This study tested the effects of 5 classroom contextual features on the social status (perceived popularity and social preference) that peers accord to aggressive students in late elementary school, including classroom peer status hierarchy (whether within-classroom differences in popularity are large or small), classroom academic level, and grade level as the main predictors of interest as well as classroom aggression and ethnic composition as controls. Multilevel analyses were conducted on an ethnically diverse sample of 968 fourth- and fifth-graders from 46 classrooms in 9 schools. Associations between aggression and status varied greatly from one classroom to another. Aggressive students were more popular and better liked in classrooms with higher levels of peer status hierarchy. Aggressive students had higher social status in Grade 5 than in Grade 4 and lower social preference in classrooms of higher academic level. Classroom aggression and ethnic composition did not moderate aggression-status associations. Limitations and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

This study investigated the independent and interacting effects of classroomlevel embeddedness (i.e., hierarchical vs. egalitarian) and classroom density on the perceived popularity and social preference of aggressive and victimized 3rd-4th grade students (N = 881). A cohesive blocking procedure was used to compute embeddedness. Multilevel analyses indicated that aggressive children achieved much higher perceived popularity in hierarchical classrooms with high density. While children with high victimization scores were unpopular across classrooms, they were least unpopular in egalitarian classrooms with high density. Furthermore, aggressive children were more disliked in lowdensity classrooms, and victimized children were more disliked in hierarchical classrooms. Implications for educational management of classroom social structures are discussed.

This study compares three variations in how researchers construct middle childhood social networks: (1) with friendships or affiliations as a relational tie; (2) with children providing self reports of relationships, or in addition, multi-informant reports of relationships in which they are not involved; and (3) whether network computation is correlational or distance-based. The sample was 357 fourth-and fifth-grade students in 17 classrooms. The strongest differences were between self-reported friendship and affiliative networks. Results showed that compared with affiliations, friendship networks had smaller groups, more isolates, and lower fall-to-spring stability. Agreement in social placement between friendship and affiliative networks was generally average, but poor for unpopular and aggressive children. Multi-informant affiliative networks were most robust in their positioning of aggressive children. Multi-informant centrality was uniquely uncorrelated with aggression. Network computation differences were not substantial. Discussion focuses on recommendations for research and the educational promise of network technology.

How are African American and European American children getting along in integrated elementary schools? The authors find substantial integration in majority black and multicultural classrooms, but ethnic segregation and cross‐ethnic antipathies are more common in majority white classrooms.

No abstract