Children with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD; N = 182) and their teachers (N = 76) completed an instrument designed to assess the quality of their classroom working alliance. Confirmatory factor analyses conducted on student and teacher data, based on prior research conducted with normative samples, confirmed a two-factor model of classroom working alliance among students with EBD and their teachers. Follow-up analyses of student and teacher scores on items and constructs indicated that students reported greater bonding and greater task/goal alliance than did their teachers. This finding suggests that students with EBD had more positive views of their relationship than did teachers. The implications of these findings for future research are discussed.
BreemanL.van LierP.WubbelsT.VerhulstF.van der EndeJ.MarasA.TickN. (2017). Developmental links between teacher-child closeness and disobedience for boys placed in special education. Exceptionality, 26, 230-244. doi:10.1080/09362835.2017.1283624
2.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3.
GageN.LierheimerK. (2012). Exploring self-concept for students with emotional and/or behavioral disorders as they transition from elementary to middle school and high school. Education Research International, 2012, Article 871984. doi:10.1155/2012/871984
4.
GreshamF.LaneK.MacMillanD.BocianK.WardS. (2000). Effects of positive and negative illusory biases: Comparisons across social and academic self-concept domains. Journal of School Psychology, 38, 151-175.
5.
HedgesL. V. (1981). Distribution theory for Glass’s estimator of effect size and related estimators. Journal of Educational Statistics, 6, 107-128.
6.
HorvathA.BediR. P. (2002). The alliance. In NorcrossC. (Ed.), Psychotherapy relationships that work: Therapist contributions and responsiveness to patients (pp. 37-69). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
HorvathA.GreenbergL. (1986). The development of the Working Alliance Inventory: A research handbook. In GreenbergL.PinsofW. M. (Eds.), The psychotherapeutic processes: A research handbook (pp. 529-556). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
9.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1-55.
10.
HughesJ. (2012). Teacher-student relationships and school adjustment: Progress and remaining challenges. Attachment & Human Development, 14, 319-327. doi:10.1080/14616734.2012.672288
11.
KlineR. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
12.
KratochwillT.SheridanS.CarlsonJ.LaseckiK. (1999). Advances in behavioral assessment. In ReynoldsC. R.GutkinT. B. (Eds.), The handbook of school psychology (pp. 350-382). New York, NY: Wiley.
13.
MurrayC.GreenbergM. (2001). Relationships with teachers and bonds with school: Social emotional adjustment correlates for children with and without disabilities. Psychology in the Schools, 38, 25-41.
14.
MurrayC.MurrayK. (2004). Child level correlates of teacher-student relationships: An examination of child demographic characteristics, academic orientations and behavioral orientations. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 751-762. doi:10.1002/pits.20015
15.
PiantaR.HamreB.StuhlmanM. (2003). Relationships between teachers and children. In ReynoldsW. M.MillerG. E. (Eds.), Comprehensive handbook of psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 199-234). New York, NY: Wiley.
16.
ReidJ.PattersonG. R.SnyderJ. (Eds.). (2002). Antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: A developmental analysis and model for intervention. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
17.
SimpsonR.PetersonR.SmithC. (2011). Critical educational program components for students with emotional and behavioral disorders: Science, policy, and practice. Remedial and Special Education, 32, 230-242.
18.
TosteJ.BloomE. L.HeathN. L. (2014). The differential role of classroom working alliance in predicting school-related outcomes for students with and without high-incidence disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 48, 135-148. doi:10.1177/0022466912458156
19.
TosteJ.HeathN.DallaireL. (2010). Perceptions of classroom working alliance and student performance. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 56, 371-387.
20.
TosteJ.HeathN.ConnorC. M.PengP. (2015). Reconceptualizing teacher-student relationships: Applicability of the working alliance within classroom contexts. Elementary School Journal, 116, 30-48.
21.
TryonG.BlackwellS.HammelE. (2007). A meta-analytic examination of client–therapist perspectives of the working alliance. Psychotherapy Research, 17, 629-642.
