Search

National data on student disengagement show a pervasive trend that currently makes this phenomenon one of the biggest challenges faced by teachers worldwide. Much research on student disengagement examines the problem through an indirect framework in which deficiencies in positive social conditions or psychological states are tested as predictors of disengagement. This study uses a different lens by examining how "negative" student-teacher interactions differentially predict disengagement in adolescent students. Using self-determination theory, this study advances two hypotheses: H1, student perception of psychological need thwarting will have a stronger relationship with student disengagement than student perception of the lack of need support, and H2, the relationship between student perceived psychological need thwarting and student disengagement will be mediated by psychological need frustration. With data from 4694 students, ex post facto study findings confirmed the anticipated increased variance in disengagement when testing negative student-teacher interactions. Further, the hypothesized mediating effect of psychological need frustration was supported.

National data on student disengagement show a pervasive trend that currently makes this phenomenon one of the biggest challenges faced by teachers worldwide. Much research on student disengagement examines the problem through an indirect framework in which deficiencies in positive social conditions or psychological states are tested as predictors of disengagement. This study uses a different lens by examining how negative student–teacher interactions differentially predict disengagement in adolescent students. Using self-determination theory, this study advances two hypotheses: H1, student perception of psychological need thwarting will have a stronger relationship with student disengagement than student perception of the lack of need support, and H2, the relationship between student perceived psychological need thwarting and student disengagement will be mediated by psychological need frustration. With data from 4694 students, ex post facto study findings confirmed the anticipated increased variance in disengagement when testing negative student–teacher interactions. Further, the hypothesized mediating effect of psychological need frustration was supported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Limited attention to messages transmitted between principals and teachers led to the general question for this study: is principal support of student psychological needs related to functional social conditions within the instructional core? Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to define principal support of student psychological needs and explain its leadership function through the lens of conversation theory. Without much empirical evidence to draw from, a theoretical argument for how principal support of student psychological needs might influence the features of the teaching and learning environment is advanced then tested empirically. Design/methodology/approach: Hypotheses were tested using a non-experimental, correlational research design based on ex-post facto data collected from teachers and students in 93 schools in a metropolitan city of the USA. Data were collected in the spring of 2017 from randomly sampled teachers and students in the 93 schools. Usable responses were received from 1,168 teachers, yielding a response rate of 66 percent. A total of 4,523 students received surveys and usable responses were received from 3,301, yielding a response rate of 73 percent. Multi-level modeling was used to analyze the data. Findings: Principal support of student psychological needs was related to school-level differences in faculty trust in students, collective teacher efficacy and student perceived autonomy support. Leadership practices surrounding professional development and instructional coherence had moderately strong, positive relationships with the outcome variables; however, the strength of these relationships diminished when principal support was included in the analysis. Originality/value: The argument in this study proposes that principal–teacher conversations enhance leadership practices and support a vibrant and engaging instructional core when intentional messages build mental representations that enable teachers to understand sources of optimal student growth. Such use of conversation extends the functionality of principal–teacher interactions beyond that of teacher control and toward an ongoing sense-making and learning process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to define student learning capacity and to examine the role of the school principal in nurturing it. Method: The study used cross-sectional data from 3,175 students in 70 schools located in a metropolitan area of a Southwestern city. We tested three hypotheses by following a conventional modeling building process in HLM 7.0: Hypothesis 1--Principal Support for Student Psychological Needs (PSSPN) is related to school differences in student-perceived autonomysupport; Hypothesis 2--PSSPN is related to school differences in studentperceived competence-support; Hypothesis 3--Student-perceived needsupport mediates the relationship between PSSPN and grit. Results: Evidence aligns with our initial theorizing about student learning capacity and principal support for student psychological needs. Student-perceived need-support, as a social characteristic of capacity, manifests itself through teacher-student interactions in the learning process. Need-supporting interactions varied significantly across schools, and principals played a critical role in developing an instructional environment that students experienced as nurturing autonomy and competence. Implications: PSSPN highlights the transformative effects that regular principal-teacher social exchanges can have on instructional practices. School principals who interacted with teachers about student psychological needs and need-supporting instructional practices contributed to a learning environment that students experienced as autonomy-supporting and competence-supporting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]