and violent behaviors. Caring teachers had a significant moderating effect on the association between adverse experiences and both bullying perpetration and violent behaviors. Adolescents who perceived their teachers as caring showed lower tendencies towards bullying and violence, even if they had adverse experiences. These results highlight the crucial role of teacher care in supporting African American adolescents from under-resourced neighborhoods who have experienced adverse life events. It emphasizes educators’ role in shaping our youth’s future, especially those facing adversity and at a crossroads in their lives.

Plain language summary

Despite adverse life events, adolescents who perceived their teachers as caring were less at risk of engaging in bullying and violence. Caring teachers are especially important for African American adolescents in under-resourced neighborhoods.

Keywords

Adverse adolescent experiences bullying risky sexual behaviors substance use teacher violent behaviors

Introduction

Adverse adolescent experiences, which include harmful and traumatic experiences in adolescence, such as exposure to parental hardships at home and violence in the school and neighborhood, can seriously impair adolescent health and mental health. Adverse childhood and adolescent experiences impact approximately half of all youth in the United States (Assini-Meytin et al., 2022). However, adverse childhood and adolescent experiences are not homogeneously distributed (Assini-Meytin et al., 2022). Partly due to racialized poverty and sustained systems of inequality, adolescents living in low-resourced, urban neighborhoods are significantly exposed to adverse experiences. Some youth in low-resourced neighborhoods are likely to reside in a distressed home environment where they witness parental mental health problems, drug use, and incarceration (Voisin, 2018).

Several studies have documented that a strong and consistent relation has been found between exposure to adverse experiences and various negative outcomes, such as sexually risky behaviors (London et al., 2017; Song & Qian, 2020), bullying (Forster et al., 2020; Reisen et al., 2019), drug use (Afifi et al., 2020; Leza et al., 2021), and violence perpetration (Duke et al., 2010) among adolescents. The relationship between adverse adolescent experiences and risky behaviors could be explained by the general strain theory, which argues that strains, such as those reinforced by adverse childhood and adolescent experiences, tend to generate negative emotions, thereby creating pressure for “corrective” actions (Agnew, 1992), such as sexually risky behaviors, bullying, drug use, and violence, for example. Also, in line with the self-medication hypothesis, adolescents with adverse life events may perceive risky behaviors as a form of self-medication. According to the self-medication hypothesis, risky behaviors, such as drug use, for example, function as a compensatory means to modulate the effect and relieve distressful psychological states (Khantzian, 2003).

The effects of adverse childhood and adolescent experiences can be substantially buffered by supportive and caring relations with adult figures (Theron & Engelbrecht, 2011), such as primary caregivers. For some adolescents in economically oppressed communities, however, their relationship with caregivers is likely to be negatively affected as their caregivers may be emotionally unavailable due to adversities, including drug use, mental illness, and incarceration. In such a situation, teachers in school might play a crucial role in providing support to help adolescents cope with challenges. Teachers assume a great deal of responsibility to build a sense of belonging and connectedness, especially for students who have been historically disenfranchised (Maloney & Matthews, 2020). Although caregivers are considered the primary attachment figures, for some adolescents, attachment with teachers can provide them with the necessary emotional security, especially since caregivers are typically not present in school (Spilt & Koomen, 2022). According to a study by Van Ryzin (2010), about 40% of the students in their sample perceived their teachers as secondary attachment figures. Teacher care as a protective buffer appears to support Hirschi’s (1969) social control theory in which individuals are less likely to exhibit negative behaviors if they have strong bonds to conventional society (e.g., school). The presence of caring teachers can reinforce adolescents’ sense of connectedness to their school thereby lowering their odds of developing negative behaviors.

Research on adverse childhood and adolescent experiences has been growing over the years, particularly antecedents and associated health outcomes. However, little is known about protective factors, such as teacher care, and how they might moderate the relationship between adverse adolescent experiences and negative outcomes for some adolescents. In one of few studies, Forster et al. (2017) explored the relationship between ACEs and non-medical use of prescription medication and whether positive student-teacher relationships moderate this relationship from 2013 Minnesota Student Survey, which comprised 104,332 8^th, 9^th, and 11^th graders, The study findings revealed that students’ perceptions of their teachers as caring were a protective buffer in the association between adverse experiences and non-medical use of prescription medications. Teachers play an important role in students’ psychosocial development. Students spend most of their time in school where attendance is compulsory, which provides an opportunity for the development of bonds not only between students but also between students and teachers (Forster et al., 2017).

The present study

Expanding on Forster et al.’s (2017) seminal works, the present study investigates whether teacher care is a protective buffer for adolescents who have experienced adverse adolescent experiences. The sample consists of African American adolescents in four under-resourced neighborhoods in Chicago’s Southside. It was hypothesized that, as highlighted by the social bond theory, teacher care would moderate the association between adverse adolescent experiences and various negative behaviors, including risky sexual behavior, bullying perpetration, substance use, and violent behaviors.

Method

Recruitment and sample

A cross-sectional study consisting of a convenience sample of African American adolescents in four neighborhoods located in Chicago’s Southside (i.e., Englewood, Woodlawn, Kenwood, and Southshore) was conducted between August 2013 and January 2014. After receiving approval from the Institutional Review Board, the fifth noted author began to recruit adolescents in three high schools, one youth church group, two community youth programs, and four public venues that are frequented by the adolescents (e.g., parks, fast food outlets, and movie theaters) in Chicago’s Southside. Adolescents were eligible to participate in the study if they self-identified as African American and were between the ages of 13 and 24, which represents early to late adolescence. In Chicago’s Southside, some adolescents older than eighteen also attended high school. Adolescents younger than eighteen were asked to provide informed assent and had a legal caregiver who provided formal consent. Those eighteen and older were asked to provide consent. The following are the number of adolescents approached at each site and those who enrolled: schools (606/579), community centers (42/38), churches (49/44), and public venues (56/39). The overall response rate was 87% of the total number of 753 participants who were initially invited to take part in the study. For this study, the total number of the study participants was 638.

The participants were African American residents and the average annual median income ranged from $24,049 to $35,946, with the city average being $43,628 (City-Data, 2015). The percentage of single-female-headed households in these neighborhoods ranged from 28.9% to 32.3%, with the city average being 13.9% (City-Data, 2015).

Measures

Dependent variables

Risky sexual behaviors were measured with two items, which include “The last time you had sexual intercourse, were you high on drugs or alcohol?” and “The last time you had sexual intercourse, did you have any alcoholic drinks and/or any drugs before having sexual intercourse?” These items were selected as both alcohol and drug use and risky sexual behavior are serious problems especially for youth in low-resourced neighborhoods under economic stress (Brown et al., 2022; Crandall et al., 2017). Response options were No (0) and Yes (1). The Spearman-Brown reliability coefficient was measured for the two items, and the value obtained was 0.714, which indicated statistical significance. The Spearman-Brown coefficient is considered more appropriate than Cronbach’s alpha for assessing the reliability of two-item measures (Eisinga et al., 2013).

Substance use was measured with three items, including “Have you ever used Lean or Krokodil (cough syrup, codeine)?”; “Have you ever had at least one drink of alcohol?”; “Have you ever used marijuana (blunts, pot, weed)?” Response options were No (0) and Yes (1). Cronbach’s alpha was α = .65 or the present study sample.

Bullying perpetration was measured using four items from the University of Illinois Bully Scale (Espelage & Holt, 2001). This scale measures the extent to which individuals have engaged in behaviors against others within the last 30 days, such as “I threatened to hurt or hit another student” and “I helped harass other students.” Responses were measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from Never (0) to 7 or more times (4). A composite score was calculated with higher scores indicating higher levels of bullying perpetration. The University of Illinois Bully Scale is found to have achieved good internal consistency in other studies (Espelage et al., 2012; Walters & Espelage, 2019). Cronbach’s alpha was α = .78 for the present study sample.

Violent behaviors were measured by three items, which include “Gotten something by telling a person something bad would happen to him/her if you did not get what you wanted”; “Hurt someone badly enough for them to need bandages or a doctor”; “Used a knife or gun or some other thing (such as a bat, pipe, razor, taser, mace) to get something from a person.” Responses were measured on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 times (0) to 12 or more times (5). A composite score was calculated, with higher scores indicating higher levels of violent behaviors. Cronbach’s alpha was α = .73 for the study sample.

Independent variable

Adverse adolescent experiences were measured by summing up three different adverse experiences, including witnessing adult adversities in the household, bullying victimization, and witnessing violence in the neighborhood. The three different adverse experiences were comprised of a total of 12 items, with each item being measured as a dichotomous variable, No (0) and Yes (1). A composite score of 12 items was calculated, with higher scores indicating higher levels of adversity experienced. The Cronbach’s alpha was α = .77 for the study sample. To test construct validity, confirmatory factor analysis was employed with twelve items and a proposed three latent variables. The model achieved an adequate fit with the data indicating that the data in the current study match the hypothesized factor structure: $χ^{2}$ (51) = 89.089, p = .001, CFI = .995, TLI = .993, RMSEA = .034 (90% CI = .022 to .046), and WRMR = .093.

Witnessing adult adversities consisted of three items, “How many adults in your household have ever been incarcerated (spent time in jail or prison?)”; “How many adults in your household have a problem with substance abuse (e.g., coke, crack, marijuana, alcohol)?”; “How many adults in your household have a problem with mental health illness (e.g., depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, posttraumatic stress disorder)?” Response options were None (0) and One or more (1).

Bullying victimization was derived from the University of Illinois Victimization Scale (Espelage & Holt, 2001) and consisted of four items, “Other students picked on me”, “Other students made fun of me”, “Other students called me names”, and “I got hit and pushed by other students.” Response options were No (0) and Yes (1). This measure is shown to have a good internal consistency in other studies (e.g., Ahmed et al., 2018). The Cronbach’s alpha was α = .85 for the study sample.

Witnessing violence in the neighborhood was derived from the Exposure to Violence Probe (Stein et al., 1997) and was measured with five items, “Has a close relative or friend died violently?”; “Has a close relative or friend been seriously injured because of violence?”; “Has a close relative or friend been robbed or attacked?”; “Have you seen someone being beaten?”; “Have you witnessed a gun-related incident?” Response options were No (0) and Yes (1). The Cronbach’s alpha was α = .79 for the study sample.

Caring teachers was derived from a modified Questionnaire on Teacher Interaction (Wubbels & Levy, 1991). This questionnaire showed good validity and high internal consistency as indicated in several studies (e.g., Den Brok et al., 2006; Telli et al., 2007). In the present study, three items were included, “My teachers care about me,” “Teachers in my school really care about the students,” and “Teachers at my school really care about the feelings of their students”. Responses were measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from Strongly disagree (0) to Strongly agree (4). A composite score was calculated, with higher scores indicating higher levels of the presence of caring teachers. The Cronbach’s alpha was α = .83 for the study sample.

Covariates

Three covariates included gender (boy [1] and girl [2]), age (continuous), and receiving government assistance (“Are you receiving free or reduced lunch and/or SNAP benefits?”; No [0] and Yes [1]).

Procedures

Permission was obtained by the principals and leaders of church groups and youth programs to recruit adolescents to participate in the study. Flyers, which consisted of information about the study, were posted at each location, and trained research assistants introduced the study to potential participants in these settings. All research assistants who handed out the surveys completed human subjects training, which included informed consent safeguarding the rights and privacy of study participants and limits to confidentiality. Participants were given a detailed letter describing the study and parental consent forms. Those who returned signed consent forms were allowed to participate in the study. Adolescents who were recruited in public venues were only asked to participate if a parent or a guardian was present to provide consent. Paper-and-pencil questionnaires were given in small groups when possible.

Research assistants monitored the participants in completing the self-administered questionnaire and made sure interruptions were minimized and confidentiality was ensured. Participants who were recruited from schools, community programs, and churches were provided with a questionnaire in those respective locations in spaces assigned by the venue. The few individuals who were recruited in public venues (e.g., parks and fast food venues) were provided with the questionnaire in quiet spaces at or near those venues. In such instances, questionnaires were only administered if a caregiver was present to provide consent. Participants took up to 45 minutes to complete the questionnaire and were each provided with $10.

Analytic techniques

Univariate analyses were conducted to describe the overall sample. Next, a two-step hierarchical multiple regression was conducted to investigate the moderating effects of the presence of caring teachers on the relationship between adverse adolescent experiences and risky sexual behaviors, substance use, bullying perpetration, and violent behaviors. In the first step, two independent variables, adverse adolescent experiences and the presence of caring teachers, were included in Model 1 along with the covariates to examine the main effects of those two independent variables. In Model 2, an interaction term, adverse adolescent experiences × the presence of caring teachers was included along with all the study variables. The moderating effect model of Hayes’ PROCESS macro analysis was used, and mean centering was performed for continuous variables (Hayes, 2018). All analyses were performed using SPSS (version 22.0) and Hayes' PROCESS version 4.2 program.

Results

The socio-demographic characteristics of the study participants are presented in Table 1. Among the 638 participants, 45.6% were male and 54.4% were female, and the mean age was 15.84 years old (SD = 1.41, range 12–22). About three-fourths (75.7%) of the overall sample qualified for free or reduced school lunches, which indicates that most participants resided in low-income households. The mean was 4.87 (SD = 2.94, range 0–12) for adverse adolescent experiences, 7.78 (SD = 2.82, range 0–12) for the presence of caring teachers, 0.19 (SD = 0.54, range 0–2) for risky sexual behaviors, 1.76 (SD = 2.59, range 0–16) for bullying perpetration, 1.05 (SD = 1.04, range 0–3) for substance use, and 0.86 (SD = 1.86, range 0–23) for violent behaviors. Correlation analysis results are displayed in Table 2. No correlation was greater than r = .50. Tolerance and VIF calculations for each independent variable in the model indicated a value of less than 10 for all variables, suggesting no concerns over multicollinearity.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics of the Overall Sample (N = 638).

	n(%)	M(SD)
Age (range 12-22)	15.84(1.41)
Gender
Male	290(45.6)
Female	346(54.4)
Receiving government assistance
No	153(24.3)
Yes	476(75.7)
Adverse adolescent experiences (range 0-12)		4.84(2.92)
Presence of caring teachers (range 0-12)		7.78(2.82)
Risky sexual behaviors (range 0-2)		0.89(0.54)
Bullying perpetration (range 0-16)		1.76(2.59)
Substance use (range 0-3)		1.05(1.04)
Violent behaviors (range 0-12)		0.86(1.86)

Table 2.

Correlations of the Main Study Variables.

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
Age	-
Gender	−.140^***	-
Receiving government assistance	.117^**	.039	-
AAE	0.41	−.106^**	.001	-
Presence of caring teachers	.030	−.007	.107^**	−.202^***	-
Risky sexual behaviors	.054	−.166^**	.011	.163^**	−.129^*	-
Bullying perpetration	−.007	−.077	−.011	.462^***	−.252^***	.127^*	-
Substance use	.188^***	−.112^**	.052	.343^***	−.171^***	.243^***	.248^***	-
Violent behaviors	.017	−.124^**	−.037	.308^***	−.224^***	.072	.365^***	.193^***	-

^*p < .05; ^**p < .01; ^***p < .001.

Table 3 presents the results of the hierarchical multiple regression analysis on the moderating effects of the presence of caring teachers in the relationship between adverse adolescent experiences and risky sexual behaviors, substance use, bullying perpetration, and violent behaviors respectively. After controlling for the covariates, results in Model 1 indicated that the adverse adolescent experiences were positively associated with risky sexual behaviors (B = .025, p < .05), and the presence of caring teachers was negatively associated with risky sexual behaviors (B = −.023, p < .05). However, the results in Model 2 indicated that the moderating effect of the presence of caring teachers between adverse adolescent experiences and risky sexual behaviors was not significant in this study.

Table 3.

Presence of Caring Teachers as a Moderator.

	Risky sexual behaviors				Bullying perpetration				Substance use				Violent behaviors
	Model 1		Model 2		Model 1		Model 2		Model 1		Model 2		Model 1		Model 2
	B	SE	B	SE	B	SE	B	SE	B	SE	B	SE	B	SE	B	SE
Age	.022	.022	.023	.022	−.067	.065	−.076	.065	.116^***	.028	.117^***	.028	.008	.049	.001	.049
Gender	−.173^**	.058	−.173^**	.058	−.137	.186	−.109	.186	−.122	.079	−.126^*	.079	−.365^**	.139	−.346^*	.139
Reeiging government assistance	.041	.069	.041	.069	.017	.213	.020	.212	.119	.092	.118	.092	−.106	.160	−.102	.159
Adverse adolescent experiences	.025^*	.010	.025^*	.010	.425^***	.033	.421^***	.033	.111^***	.014	.112^***	.014	.164^***	.024	.160^***	.024
Presence of caring teachers	−.023*	.010	−.023*	.010	−.138^***	.033	−.138^***	.033	−.045^***	.014	−.045^**	.014	−.113^***	.025	−.113^***	.025
AAE x presence of caring teachers			.001	.003			−.030^**	.011			.004	.005			−.023^**	.009

The results in Model 1 indicated that the adverse adolescent experiences were positively associated with bullying perpetration (B = .425, p < .001), and the presence of caring teachers was negatively related to bullying perpetration (B = −.138, p < .001). In Model 2, the results indicated that the moderating effect of the presence of caring teachers between adverse adolescent experiences and bullying perpetration was significant (B = −.030, p < .01). The simple slopes of adverse adolescent experiences on bullying perpetration were probed at high (+1 SD) and low (−1 SD) levels of the presence of caring teachers (see Figure 1). The slope to predict bullying perpetration from adverse adolescent experiences was less steep for the high level of the presence of caring teachers, indicating that the presence of caring teachers buffered the relationship between adverse adolescent experiences and bullying perpetration.

Figure 1.

The Moderating Effect of the Presence of Caring Teachers in the Relationship Between Adverse Adolescent Experiences and Bullying Perpetration.

The results in Model 1 indicated that the adverse adolescent experiences were positively associated with substance use (B = .111, p < .001), and the presence of caring teachers was significantly and negatively associated with substance use (B = −.045, p < .001). However, the results in Model 2 indicated that the moderating effect of the presence of caring teachers between adverse adolescent experiences and substance use was not significant in this study.

The results in Model 1 indicated that the adverse adolescent experiences were positively associated with violent behaviors (B = .164, p < .001), and the presence of caring teachers was negatively associated with violent behaviors (B = −.113, p < .001). In Model 2, the results indicated that the moderating effect of the presence of caring teachers between adverse adolescent experiences and violent behaviors was significant (B = −.023, p < .01). The simple slopes of adverse adolescent experiences on violent behaviors were probed at high (+1 SD) and low (−1 SD) levels of the presence of caring teachers (see Figure 2). The slope to predict violent behaviors from adverse adolescent experiences was less steep for the high level of the presence of caring teachers, indicating that the presence of caring teachers buffered the relationship between adverse adolescent experiences and violent behaviors.

Figure 2.

The Moderating Effect of the Presence of Caring Teachers in the Relationship Between Adverse Adolescent Experiences and Violent Behaviors.

Discussion

The present study aimed to investigate whether the presence of caring teachers moderated the association between adverse African American adolescent experiences and risky sexual behaviors, substance use, bullying perpetration, and violent behaviors. The study found that the presence of caring teachers moderated the linkage between adverse adolescent experiences and bullying perpetration as well as violent behaviors, which supported the proposed hypothesis. More specifically, adolescents who perceived their teachers as caring were less likely to display bullying or violent behaviors even in the presence of adverse adolescent experiences. This finding is consistent with the results from prior study findings, which investigated the protective role of caring teachers in bullying perpetration. For instance, ten Bokkel et al.’s (2023) multilevel meta-analysis revealed that the teacher-student relationship was related to less bullying perpetration, and this association was stronger for minority students. Experiencing or witnessing adverse events, such as bullying victimization, sexual coercion, violence in the neighborhood, and adult adversities in the home can be traumatizing and lead to bullying and other forms of violent behaviors. Consistent with Agnew’s (1992) proposition, the relationship between adverse adolescent experiences and violent behavior could be supported by the general strain theory, which purports that strains derived from adverse childhood and adolescent experiences would reinforce negative emotions, resulting in “corrective” actions (Agnew, 1992), such as bullying. On the other hand, the presence of a caring teacher is found to be a protective buffer, which appears to be consistent with Hirschi’s (1969) social control theory. Individuals are less inclined to engage in bullying and violent behaviors if they have a strong bond with their school. The presence of caring teachers can reinforce adolescents’ sense of connectedness to their school thereby lowering their risk of bullying and other forms of violent behaviors.

Regarding substance use, our study found that adverse adolescent experience was positively associated with substance use, which was in line with prior study findings (Afifi et al., 2020; Leza et al., 2021). In addition, the presence of caring teachers was negatively related to substance use, which was expected as previous studies have reported a negative association (Forster et al., 2017). This finding suggests that caring teachers are important in reducing substance abuse. One possible explanation is that adolescents who perceive teachers as caring are likely to feel bonded to their school. As a result, they may be more motivated to obey the rules and are less inclined to engage in negative behaviors, such as substance use. However, teacher care was not found to moderate the association between adverse adolescent experiences and substance use, which was inconsistent with the hypothesis.

The present study also did not find that adverse adolescent experiences and the presence of caring teachers were significantly related to risky sexual behaviors, which was inconsistent with past research findings (London et al., 2017; Song & Qian, 2020) and the proposed hypothesis. Also, as indicated in the present findings, the presence of caring teachers did not moderate the association between adverse adolescent experiences and risky sexual behaviors. However, given that there are gender differences in risky sexual behaviors and males are more prone to engage in such behaviors, future research might consider examining whether adverse adolescent experiences and the presence of caring teachers might be associated with risky sexual behaviors for males.

Limitations and implications for future research

Several limitations need to be mentioned. One is the cross-sectional study design, which precludes causal or temporal inferences. Another limitation is related to developmental differences and the wide age range of the study participants although they represent early to late adolescents. Future studies need to consider exploring the developmental trajectories from early adolescence to late adolescence, which requires a longitudinal study design. The inability to determine whether adolescents, especially those who were recruited in the schools, had the same teachers, is a major concern. Also, related to the measures, caring teachers measured in the study asked the youth about their perceptions of teachers in their school in general rather than ways in which their teachers specifically demonstrated care for them. In addition, the low-reliability coefficients for variables found in variables, such as risky sexual behaviors and substance use are a serious concern. A reliability coefficient (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha) value of .70 or higher is typically regarded as acceptable. However, some scholars have argued that for variables with fewer than 20 items, a reliability coefficient of .50 or higher could be considered adequate (Dall’Oglio et al., 2010). Moreover, the study relied exclusively on youths’ self-reports rather than multi-informant reports, which likely resulted in response bias, although self-reports are widely used in similar studies. Further, the study sample was comprised of a large number of adolescents in very vulnerable conditions, which was a major strength. However, the study sample was limited to African American adolescents in Chicago’s Southside, which limited the generalizability of the findings. And finally, the study data were collected in 2013–2014, which is another limitation of the study, although adverse childhood and adolescent experiences continue to be a serious concern, especially among African Americans who show the highest rate among all racial groups (Crouch et al., 2019; Sacks & Murphey, 2018).

Notwithstanding the limitations of the present study, the findings can open opportunities for new lines of research. Future studies could delve into similar analyses using a longitudinal approach to better assess the causal relations among the variables. Moreover, future research might consider exploring and identifying positive teachers’ characteristics, such as teachers’ involvement, and whether they would be protective against risky behaviors among African American adolescents in other urban neighborhoods. Identifying positive teachers’ characteristics could contribute to research that is focused on the strengths of the individuals and communities rather than the so-called “deficits.” Furthermore, the findings of the study could also contribute to future research on the protective role of teacher care in the behaviors of other racial and ethnic minority adolescent groups, such as immigrants and refugees, for example.

Implications for practice

The findings of the present study suggest that caring teachers may be a powerful and low-threshold leverage for the prevention of negative behaviors among adolescents who are exposed to adverse experiences. Yet, whereas mean levels of caring teachers in this study indicated that adolescents perceived their teachers as supportive (than not) on average, they showed that there is room for improvement as well. This is supported by research demonstrating that African American adolescents more often experience negative interactions with their teachers and are more disciplined, regardless of their actual behavior (e.g., Skiba et al., 2011), which may undermine their perceptions of teachers’ efforts for care and support. Caring for and building positive relationships with students, in particular vulnerable students and students of diverse ethnic backgrounds, should be promoted both in teachers’ pre-and in-service training. Based on a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) aimed at strengthening teacher-student relationship quality, Kincade et al. (2020) identified 44 evidence-based practices that teachers can apply in their daily interactions with students, such as effective use of praise, one-on-one time, and reflective and supportive listening. Of note, all but one RCT focused on elementary school and intervention research promoting teacher-student relationships in adolescence is very scarce.

As an exception, Duong et al. (2019) investigated teacher training and implementation support in the Establish-Maintain-Restore (EMR) approach, which aims to improve teachers’ skills to establish positive relationships with their students, maintain these relationships over time, and restore relationships characterized by conflict. In an RCT, they found positive effects on teacher-student relationship quality and student behavior in middle schools. More recently, the approach was extended to the Equity-Explicit Establish-Maintain-Restore (E-EMR) approach by adding specific strategies for teachers to avoid implicit ethnic and racial bias in relationship-building with their students and promote their competencies to enlarge the cultural lens through which they perceive and understand their students’ behavior (Duong et al., 2022). A cluster-randomized pilot trial did not find the main effects of this approach on a wide range of student outcomes; yet ethnic minority students did show positive effects, although for African American students, these effects were limited to higher perceived control and schoolwork. Further research with this promising approach is highly recommended to provide future teachers with evidence-based strategies for supporting diverse groups of students.

Conclusion

Navigating adolescence can be a challenging developmental period under typical circumstances. Managing adolescence while residing in low-resourced communities where there are lower rates of social, political, and economic investments coupled with higher rates of policing, parental incarceration, parental mental health difficulties, and substance youth can further challenge positive youth outcomes. This study highlighted that positive adult influences in the form of caring teachers could buffer the relationship between adverse adolescent experiences and negative behaviors.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

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

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was funded by the Center for Health Administration Studies and the STI/HIV Intervention Network at the University of Chicago, which were awarded to Dr. Dexter R. Voisin.

Ethical statement

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained before the data collection.

IRB statement

The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the last author’s previous institution. The last author collected the data for the study, and the authors take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

ORCID iD

Jun Sung Hong

Author biographies

Jun Sung Hong, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor in the School of Social Work at Wayne State University, USA and a Visiting Professor in the Department of Social Welfare at Ewha Womans University, South Korea.

Dong Ha Kim, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Social Welfare at Chungwoon University, South Korea.

Hilde Colpin, Ph.D. is a Full Professor at the Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences at KU Leuven, Belgium.

Vicente J Llorent, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor at the University of Cordoba, Spain.

Dexter R Voisin, Ph.D., is the Dean and Professor at the Jack, Joseph and Morton Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences at Case Western Reserve University, USA.

Shantalea Johns, Ed.D., is an Assistant Professor Clinical and the Director of Continuing Education in the School of Social Work at Wayne State University, USA.

References

Afifi

T. O.

Taillieu

Salmon

Davila

I. G.

Stewart-Tufescu

Fortier

Struck

Asmundson

G. J. G.

Sareen

MacMillan

H. L.

(2020). Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), peer victimization, and substance use among adolescents. Child Abuse & Neglect, 106, 104504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104504

Agnew

(1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology, 30, 47–87.

Ahmed

Moore

T. M.

Lewis

Butler

Benton

T. D.

Boyd

R. C.

(2018). Psychometric properties of bully, fighting, and victimization scales among clinically referred youth. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 27(10), 1110–1124. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2017.1420718

Assini-Meytin

L. C.

Fix

R. L.

Green

K. M.

Nair

Letourneau

E. J.

(2022). Adverse childhood experiences, mental health, and risk behaviors in adulthood: Exploring sex, racial, and ethnic group differences in a nationally representative sample. Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma, 15(3), 833–845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40653-021-00424-3

Brown

A. L.

Simons

L. G.

Gibbons

F. X.

(2022). How economic stress impacts risky sex among African American adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 51, 1074–1088. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-021-01529-6

City-Data . (2015). Chicago. https://www.city-data.com

Crandall

Magnusson

B. M.

Novilla

M. L. B.

Novilla

L. K. B.

Dyer

W. J.

(2017). Family financial stress and adolescent sexual risk-taking: The role of self-regulation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0543-x

Crouch

Probst

J. C.

Radcliff

Bennett

K. J.

McKinney

S. H.

(2019). Prevalence of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) among US children. Child Abuse & Neglect, 92, 209–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2019.04.010

Dall'Oglio

A. M.

Rossiello

Coletti

M. F.

Caselli

M. C.

Ravà

Di Ciommo

Orzalesi

Giannantoni

Pasqualetti

(2010). Developmental evaluation at age 4: Validity of an Italian parental questionnaire. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 46, 419–426. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1754.2010.01748.x

10.

Den Brok

Brekelmans

Wubbels

(2006). Multilevel issues in research using students’ perceptions of learning environments: The case of the Questionnaire on Teacher Interaction. Learning Environments Research, 9(3), 199–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-006-9013-9

11.

Duke

N. N.

Pettingell

S. L.

McMorris

B. J.

Borowsky

I. W.

(2010). Adolescent violence perpetration: Associations with multiple types of adverse childhood experiences. Pediatrics, 125(4), e778–e786. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2009-0597

12.

Duong

M. T.

Gaias

L. M.

Brown

Kiche

Nguyen

Corbin

C. M.

Chandler

C. J.

Buntain-Ricklefs

J. J.

Cook

C. R.

(2022) A cluster randomized pilot trial of the Equity-Explicit Establish-Maintain-Restore program among high school teachers and students. School Mental Health, 14, 951–966. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-022-09516-3

13.

Duong

M. T.

Pullman

M. D.

Buntain-Ricklefs

Lee

Benjamin

K. S.

Nguyen

Cook

(2019). Brief teacher training improves student behavior and student-teacher relationships in middle school. School Psychology, 34(2), 212–221. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000296

14.

Eisinga

Grotenhuis

M. T.

Pelzer

(2013). The reliability of a two-item scale: Pearson, Cronbach, or Spearman-Brown? International Journal of Public Health, 58, 637–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-012-0416-3

15.

Espelage

D. L.

Basile

K. C.

Hamburger

M. E.

(2012). Bullying perpetration and subsequent sexual violence perpetration among middle school students. Journal of Adolescent Health, 50(1), 60–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2011.07.015

16.

Espelage

D. L.

Holt

M. K.

(2001). Bullying and victimization during early adolescence: Peer influences and psychosocial correlates. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 2(2-3), 123–142.

17.

Forster

Gower

A. L.

Borowsky

I. W.

McMorris

B. J.

(2017). Associations between adverse childhood experiences, student-teacher relationships, and non-medical use of prescription medication among adolescents. Addictive Behaviors, 68, 30–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2017.01.004

18.

Forster

Gower

A. L.

McMorris

B. J.

Borowski

I. W.

(2020). Adverse childhood experiences and school-based victimization and perpetration. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 35(3-4), 662–681. https://doi.org/10.1177/00886260517689885

19.

Hayes

A. F.

(2018). Partial, conditional, and moderated moderated mediation: Quantification, inference, and interpretation. Communication Monographs, 85, 4–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2017.1352100

20.

Hirschi

(1969). Causes of delinquency. University of California Press.

21.

Khantzian

E. J.

(2003). The self-medication hypothesis revisited: The dually diagnosed patient. Primary Psychiatry, 10(9), 47–54.

22.

Kincade

Cook

Goerdt

(2020). Meta-analysis and common practice elements of universal approaches to improving student-teacher relationships. Review of Educational Research, 90(5), 710–748. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320946836

23.

Leza

Siria

López-Goñi

J. J.

Fernandez-Montalvo

(2021). Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and substance use disorder (SUD): A scoping review. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 221, 108563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2021.108563

24.

London

Quinn

Scheidell

J. D.

Frueh

B. C.

Khan

M. R.

(2017). Adverse experiences in childhood and sexually transmitted infection risk from adolescence into adulthood. Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 44(9), 524–532. https://doi.org/10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000640

25.

Maloney

Matthews

J. S.

(2020). Teacher care and students’ sense of connectedness in the urban mathematics classroom. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 51(4), 339–432. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc-2020-0044

26.

Reisen

Viana

M. C.

dos Santos Neto

E. T.

(2019). Adverse childhood experiences and bullying in late adolescence in a metropolitan region of Brazil. Child Abuse & Neglect, 92, 146–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2019.04.003

27.

Sacks

Murphey

(2018). The prevalence of adverse childhood experiences, nationally, by state, and by race or ethnicity. Child Trends.

28.

Skiba

R. J.

Horner

R. H.

Chung

C. G.

Rausch

M. K.

May

S. L.

Tobin

(2011). Race is not neutral: A national investigation of African American and Latino disproportionality in school discipline. School Psychology Review, 40(1), 85–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2011.12087730

29.

Song

Qian

(2020). Adverse childhood experiences and teen sexual behaviors: The role of self-regulation and school-related factors. Journal of School Health, 90(11), 830–841. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12947

30.

Spilt

J. L.

Koomen

H. M.

(2022). Three decades of research on individual teacher-child relationships: A chronological review of prominent attachment-based themes. Frontiers in Education, 7, 920985. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.920985

31.

Stein

M. B.

Walker

J. R.

Hazen

A. L.

Forde

D. R.

(1997). Full and partial posttraumatic stress disorder: Findings from a community survey. American Journal of Psychiatry, 154(8), 1114–1119. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.154.8.1114

32.

Telli

Den Brok

Cakiroglu

(2007). Students' perceptions of science teachers' interpersonal behaviour in secondary schools: Development of a Turkish version of the questionnaire on teacher interaction. Learning Environments Research, 10(2), 115–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-007-9023-2

33.

ten Bokkel

I. M.

Roorda

D. L.

Maes

Verschueren

Colpin

(2023). The role of affective teacher–student relationships in bullying and peer victimization: A multilevel meta-analysis. School Psychology Review, 52(2), 110–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2022.2029218

34.

Theron

L. C.

Engelbrecht

(2011). Caring teachers: Teacher–youth transactions to promote resilience. In Ungar

(Ed.), The social ecology of resilience: A handbook of theory and practice (pp. 265–280), Springer.

35.

Van Ryzin

(2010). Secondary school advisors as mentors and secondary attachment figures. Journal of Community Psychology, 38(2), 131–154. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.20356

36.

Voisin

(2018). America the beautiful and violent: Black youth and neighborhood trauma in Chicago. Columbia University Press.

37.

Walters

G. D.

Espelage

D. L.

(2019). Bullying perpetration and subsequent delinquency: A regression-based analysis of early adolescent schoolchildren. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 39(5), 669–688. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431618791277

38.

Wubbels

Levy

(1991). A comparison of interpersonal behaviour of Dutch and American teachers. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 15(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(91)90070-W