18.7.1: The School Environment
- Page ID
- 245759
\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)
\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)
\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)
\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)
\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}} % arrow\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}} % arrow\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)
\(\newcommand{\avec}{\mathbf a}\) \(\newcommand{\bvec}{\mathbf b}\) \(\newcommand{\cvec}{\mathbf c}\) \(\newcommand{\dvec}{\mathbf d}\) \(\newcommand{\dtil}{\widetilde{\mathbf d}}\) \(\newcommand{\evec}{\mathbf e}\) \(\newcommand{\fvec}{\mathbf f}\) \(\newcommand{\nvec}{\mathbf n}\) \(\newcommand{\pvec}{\mathbf p}\) \(\newcommand{\qvec}{\mathbf q}\) \(\newcommand{\svec}{\mathbf s}\) \(\newcommand{\tvec}{\mathbf t}\) \(\newcommand{\uvec}{\mathbf u}\) \(\newcommand{\vvec}{\mathbf v}\) \(\newcommand{\wvec}{\mathbf w}\) \(\newcommand{\xvec}{\mathbf x}\) \(\newcommand{\yvec}{\mathbf y}\) \(\newcommand{\zvec}{\mathbf z}\) \(\newcommand{\rvec}{\mathbf r}\) \(\newcommand{\mvec}{\mathbf m}\) \(\newcommand{\zerovec}{\mathbf 0}\) \(\newcommand{\onevec}{\mathbf 1}\) \(\newcommand{\real}{\mathbb R}\) \(\newcommand{\twovec}[2]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\ctwovec}[2]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\threevec}[3]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cthreevec}[3]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\fourvec}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cfourvec}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\fivevec}[5]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \\ #5 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cfivevec}[5]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \\ #5 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\mattwo}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{rr}#1 \amp #2 \\ #3 \amp #4 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\laspan}[1]{\text{Span}\{#1\}}\) \(\newcommand{\bcal}{\cal B}\) \(\newcommand{\ccal}{\cal C}\) \(\newcommand{\scal}{\cal S}\) \(\newcommand{\wcal}{\cal W}\) \(\newcommand{\ecal}{\cal E}\) \(\newcommand{\coords}[2]{\left\{#1\right\}_{#2}}\) \(\newcommand{\gray}[1]{\color{gray}{#1}}\) \(\newcommand{\lgray}[1]{\color{lightgray}{#1}}\) \(\newcommand{\rank}{\operatorname{rank}}\) \(\newcommand{\row}{\text{Row}}\) \(\newcommand{\col}{\text{Col}}\) \(\renewcommand{\row}{\text{Row}}\) \(\newcommand{\nul}{\text{Nul}}\) \(\newcommand{\var}{\text{Var}}\) \(\newcommand{\corr}{\text{corr}}\) \(\newcommand{\len}[1]{\left|#1\right|}\) \(\newcommand{\bbar}{\overline{\bvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\bhat}{\widehat{\bvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\bperp}{\bvec^\perp}\) \(\newcommand{\xhat}{\widehat{\xvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\vhat}{\widehat{\vvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\uhat}{\widehat{\uvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\what}{\widehat{\wvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\Sighat}{\widehat{\Sigma}}\) \(\newcommand{\lt}{<}\) \(\newcommand{\gt}{>}\) \(\newcommand{\amp}{&}\) \(\definecolor{fillinmathshade}{gray}{0.9}\)- Explain how teacher-student relationships influence academic and emotional outcomes in middle childhood.
- Describe the role of classroom climate in shaping children's engagement and behavior.
- Summarize the effects of class size on learning.
- Evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of ability grouping in elementary education.
- Identify the risks and considerations associated with grade retention.
During middle childhood, school becomes a central arena for personal and social development. Children spend more time in school than in any other structured environment, and what happens within school walls can have a lasting impact on their academic achievement and overall development. While curriculum matters, so does the setting in which it's delivered. The school environment includes the relationships, teaching practices, classroom structure, and policies that shape learning on a day-to-day basis.
Teacher-Student Relationships
Strong teacher-student relationships support children's academic growth and emotional well-being. When children feel seen, valued, and supported by their teachers, they are more likely to participate in class, persevere through challenges, and develop a positive attitude toward school (Hamre & Pianta, 2001). These relationships are especially important for students who may lack consistent support at home.
Classroom Climate
The classroom climate—the emotional and social atmosphere created by the teacher and students—affects how safe and motivated children feel. A positive climate is characterized by respect, cooperation, clear routines, and opportunities to collaborate. In contrast, a classroom with frequent disruptions, punitive discipline, or unclear expectations can lead to disengagement and an increase in behavioral issues (Pianta, La Paro, & Hamre, 2008).
Figured \(\PageIndex{1}\). Creating a positive classroom culture. Image by UCSD Jacobs School of Engineering is licensed CC BY-NC 3.0.
Class Size
Smaller class sizes are generally associated with better academic outcomes, particularly in the early grades. In smaller classrooms, teachers are better able to provide individualized attention, adapt instruction to students’ needs, and manage classroom behavior (Finn & Achilles, 1999). Research from the Tennessee STAR project found that students in smaller classes (13–17 students) performed better in reading and math than those in regular-sized classes, with the benefits being particularly strong for students from low-income families (Krueger, 1999).
While class size effects may taper off in upper elementary grades, small classes remain beneficial for teachers trying to support students with diverse learning needs.
Academic Expectations
High—but—realistic academic expectations are linked to higher student achievement. When teachers believe their students are capable of success, they tend to provide more encouragement, opportunities, and meaningful feedback (Jussim & Harber, 2005). These expectations influence students’ own beliefs about their abilities—a phenomenon known as the Pygmalion effect. However, low expectations, whether implicit or explicit, can limit learning, especially for students from marginalized groups.
Clear academic goals and developmentally appropriate challenges can foster a sense of competence, motivating children to persist in the face of setbacks.
Ability Grouping
Ability grouping, also known as tracking, involves placing students into instructional groups based on their perceived skill levels. This is a common practice in elementary schools, especially for reading and math.
There is debate about the long-term effectiveness of ability grouping. On the one hand, it can allow teachers to tailor instruction more closely to students' skill levels. On the other hand, students placed in lower groups may receive less rigorous instruction and fewer enrichment opportunities, which can reinforce existing gaps in achievement over time (Gamoran, 2009). Grouping strategies are most effective when they are flexible and regularly reassessed, rather than being fixed for extended periods.
Grade Retention
Grade retention—having a student repeat a grade—is another controversial practice. While intended to give children extra time to catch up academically or mature socially, retention is linked with increased risk of academic disengagement, lower self-esteem, and school dropout in later years (Jimerson, 2001). Studies suggest that providing targeted academic support and differentiated instruction is more effective than retention alone.
The decision to retain a student should involve a holistic assessment of academic skills, emotional readiness, and available interventions, rather than relying solely on test scores or age.
References, Contributors and Attributions
Finn, J. D., & Achilles, C. M. (1999). Tennessee’s class size study: Findings, implications, misconceptions. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(2), 97–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737021002097
Gamoran, A. (2009). Tracking and inequality: New directions for research and practice. WCER Working Paper No. 2009-6. Wisconsin Center for Education Research. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED506617.pdf
Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher–child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72(2), 625–638. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00301
Jimerson, S. R. (2001). Meta-analysis of grade retention research: Implications for practice in the 21st century. School Psychology Review, 30(3), 420–437. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2001.12086124
Jussim, L., & Harber, K. D. (2005). Teacher expectations and self-fulfilling prophecies: Knowns and unknowns, resolved and unresolved controversies. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9(2), 131–155. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0902_3
Krueger, A. B. (1999). Experimental estimates of education production functions. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(2), 497–532. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355399556052
Pianta, R. C., La Paro, K. M., & Hamre, B. K. (2008). Classroom assessment scoring system (CLASS) manual: K-3. Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.