Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
ABSTRACT Positive teacher–student relationships are widely recognized as critical during the transition to secondary education. Grounded in attachment and self‐determination theories, this study examines the role of affiliative teacher behaviors in supporting these relationships. Despite their significance, no comprehensive student questionnaire currently exists to assess teachers' affiliative practices. To address this gap, a mixed‐method study was conducted with 12‐ to 14‐year‐olds, who reflected on teacher practices they viewed as shaping relationship quality. Thematic analysis of focus group interviews with 48 students revealed five dimensions of affiliative practice: Approachability, Sensitive Care, Motivational Teaching, Personal Attention, and Righteous Authority. Based on these dimensions, the TAP‐S (Teachers' Affiliative Practices−Student perspective) was developed: a student questionnaire to directly measure affiliative practices from students' perspectives. Data from 496 seventh‐ and eighth‐grade students on the original 32‐item version of the TAP‐S resulted in a final 25‐item version, supporting the TAP‐S's content, construct, and criterion‐related validity through confirmatory factor analysis and correlational analyses. Expected positive associations were found between the dimensions of the TAP‐S and aspects of relationship quality, student engagement and academic self‐concept. The findings suggest that the TAP‐S is a valuable tool for assessing and strengthening teacher–student connections.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Evelien Buyse
KU Leuven
Margot Longeville
KU Leuven
Karine Verschueren
KU Leuven
Psychology in the Schools
KU Leuven
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Buyse et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0eeae32eca052da647ea0d — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.70125
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: