E R I C A H O W E L L , P H . D .
A S S O C I AT E P R O F E S S O R
D E PA RT M E N T O F S P E C I A L E D U C AT I O N , C S U F
Examining the Student Teacher Relationship (STR) for Children with and Without Disabilities: Spotlight on
Autism
Agenda for Today
1. Student-teacher-relationship (STR) for typically developing (TD) students
2. STR for students with disabilities 3. STR for students with ASD4. Investigation outcome report of the STR and
ASD5. Audience perspectives on research
outcomes
Typically Developing Students and the STR
Behavior problems and gender associated with conflict in the STR (Jerome, Hamre, and Pianta, 2009; Birch & Ladd, 1997; Howes, Phillipsen, & Peisner-Feinberg, 2000; Silver, Measelle, Armstrong, & Essex, 2005)
Conflict and dependency in the STR are strong predictors of behavioral challenges over time (Hamre and Pianta, 2001; Howes et al., 2000; Jerome et al., 2008)
STR may act as a protective factor for at-risk children (Silver et al., 2005)
Students with Disabilities and the STR
By age 6, children with ID had significantly lower STRS scores than TD children (Eisenhower, Baker and Blacher, 2007)
Poorer STR quality for students with ID in the general education when compared to special day class settings
Student reports indicated that students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders rated more dissatisfaction with their teacher than students with learning disabilities, other health impairments, and typically developing peers
Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder
and the STR
The Importance of Autism and the STR
Autism prevalencePublic school determinationAssociated behavior challenges and social
deficits may make STR problematic
Class-roomChar
Child Char
Teacher
Char
Family
Char
STRSocial
Response
AutismRating
Behavior Problem
s
Income
TeacherExp.
Educational
Placement
Classroom, Family, and Teacher Characteristics: Latent Variables
ClassroomCharacteristics
Family Characteristics
TeacherCharacteristics
Educational Placement
Income Teaching Experience
General education versus SDC (Blacher et al., 2009)
Least Restrictive Environment (IDEA, 2004)
Autism Authorization (CCTC, 2009)
Classroom composition (Buyse et al., 2008)
Low socioeconomic status and conflictual STRs (Ladd et al., 1999)
High cost of autism intervention
SPED teacher “burnout” (Hastings & Brown, 2002)
Quality of instructional practices (Mantzicopoulos, 2005)
Child Characteristics: Latent Variable
Behavior Problems
Autism Rating Social Response
Problem behaviors and conflictual STRs (Birch & Ladd, 1997; Howes et al., 2000; Silver et al., 2005)
STR accounted for by behavior problems (Blacher et al., 2009; Eisenhower et al., 2007)
Autism and behavior problems (Dominick et al., 2007; Eisenhower et al., 2005; Hartley et al., 2008; Horner et al., 2002; Shattuck et al., 2007)
Typical characteristics (APA, 2000)
Higher social ratings and closeness, dependency, and conflict (Howes et al., 2000)
Early attachment style and STR (O’Connor & McCartney, 2007)
Autism and social challenges (Kleinman et al., 2001; Peterson et al., 2009
Participants
Child Demographic Information for Public and Non-Public Schools_______________________________________________________________
Public Non-public t/x² p-val(n = 57) (n = 33)
__________________________________________________________
Child Age (mean years) 5.65 8.88 -6.92 p = 0.00 Gender (% male) 79% 82% Grades (%) 14.81 p = 0.01 Preschool 47% 6% Kinder-3rd 45% 41% 4th-8th 8% 52%
Procedures
Public sample recruited from nine public schools in Southern California (N = 57)
Non-public school sample drawn from California (80%) and Massachusetts (20%) through School Adaptations for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder study (N = 33) [UCR SEARCH, The Help Group, Melmark-New England]
Parents and teachers consented to participate and completed measures
Honorarium: $15 Target gift card for parents and teachers
Funding provided by a grant from the Riverside Community Foundation (J. Blacher, P.I.); COR grant, UC Riverside (J. Blacher, P.I.)
Outcome Measure: The Student Teacher Relationship Scale (Pianta, 2001)
Total score and three subscale scores Conflict (e.g. “This child sees me as a source of
punishment and criticism”) Closeness (e.g. “This child openly shares his/her
feelings and experiences with me”) Dependency (e.g. “This child asks for my help when
he/she really does not need help”)Teacher rated each item on 1-5 scaleAlphas in present sample were .75
(conflict), .77 (closeness), .51 (dependency), and .76 (total)
Instruments
Parent, Teacher, and Child Completed Measures________________________________________________________________________
Rater Measurement
Teacher-Rated MeasuresStudent Teacher Relationship Total Score and SubscalesSocial Responsiveness SRS-T (Total Score)Behavior Problems TRF (Total Score)Autism GARS (Autism Index)Classroom Demographics Classroom Climate Inventory
Parent-Rated Measures
Social Responsiveness SRS-P (Total Score)Behavior Problems CBCL (Total Score)Autism GARS (Autism Index)Family Demographics Family Information Form
What family, teacher, child, and classroom characteristics are predictive of the STR?
Latent and Observed Variables in Teacher-Rated STRS Total Score Path Model Latent Factor Observed Variables Child Characteristics Behavior Problems Teacher Report Form (total score) Autistic Characteristics Gilliam Autism Rating Scale-T (autism index) Social Responsiveness Social Responsiveness Scale-T (total score) Classroom Characteristics Educational Placement
General education/mild moderateAutism-only classroomsNon-public school classrooms
Family Characteristics Income Teacher characteristics Teacher ExperienceStudent-Teacher-Relationship Student Teacher Relationship Scale (Total Score)
Class-roomChar
Child Char
Teacher
Char
Family
Char
STRSocial
Response
AutismRating
Behavior Problem
s
Income
TeacherExp.
Educational
Placement
Chi-square 13.04Df 11P-value .29CFI .99RMSEA .045RMSEA CI .00 to .124
Class-roomChar
Child Char
Teacher
Char
Family
Char
STRSocial
Response
AutismRating
Behavior Problem
s
Income
TeacherExp.
Educational
Placement
Teacher-Rated Path Model Predicting the Overall Student-Teacher-Relationship
-.27
-.02
-.1o
-.69
1.00
.74
.80.82
1.00
1.00
.23
-.34-.47
STRS Total
1.00
Classroom
Char.
STRTotal
Child Char.
-.27**
-.69***
BehaviorProblem
s
Autism
Rating
Social Respons
e
.79
.86
.91
Significant Paths in Teacher-Rated Path Model Predicting the Overall Student-Teacher-
Relationship
.23*
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
Class-roomChar.
Child Char.
Teacher
Char.
Family
Char.
STRClose-ness
Social Respons
e
AutismRating
Behavior Problem
s
Income
TeacherExp.
Educational
Placement
Teacher-Rated Path Model Predicting Student-Teacher-Relationship Closeness
-.15
.04
.03
-.64
1.00
.59
.91.82
1.00
1.00
.20
-.33-.48
STRS Closenes
s
1.00
Chi-square 11.04df 11P-value .44CFI 1.000RMSEA .006RMSEA CI .00 to .111
ChildCharacteristi
cs
STRCloseness
Significant Paths in Teacher-Rated Path Model Predicting the Student-Teacher-Relationship
Closeness
.64*
Behavior
Problems
AutismRatings
Social Respons
e
.59
.82
.91
*p < .001
Class-roomChar.
Child Char.
Teacher
Char.
Family
Char.
STR Conflic
t
Social Respons
e
AutismRating
Behavior Problem
s
Income
TeacherExp.
Educational
Placement
Parent-Rated Path Model Predicting Student-Teacher-Relationship Conflict
.26
.03
.00
.21
1.00
.80
.90.86
1.00
1.00
.42
-.13-.38
STRS Conflic
t
1.oo
Chi-square 10.74df 11P-value .465CFI 1.00RMSEA .000RMSEA CI .00 to .109
ClassroomChar.
STRConflict
Significant Paths in Parent-Rated Path Model Predicting the Student-Teacher-Relationship
Conflict
.26*
*p < .05
Class-roomChar.
Child Char.
Teacher
Char.
Family
Char.
STR Conflic
t
Social Respons
e
AutismRating
Behavior Problem
s
Income
TeacherExp.
Educational
Placement
Parent-Rated Path Model Predicting Student-Teacher-Relationship Dependency
.26
.32
.10
-.04
1.00
.80
.90.86
1.00
1.00
.41
-.13-.41
STRS Conflic
t
1.oo
Chi-square 9.46Df 11P-value .58CFI 1.00RMSEA .000RMSEA CI .00 to .098
TeacherCharacteristi
cs
STRDependenc
y
Significant Paths in Parent-Rated Path Model Predicting the Student-Teacher-Relationship
Dependency
.32*
*p < .05
Discussion
Teacher and parent-rated child characteristics predicted the overall STR Corroborates several key studies on the STR and disability
(Blacher et al., 2009; Eisenhower et al., 2007; Robertson et al., 2003)
Classroom characteristics contributed significant variance to the overall STR even when accounting for child characteristics Students in more restrictive educational settings reported
poorer quality STRs Classroom composition (Buyse et al., 2008) Perceptions of teaching assignment (Mantzicopoulos, 2005) Work-related stress (Mantzicopoulos, 2005)
Discussion Continued
Students who demonstrated challenging child characteristics experienced less-close STRs in the teacher-rated model. Child characteristics predicting STR closeness highlighted
in past research (Al-Yagon & Mikulincer, 2008; Copeland et al., 1997; Howes et al., 1994; Howes et al., 2000)
The parent-rated model indicated that more challenging child characteristics and students from lower income families were rated as less close to the teacher Similar finding in Ladd et al. (1999) Impact of income on parent-teacher relationship
Discussion Continued
Veteran teachers were more likely to have dependent relationships with students than beginning teachers Teacher fatigue (Olivier & Venter, 2003) Teacher “burn-out” (Hastings & Brown, 2002;
Ingersoll, 2003; Lecavalier et al., 2006)Parent-ratings differentiated between groups
on ratings of child characteristics Environmental differences
Implications Limitations
Early interventionTeacher educationSupport for
teachers
Inability to include all relevant variables in path model
Imputation of dataSelf-report nature
of measuresDependency scale
in STRS
Discussion Continued
Future Research
Investigate variables specific to educational settings that impact the STR
Classroom observations to supplement self-report measures
Comparison of STR between disability groupsContribution of parent-teacher dynamics to
the STR