The Effect of Student–Teacher Relationships on Students’ Math Motivation Across EU Countries

Abstract

Using PISA 2012 data, we conducted multilevel modeling analyses to explore how student–teacher relationships (STRs) affected mathematics motivation across EU countries. We compared this relationship across high and low achievers and explored how sex, economic, social, and cultural status (ESCS), ability grouping, class size, and teacher intentions moderated this relationship. Results show that positive STR was associated with higher motivation. High-ability students, boys, and high ESCS students had higher motivation, but we found no statistically significant interactions between STR and low or high ability. Class size, ability grouping, and teacher intentions had no statistically significant effects on mathematics motivation. Overall, our findings suggest that positive perceptions of STR can positively impact student motivation in mathematics and that this effect is consistent across different demographic groups. Thus, general trends around STR and motivation also apply to high-achieving populations.

Keywords

student–teacher relationships ability grouping gifted multilevel modeling PISA

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adams-Byers

Whitsell

S. S.

Moon

S. M.

(2004). Gifted students’ perceptions of the academic and social/emotional effects of homogeneous and heterogeneous grouping. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 7–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620404800102

Ahmmed

Sharma

Deppeler

(2014). Variables affecting teachers’ intentions to include students with disabilities in regular primary schools in Bangladesh. Disability & Society, 29(2), 317–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2013.796878

Akben-Selcuk

(2017). Personality, motivation, and math achievement among Turkish students: Evidence from PISA data. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 124(2), 514–530. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031512516686505

Allen

Gregory

Mikami

Lun

Hamre

Pianta

(2013). Observations of effective teacher–student interactions in secondary school classrooms: Predicting student achievement with the classroom assessment scoring system—secondary. School Psychology Review, 42(1), 76–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2013.12087492

Arens

A. K.

Marsh

H. W.

Pekrun

Lichtenfeld

Murayama

vom Hofe

(2017). Math self-concept, grades, and achievement test scores: Long-term reciprocal effects across five waves and three achievement tracks. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(5), 621–634. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000163

Ayala

(2020). Addressing the math achievement gap of socio-economic disadvantaged students through intervention [Master’s Thesis]. California State University.

Ayuwanti

Marsigit

Siswoyo

(2021). Teacher–student interaction in mathematics learning. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 10(2), 660–667. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v10i2.21184

Baker

J. A.

(2006). Contributions of teacher–child relationships to positive school adjustment during elementary school. Journal of School Psychology, 44(3), 211–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.02.002

Barbier

Struyf

Donche

(2022a). Teachers’ beliefs about and educational practices with high-ability students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 109, 103566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103566

10.

Barbier

Struyf

Verschueren

Donche

(2022b). Fostering cognitive and affective-motivational learning outcomes for high-ability students in mixed-ability elementary classrooms: A systematic review. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 1, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-022-00606-z

11.

Barile

J. P.

Donohue

D. K.

Anthony

E. R.

Baker

A. M.

Weaver

S. R.

Henrich

C. C.

(2012). Teacher–student relationship climate and school outcomes: Implications for educational policy initiatives. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41(3), 256–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-011-9652-8

12.

Beatty

Campbell-Evans

(2020). School leaders and a culture of support: Fostering student social emotional development. Issues in Educational Research, 30(2), 435–451. http://www.iier.org.au/iier30/beatty.pdf

13.

Benjamini

(2001). The Control of the False Discovery Rate in Multiple Testing under Dependency. The Annals of Statistics, 29(4), 1165–1188. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2674075

14.

Bernstein-Yamashiro

Noam

G. G.

(2013). Teacher–student relationships: A growing field of study. New Directions for Youth Development, 137, 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.20045

15.

Blatchford

Bassett

Brown

(2011). Examining the effect of class size on classroom engagement and teacher–pupil interaction: Differences in relation to pupil prior attainment and primary vs. secondary schools. Learning and Instruction, 21(6), 715–730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.04.001

16.

Blömeke

Olsen

R. V.

Suhl

(2016). Relation of student achievement to the quality of their teachers and instructional quality. In Nilsen

Gustafsson

J. E.

(Eds.), Teacher quality, instructional quality and student outcomes. IEA Research for Education (Vol. 2). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41252-8_2

17.

Brinkworth

M. E.

McIntyre

Juraschek

A. D.

Gehlbach

(2018). Teacher–student relationships: The positives and negatives of assessing both perspectives. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 55, 24–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2017.09.002

18.

Caires

Almeida

Vieira

(2012). Becoming a teacher: Student teachers’ experiences and perceptions about teaching practice. European Journal of Teacher Education, 35(2), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2011.643395

19.

Carver-Thomas

Darling-Hammond

(2017). Teacher turnover: Why it matters and what we can do about it. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/Teacher_Turnover_REPORT.pdf

20.

Chalmers

R. P.

(2012). Mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R environment. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(6), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i06

21.

Chevalère

Cazenave

Wollast

Berthon

Martinez

, Mazenod

, Borion, M. C., Pailler, D., Rocher, N., Cadet, R., Lenne, C., Maïonchi-Pino, N., & Huguet

(2023). The influence of socioeconomic status, working memory and academic self-concept on academic achievement. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 38(1), 287–309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-022-00599-9

22.

Chong

W. H.

Huan

V. S.

Quek

C. L.

Yeo

L. S.

Ang

R. P.

(2010). Teacher–student relationship: The influence of teacher interpersonal behaviours and perceived beliefs about teachers on the school adjustment of low achieving students in Asian middle schools. School Psychology International, 31(3), 312–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034310366207

23.

Cornelius-White

(2007). Learner-centered teacher–student relationships are effective: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 113–143. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298563

24.

Davis

H. A.

(2006). Exploring the contexts of relationship quality between middle school students and teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 106(3), 193–223. https://doi.org/10.1086/501483

25.

De Ayala

R. J.

(2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. The Gildford Press.

26.

Dowker

Sarkar

Looi

C. Y.

(2016). Mathematics anxiety: What have we learned in 60 years? Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00508

27.

Drugli

M. B.

(2013). How are closeness and conflict in student–teacher relationships associated with demographic factors, school functioning and mental health in Norwegian schoolchildren aged 6-13? Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 57(2), 217–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2012.656276

28.

Ewing

A. R.

Taylor

A. R.

(2009). The role of child sex and ethnicity in teacher–child relationship quality and children’s behavioral adjustment in preschool. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 24(1), 92–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2008.09.002

29.

Finn

J. D.

Pannozzo

G. M.

Achilles

C. M.

(2003). The “why’s” of class size: Student behavior in small classes. Review of Educational Research, 73(3), 321–368. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543073003321

30.

Fiorella

Yoon

S. Y.

Atit

Power

J. R.

Panther

Sorby

Uttal

D. H.

Veurink

(2021). Validation of the mathematics motivation questionnaire (MMQ) for secondary school students. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(52), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00307-x

31.

Fredriksson

Öckert

Oosterbeek

(2013). Long-term effects of class size. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128(1), 249–285. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjs048

32.

Gagné

(2018). Academic talent development: Theory and best practices. In Pfeiffer

S. I.

Shaunessy-Dedrick

Foley-Nicpon

(Eds.), APA Handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 163–183). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000038-011.

33.

Gottfried

A. E.

Marcoulides

G. A.

Gottfried

A. W.

Oliver

P. H.

(2013). Longitudinal pathways from math intrinsic motivation and achievement to math course accomplishments and educational attainment. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 6(1), 68–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2012.698376

34.

Gunderson

E. A.

Park

Maloney

E. A.

Beilock

S. L.

Levine

S. C.

(2018). Reciprocal relations among motivational frameworks, math anxiety, and math achievement in early elementary school. Journal of Cognition and Development, 19(1), 21–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2017.1421538

35.

Herges

R. M.

Duffield

Martin

Wageman

(2017). Motivation and achievement of middle school mathematics students. The Mathematics Educator, 26(1), 83–106.

36.

Heyder

Weidinger

A. F.

Cimpian

Steinmayr

(2020). Teachers’ belief that math requires innate ability predicts lower intrinsic motivation among low-achieving students. Learning and Instruction, 65, 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101220

37.

Hogheim

Reber

(2015). Supporting interest of middle school students in mathematics through context personalization and example choice. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42, 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.03.006

38.

Holder

Kessels

(2017). Gender and ethnic stereotypes in student teachers’ judgments: A new look from a shifting standards perspective. Social Psychology of Education, 20, 471–490. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-017-9384-z

39.

Kesner

J. E.

(2005). Gifted children's relationships with teachers. International Education Journal, 6(2), 218–223.

40.

Khalil

Accariya

(2016). Identifying “good” teachers for gifted students. Creative Education, 7(3), 407–418. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2016.73040

41.

Kincade

Cook

Goerdt

(2020). Meta-analysis and common practice elements of universal approaches to improving student–teacher relationships. Review of Educational Research, 90(5), 710–748. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320946836

42.

Koc

Celik

(2015). The impact of number of students per teacher on student achievement. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 177, 65–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.335

43.

Koepke

M. F.

Harkins

D. A.

(2008). Conflict in the classroom: Gender differences in the teacher-child relationship. Early Education and Development, 19(6), 843–864. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409280802516108

44.

Lakin

J. M.

(2018). Making the cut in gifted selection: Score combination rules and their impact on program diversity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(2), 210–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217752099

45.

Lee

J. S.

(2012). The effects of the teacher–student relationship and academic press on student engagement and academic performance. International Journal of Educational Research, 53, 330–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.04.006

46.

Lei

Wang

Chiu

M. M.

Xie

(2022). Teacher–student relationship and academic achievement in China: Evidence from a three-level meta-analysis. School Psychology International, 44(1), 68–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/01430343221122453

47.

Lessard

Butler-Kisber

Fortin

Marcotte

Potvin

Royer

(2008). Shades of disengagement: High school dropouts speak out. Social Psychology of Education, 11, 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-007-9033-z

48.

Lessard

Larose

Duchesne

(2020). Does mathematics tracking influence student motivation? Exploring the classroom experience. International Journal of School & Educational Psychology, 8(1), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683603.2018.1506957

49.

Lodewyk

K. R.

Winne

P. H.

Jamieson-Noel

D. L.

(2009). Implications of task structure on self-regulated learning and achievement. Educational Psychology, 29(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410802447023

50.

Wang

Luo

(2019). A person-centered investigation of math motivation and its correlates to math achievement in elementary students. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 13, e24. https://doi.org/10.1017/prp.2019.21

51.

Lyons

I. M.

Beilock

S. L.

(2012). Mathematics anxiety: Separating the math from the anxiety. Cerebral Cortex, 22(9), 2102–2110. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhr289

52.

MacDonnell

McClain

Ganguli

Elias

M. J.

(2021). It’s not all or nothing: Exploring the impact of a social-emotional and character development intervention in the middle grades. RMLE Online, 44(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2020.1868226

53.

Marzano

R. J.

Pickering

D. J.

Heflebower

(2011). The highly engaged classroom. Marzano Resources.

54.

Maulana

Opdenakker

M. C.

Bosker

(2014). Teacher–student interpersonal relationships do change and affect academic motivation: A multilevel growth curve modeling. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 459–482. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12031

55.

Mazana

Y. M.

Suero Montero

Olifage

C. R.

(2019). Investigating students’ attitude towards learning mathematics. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 14(1), 207–231. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/3997

56.

McCormick

M. P.

O’Connor

E. E.

(2015). Teacher–child relationship quality and academic achievement in elementary school: Does gender matter? Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(2), 502–516. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037457

57.

McCormick

M. P.

O’Connor

E. E.

Cappella

McClowry

S. G.

(2013). Teacher–child relationships and academic achievement: A multilevel propensity score model approach. Journal of School Psychology, 51(5), 611–624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2013.05.001

58.

McFarland

Murray

Phillipson

(2016). Student–teacher relationships and student self-concept: Relations with teacher and student gender. The Australian Journal of Education, 60(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944115626426

59.

Murayama

Pekrun

Lichtenfeld

Vom Hofe

(2013). Predicting long-term growth in students’ mathematics achievement: The unique contributions of motivation and cognitive strategies. Child Development, 84(4), 1475–1490. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12036

60.

Nugent

S. A.

(2000). Perfectionism: Its manifestations and classroom-based interventions. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 11(4), 215–221. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2000-630

61.

O’Connor

(2010). Teacher–child relationships as dynamic systems. Journal of School Psychology, 48(3), 187–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2010.01.001

62.

OECD (2014). PISA 2012 technical report. OECD Publishing.

63.

OECD (2016). Low-performing students: Why they fall behind and how to help them succeed. PISA, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264250246-en.

64.

Olsen

A. A.

Huang

F. L.

(2021). The association between student socioeconomic status and student–teacher relationships on math achievement. School Psychology, 36(6), 464–474. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000455

65.

Olsen

A. A.

Huang

F. L.

(2022). Interaction of socioeconomic status and class relations on reading. Journal of Literacy Research, 54(3), 346–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X221116866

66.

Park

Gunderson

E. A.

Tsukayama

Levine

S. C.

Beilock

S. L.

(2016). Young children’s motivational frameworks and math achievement: Relation to teacher-reported instructional practices, but not teacher theory of intelligence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(3), 300–313. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000064

67.

Patrick

(2023). Most motivation research in education is not yet useful for teachers. In Bong

Reeve

Kim

(Eds.), Motivation science: Controversies and insights (pp. 356–C8.11P29). Oxford University Press.

68.

Peterson

J. L.

Hyde

J. S.

(2017). Trajectories of self-perceived math ability, utility value and interest across middle school as predictors of high school math performance. Educational Psychology, 37(4), 438–456. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2015.1076765

69.

Pianta

R. C.

Hamre

Stuhlman

(2003). Relationships between teachers and children. In Reynolds

W. M.

Miller

G. E.

(Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Educational psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 199–234). John Wiley & Sons Inc.

70.

Pianta

R. C.

Hamre

B. K.

Allen

J. P.

(2012, Teacher-student relationships and engagement: Conceptualizing, measuring, and improving the capacity of classroom interactions. In Christenson

Reschly

Wylie

(Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_17

71.

Pianta

R. C.

Stuhlman

M. W.

(2004). Teacher-child relationships and children’s success in the first years of school. School Psychology Review, 33(3), 444–458. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2004.12086261

72.

Preckel

Schmidt

Stumpf

Motschenbacher

Vogl

Scherrer

Schneider

(2019). High-ability grouping: Benefits for gifted students’ achievement development without costs in academic self-concept. Child Development, 90(4), 1185–1201. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12996

73.

Reeve

(2015). Understanding motivation and emotion (6th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

74.

Rivkin

S. G.

Hanushek

E. A.

Kain

J. F.

(2014). Corrigendum to teacher, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417–458. Econometrica, 82(4), 1543–1543. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA12211

75.

Roorda

D. L.

Jorgensen

T. D.

Koomen

H. M.

(2019). Different teachers, different relationships? Student–teacher relationships and engagement in secondary education. Learning and Individual Differences, 75, 101761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2019.101761

76.

Roorda

D. L.

Koomen

H. M. Y.

Spilt

J. L.

Oort

F. J.

(2011). The influence of affective teacher–student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A meta-analytic approach. Review of Educational Research, 81(4), 493–529. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311421793

77.

Rosenthal

(2002). The Pygmalion effect and its mediating mechanisms. In Aronson

(Ed.), Improving academic achievement: Impact of psychological factors on education (pp. 25–36). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-.

78.

Rubie-Davies

C. M.

(2010). Teacher expectations and perceptions of student attributes: Is there a relationship? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 121–135. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709909X466334

79.

Rudasill

K. M.

Reio

T. G.

Stipanovic

Taylor

J. E.

(2010). A longitudinal study of student–teacher relationship quality, difficult temperament, and risky behavior from childhood to early adolescence. Journal of School Psychology, 48(5), 389–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2010.05.001

80.

Sabol

T. J.

Pianta

R. C.

(2012). Recent trends in research on teacher–child relationships. Attachment & Human Development, 14(3), 213–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2012.672262

81.

Saft

E. W.

Pianta

R. C.

(2001). Teachers’ perceptions of their relationships with students: Effects of child age, gender, and ethnicity of teachers and children. School Psychology Quarterly, 16(2), 125–141. https://doi.org/10.1521/scpq.16.2.125.18698

82.

Saleh

Lazonder

A. W.

De Jong

(2005). Effects of within-class ability grouping on social interaction, achievement, and motivation. Instructional Science, 33(2), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-004-6405-z

83.

Schanzenbach

D. W.

(2014). Does class size matter? National Education Policy Center. https://nepc.colorado.edu/sites/default/files/pb_-_class_size.pdf

84.

Schmitt

Goebel

(2015). Experiences of high-ability high school students: A case study. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 38(4), 428–446. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353215607325

85.

Semeraro

Giofrè

Coppola

Lucangeli

Cassibba

(2020). The role of cognitive and non-cognitive factors in mathematics achievement: The importance of the quality of the student–teacher relationship in middle school. PloS One, 15(4), e0231381–e0231381. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231381

86.

Simões

Calheiros

M. M.

(2019). A matter of teaching and relationships: Determinants of teaching style, interpersonal resources and teacher burnout. Social Psychology of Education, 22, 991–1013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-019-09501-w

87.

Skalická

Belsky

Stenseng

Wichstrøm

(2015). Reciprocal relations between student–teacher relationship and children's behavioral problems: Moderation by child-care group size. Child Development, 86(5), 1557–1570. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12400

88.

Spilt

J. L.

Koomen

H. M. Y.

Jak

(2012). Are boys better off with male and girls with female teachers? A multilevel investigation of measurement invariance and gender match in teacher–student relationship quality. Journal of School Psychology, 50(3), 363–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2011.12.002

89.

Sprietsma

(2013). Discrimination in grading: Experimental evidence from primary school teachers. Empirical Economics, 45, 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-012-0609-x

90.

StataCorp (2021). Stata statistical software: Release 17. StataCorp LLC.

91.

Steenbergen-Hu

Makel

M. C.

Olszewski-Kubilius

(2016). What one hundred years of research says about the effects of ability grouping and acceleration on k–12 students’ academic achievement: Findings of two second-order meta-analyses. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 849–899. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316675417

92.

Teven

J. J.

McCroskey

J. C.

(1997). The relationship of perceived teacher caring with student learning and teacher evaluation. Communication Education, 46(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529709379069

93.

Thijs

Westhof

Koomen

(2012). Ethnic incongruence and the student–teacher relationship: The perspective of ethnic majority teachers. Journal of School Psychology, 50(2), 257–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2011.09.004

94.

Tvedt

M. S.

Bru

Idsoe

(2021). Perceived teacher support and intentions to quit upper secondary school: Direct, and indirect associations via emotional engagement and boredom. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 65(1), 101–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2019.1659401

95.

Umarji

Dicke

A. L.

Safavian

Karabenick

S. A.

Eccles

J. S.

(2021). Teachers caring for students and students caring for math: The development of culturally and linguistically diverse adolescents’ math motivation. Journal of School Psychology, 84, 32–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2020.12.004

96.

Verschueren

(2015). Middle childhood teacher–child relationships: Insights from an attachment perspective and remaining challenges. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 148, 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1002/cad.20097

97.

Verschueren

Koomen

H. M.

(2012). Teacher–child relationships from an attachment perspective. Attachment & Human Development, 14(3), 205–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2012.672260

98.

Vogl

Preckel

(2014). Full-time ability grouping of gifted students: Impacts on social self-concept and school-related attitudes. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986213513795

99.

Wanders

F. H. K.

Dijkstra

A. B.

Maslowski

van der Veen

(2020). The effect of teacher–student and student–student relationships on the societal involvement of students. Research Papers in Education, 35(3), 266–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2019.1568529

100.

Wang

Lukowski

S. L.

Hart

S. A.

Lyons

I. M.

Thompson

L. A.

Kovas

Mazzocco

M. M. M.

Plomin

Petrill

S. A.

(2015). Is math anxiety always bad for math learning? The role of math motivation. Psychological Science, 26(12), 1863–1876. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615602471

101.

Wubbels

Brekelmans

(2011). Teacher–students relationships in the classroom. In Fraser

B. F.

Tobin

K. G.

McRobbie

C. J.

(Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 1241–1255). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_80

102.

Yan

Gai

(2022). High achievers from low family socioeconomic status families: Protective factors for academically resilient students. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(23), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192315882

103.

Singh

(2018). Teacher support, instructional practices, student motivation, and mathematics achievement in high school. The Journal of Educational Research, 111(1), 81–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2016.1204260

104.

Zabloski, J., & Milacci, F. (2012). Gifted dropouts: Phenomenological case studies of rural gifted students. Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research, 6(3). 2.

105.

Zee

de Bree

(2017). Students’ self-regulation and achievement in basic reading and math skills: The role of student–teacher relationships in middle childhood. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 14(3), 265–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2016.1196587