The association between teacher–student relationships and school engagement: an investigation of gender differences

Abstract

This study examined gender differences in the associations among teacher–student relationships and three types of school engagement (i.e. behavioural engagement, emotional engagement, and cognitive engagement) among elementary students by using Multi-Group Structural Equation Modelling (MGSEM). For both boys and girls, negative teacher–student relationships (i.e. Conflict) had a stronger association with their school engagement than did positive teacher–student relationships (i.e. Closeness). However, several salient gender discrepancies were found. Specifically, Conflict had a stronger relation with girls’ emotional engagement than it did with boys’ emotional engagement. Girls’ cognitive engagement had no significant association with their teacher–student relationship, while boys’ cognitive engagement was predicted by both Closeness and Conflict. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.

Keywords:

• Teacher–student relationships
• school engagement
• gender differences
• Multi-Group Structural Equation Modelling (MGSEM)

Author contributions

Donghyun Kang conceived the original idea, designed the analysis, collected the data, analysed the data, and wrote the manuscript with support from Laura M. Stough. Myeongsun verified the analytical methods, and Jeffrey Liew commented on the discussion and implications. All authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.

Authors’ note

This manuscript was one of the three studies of Donghyun Kang’s three-article doctoral dissertation which was submitted to the College of Education and Human Development at Texas A&M University. The manuscript is adapted from the dissertation for the purpose of publication.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Figure 1. Structural association between teacher–student relationships and school engagement (boys, unstandardised (a) and standardised (b) solutions). Note. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. ^n.s.non-significant.

Figure 2. Structural association between teacher–student relationships and school engagement (girls, unstandardised (a) and standardised (b) solutions). Note. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. ^n.s. non-significant.