A person‐centred analysis of teacher–child relationships in early childhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previously, the nature of teacher-child relationships (TCRs) has been explored through dimensions of close, conflicted, and dependent. However, this variable-centred approach is limited, as many relationships can be characterized by more than one characteristic or trait. A person-centred approach would allow for a greater understanding of the types of relationships that are formed and improved interpretation of the students' socio-emotional outcomes associated with that relationship. AIMS: The primary goal of this study was to examine the socio-emotional functioning of young children who formed distinct types of TCRs. SAMPLE: Participants were n = 202 kindergarten children (98 girls, 104 boys, Mage = 64.12 months, SD = 4.86). METHOD: Multi-source assessment was employed with data collected from parent ratings, teacher reports, child interviews, and naturalistic observations in the classroom. Using quartile cut-offs, we identified children who formed conflicted, dependent, and 'combined' (conflicted and dependent) TCRs. RESULTS: Results indicated distinct patterns of socio-emotional functioning for each TCR group. For example, whereas children in conflicted TCRs evidenced greater externalizing difficulties, children with dependent TCRs had greater internalizing difficulties. Children who evidenced high levels of both conflicted and dependent TCRs displayed the most pervasive socio-emotional difficulties. CONCLUSIONS: Children who form TCRs characterized by high levels of both conflict and dependency displayed the most pervasive adjustment difficulties. Further investigation is needed to improve our understanding of this group and to assess the plausibility of early intervention strategies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".