The Importance of Student and Teacher Interactions for Disaffected Middle School Students: A Grounded Theory Study of Community Day Schools

Abstract

Students who are expelled from school often demonstrate the need for alternative learning environments that respond to their academic disengagement as well as their behavioral challenges. Teachers in such environments contend with a variety of student needs while attempting to engage students in the learning process. This grounded theory study examines student and teacher interactions in community day school (CDS) classrooms in one large, urban school district in the southwest. Through semistructured interviews and observations, the researcher develops an emerging theory that describes the interactions between teachers and students. Interactions vary in nature depending on student and teacher characteristics, their self-definitions and beliefs, and the influence of support staff. Various interactions precede specific student outcomes, which can be both intended and unintended. This article explains the interplay between the categories listed above and gives concrete examples from classrooms about how student and teacher interactions can lead to, or impede, growth for both students and teachers.

A Grounded Theory of Collaborative Synchronizing in Relation to Challenging Students

“…Nevertheless, interactions between good-intended teachers and challenging students might vary depending on student and teacher characteristics, selfdefinitions, beliefs, and the influence of support staff, as Kennedy's (2011) in-depth study illustrated. Furthermore, the professionals' positive relations with parents as a core element of resource synchronizing in the current grounded theory can be linked to meta-analyses, which indicate that parental involvement positively influences academic achievement of students growing up in socially disadvantaged neighborhoods (Jeynes, 2003(Jeynes, , 2005.…”

Home-School Dissonance and Student-Teacher Interaction as Predictors of School Attachment among Urban Middle Level Students

“…These and other teacher characteristics and behaviors (i.e., respect for, interest in, and fair treatment of students, Matsumura et al, 2008; teachers being nonjudgmental, Kennedy, 2011) have been conceptualized in the literature as teacher (affective) support (Anderman, Andrzejewski, & Allen, 2011;Sakiz, Pape, & Hoy, 2012) or teacher care (Perry, Liu, & Pabian, 2010;Tosolt, 2009) and understanding (Cooper & Miness, 2014). For example, den Brok, Fisher, and Koul (2005) conducted a study of teacherstudent interpersonal behavior and students' attitudes toward science and found that teacher interpersonal behavior explains more than 12% of the total variance in students' attitudes toward science.…”

Teacher as Unit Leader: Defining and Examining the Effects of Care and Support on Children: A Review of the Research

“…Wallace (1999, p. 52 [212]) reminds us engagement "goes beyond compliance to denote a level of emotional involvement in school work." "Engagement requires intention, concentration, and commitment by students" (Taylor-Dunlop & Norton, 1997, p. 278 [229]), "attendance, participation, attention, and behavior" (Kennedy, 2011, p. 7 [109]).…”

“…We know that these "relationships mediate learning" (Davis, 2003, p. 222 [156]). We understand that "relationships with teachers can have a profound effect on student learning and growth" (Kennedy, 2011, p. 9 [109]). "Teacher-child closeness" (Birch & Ladd, 1997, p. 61 [54]) and connection with teacher-leaders are related to academic and social outcomes (Davis, 2001 [163]).…”