Running Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER

Teaching Influences on Prosocial Behavior:

An Analysis of the Impact of Teaching Approaches & Strategies

Gaby Montes

Lin Number: 867101822

Lehigh University
Running Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER 1

Importance of Topic & Research Questions

Much research has been conducted on the impact of parenting on the development of

prosocial behavior in children, yet it is vital to extend this analysis into the classroom setting

where students spend as much time as they do at home. Early formal schooling has a large,

lasting impact on the prosocial behavior of children because it is what first sets the expectations

of acceptable and unacceptable behaviors within a social environment (Spivak & Howes, 2011).

Often, when children enter the social school environment, it is the first time they have been

expected to independently socially interact, establish friendships, and work together

collaboratively with a diverse group of individuals they do not know. It creates their schema for

what acceptable social interactions with strangers look like.

An important goal for many schools and teachers is promoting positive social

development due to the major implications of these early school experiences on later social

development and functioning into adulthood (Solomon et al., 1988). Teachers influence their

students greatly, not only by how and what they teach, but also by how they relate, teach, and

model prosocial behavior and social constructs and how those same principles are reflected in

their methods of classroom management (Jennings & Greenberg, 2009). There is a growing

agreement in research of the large contribution that teachers make to the social and emotional

development of their students and the creation of these behavioral schemas that have lasting

effects into adulthood (Birch & Ladd, 1998; Hamre & Pianta, 2001, 2006; Murray & Greenberg,

2000; Pianta, Hamre, & Stuhlman, 2003; Pederson, Fatcher, & Eaton, 1978; Jennings &

Greenberg, 2009) Thus, it is vital that teachers are knowledgeable on how to best cultivate

prosocial behavior in children so that both the parents and teacher are actively scaffolding the

child’s learning and schema development of how to engage in prosocial interactions

Running Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER 2

The current research expands upon existing research of the impact of parental practices

and styles on prosocial development to determine whether teaching approaches or strategies are

more impactful on the cultivation of prosocial behavior in the classroom. Further, the research

seeks to examine which specific teaching approaches, strategies, and techniques have been found

to significantly impact the development of prosocial behavior within elementary-school aged

children. Thus, the independent variables of interest are teaching approaches and teaching

strategies, while the dependent variable of interest is prosocial development. The analysis of the

impact of teaching approaches shall focus specifically on the impact of interpersonal

relationships, teacher social-emotional competence and well-being, and cultivating a welcoming

class environment. Analysis of teaching strategies shall focus mainly on the impact of classroom

management strategies, providing opportunities for collaborative interactions with peers, and

providing opportunities for social pretend play.

Discussion of Major Ideas

Prosocial behavior refers to a broad spectrum of actions that serve the purpose of

benefitting an individual other than oneself. This research will focus on the specific behavioral,

observable prosocial behaviors of helping and sharing that are especially important for young

children to learn and practice within the classroom environment (Martin & Olson, 2015). The

determinants of prosocial behavior within an individual are influenced by the association

between the characteristics of the individual and their socialization experiences and situational

influences (Eisenberg et al, 2006; Spivak & Howes, 2011). This research shall highlight the

influence of the socialization experiences and situational influences provided by the teacher

within the classroom context on the development of prosocial behavior in young children, as

well as demonstrate the importance of the way teachers go about cultivating prosocial behavior

within their students.

Running Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER 3

There is an extensive body of research that demonstrates the grand impact teaching

approaches and strategies can have on the development of prosocial behavior in children. Each

independent variable of focus impacts prosocial behavior in a unique way. Through this analysis,

the research surrounding the impacts of teaching approaches and teaching strategies on prosocial

will be reviewed. The findings of such research shall demonstrate which of these two constructs

is more influential on, as well as the specific ways in which each construct can best support the

cultivation of prosocial behavior in young children.

Prior to examining the differing impacts of teaching approaches and strategies, it is

imperative to provide a complete understanding and definition of the difference between each of

the two independent variables. On the one hand, teaching approaches are related to the personal

philosophy of teaching of the instructor surrounding the nature of education and role the teacher

plays within the classroom. On the other hand, teaching strategies are the specific procedures or

skills instructors utilize to complete a given task. Thus, teaching approaches relate more with the

personality and perspectives of the specific instructor, while the strategies are based upon the

methods the instructor decides to use to complete a learning objective.

Teaching Approaches
The analysis of the impact of teaching approaches on prosocial behavior shall focus

specifically on interpersonal relationships between students and teachers and the social-

emotional competence and well-being of the teacher. This analysis will highlight both the

importance of and specific teaching approaches that lead to higher levels of prosocial behavior

and social development in children.

Interpersonal Relationships
Research has found that the interpersonal or affective aspect of teaching, though often not

highlighted as much as the cognitive and behavioral components, is vital in influencing student
Running Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER 4

perceptions and motivations for learning (Elizabeth, 2005). These teacher-student relationships

are a strong motivator and indicator for learning of all types, including that of prosocial

behaviors (Christensen & Menzel, 1998; Wilson & Taylor, 2001; Elizabeth, 2005; Merritt et al.,

2012). The presence of these positive interpersonal relationships is vital because research

findings demonstrate that students emphasize the importance of the personal connection that they

have with faculty members for their advising and mentoring experiences (Light, 2001; Elizabeth,

2005). Due to this, students will seek advice and are more likely to value and internalize lessons

from the faculty members they have a greater personal connection with. These are the

individuals they will model behavior after and allow to mold their prosocial behaviors. If that

connection is not present, the student is less likely to value mentorship from their instructor and

is less likely to be receptive to the instructors attempts at scaffolding their development of

prosocial behaviors.

To illustrate further, Wilson (2007) found that children in classrooms with high

emotional support where they received frequent feedback on their work and behavior

demonstrated significantly better social competence and self-control than those in classrooms

with lower levels of those supports. Merritt et al. (2012) corroborated Wilson’s (2007) findings

and demonstrated that higher teacher emotional support led to lower child aggression, in addition

to the higher self-control that was previously found. These findings of better reported self-control

and lower aggression support the importance of these interpersonal relationships for students to

value the guidance and instruction provided by the teacher. The findings support this by

demonstrating that students are more likely to listen to the teacher and want to monitor their own

behavior when emotional support and a positive student-teacher relationship is present. As a

matter of fact, when students were asked to describe the characteristics within a “master teacher”
Running Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER 5

in a study, five of the top eight qualities that emerged across findings were relationship oriented

and included the teacher being understanding, personable, respectful, happy, and caring. Thus,

the teachers that students viewed as the best and the ones they most likely had the most respect

for were those teachers who took time to cultivate these interpersonal relationships with students

and focused on that affective component of teaching (Buskist et al., 2013).

Both Merritt et al. (2012) and Howes (2000) additionally found that greater levels of

prosocial behaviors were exhibited from young children when they had a relationship with their

teacher that was unconflicted, close, and had a high level of warmth. According to Howes

(2000), these findings suggest that a child’s relationship with their teacher is a construct through

which models for social interaction are provided to them. The teacher becomes a construct

through which these models exist because as young children first begin to make the transition

from the home to school environment, teachers serve a surrogate parental role for the students as

they adjust to being away from their parents and seek another individual to model and provide

them with emotional and behavioral support and guidance (Wilson et al., 2007).

All of these research findings demonstrate the importance of instructors taking the time to

cultivate warm, close, low-conflict relationships with their students. These positive student-

teacher relationships lead to higher levels of prosocial behavior and self-control, lower levels of

aggression, and appear to be vital to children’s development of social and emotional competence

and self-regulatory skills.

Social-emotional Competence of Teacher

Jennings and Greenberg (2009) provide a model that demonstrates how teacher social-

emotional competence (SEC) and well-being impacts the outcomes for the students and the

creation of a prosocial classroom environment. This diagram can be found in Appendix A. The

diagram demonstrates the way in which the social-emotional competence (SEC) of the teacher
Running Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER 6

underlies and influences their ability to develop healthy student-teacher relationships, effectively

manage the classroom, and implement curriculum in the intended manner. All three of these

aspects that are influenced by the SEC of the teacher are necessary to cultivate a healthy

classroom environment, which leads to positive social, emotional, and academic outcomes for

the students. The importance of positive student-teacher relationships has been thoroughly

discussed previously, thus it is notable that teacher SEC is a significant contributor to the

development of these interpersonal relationships within the classroom (Jennings & Greenberg,

2009). It is a vital contributor because SEC teachers are able to recognize student emotions and

understand how to effectively respond to the individual needs of students within the particular

context. SEC teachers were found to have high self-awareness, social awareness, cultural

sensitivity, and well-being (Jennings & Greenberg, 2009). Further, since teacher competence is

so strongly related to a teacher’s ability to effectively manage the classroom, the SEC of a

teacher positively correlates with the harmony that exists between the students in the classroom

(Solomon et al., 1988). Moreover, the social-emotional competence of the teacher is in a

reciprocal relationship with the student’s social and emotional outcomes, including their

prosocial development.

Teaching Strategies & Techniques

The analysis of the impact of teaching strategies on prosocial behavior shall focus

specifically on the method of classroom management and the opportunities for collaborative

interactions and pretend play provided to students. This analysis will highlight both the

importance of and specific teaching strategies that lead to higher levels of prosocial behavior and

social development in children.

Classroom Management
Running Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER 7

Research supports a switch to a much more authoritative and proactive strategy for

teachers to utilize in regards to classroom management, as opposed to the current authoritarian

and punishment-heavy approach to organizing and managing a classroom (Jennings &

Greenburg, 2009). On the one hand, this proactive aspect of this new approach to classroom

management promotes the development of prosocial and cooperative behaviors from students by

establishing warm and supportive relationships between students and teachers, as well as fellow

peers. It promotes the creation of a more welcoming and supportive classroom environment. On

the other hand, the proactive aspect of the approach highlights the use of preventative strategies

for unacceptable behaviors, as opposed to coercive measures (Jennings & Greenburg, 2009). It

promotes the idea of limit setting and scaffolding, rather than control over the student. Since

these newer strategies for going about classroom management foster a sense of community and

collaboration within the classroom, it leads students to engage in more prosocial and cooperative

behaviors, while reducing the presence of disruptive behaviors (Battistich et al., 1997).

An analysis of the findings of Solomon et al.’s (1988) study shall better illustrate the

impact of this new proactive, authoritative approach to classroom management. In this study, an

intervention program designed to better the prosocial development of elementary school students

in the classroom was implemented into many schools. Through this study, one of the two main

aspects of classroom life that researchers found to be significantly related to children’s prosocial

development was positive discipline. Positive discipline is defined a child-centered approach to

classroom discipline, which aligns with the goals of the newly promoted proactive and

authoritative approach to classroom management. This positive discipline works to scaffold the

“development of self-control and personal commitment to rules and values through an emphasis

on student understanding of the general principles behind rules, student autonomy, student input
Running Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER 8

to and participation in rule-setting and decision-making, and the use of discipline practices

centered around induction” (Hoffman, 1970). This method of classroom management helps

students to develop prosocial behaviors, not because they have to avoid punishment, but rather

because such behaviors have become ingrained as part of their values and responsibilities. This

method of management and discipline has much more effective and longer lasting effects on

prosocial behavior, in addition to self-control and autonomy. By scaffolding children through

adopting these prosocial and moral values and responsibilities, teachers also build the moral

motivation within the student. This is important because research has demonstrate that moral

motivation is independently related to prosocial behavior. Malti et al. (2009) discovered that

children with high levels of moral motivation demonstrated high prosocial behavior regardless of

their sympathy level. Thus, this method of classroom management and discipline instills in

students the importance of engaging in prosocial behaviors, regardless of whether they

sympathize with the particular individual. This increases the likelihood that they engage in

prosocial behavior across contexts (Malti et al., 2009).

Opportunities for Collaborative Interactions & Pretend Play

The second main aspect of classroom life that Solomon et al. (1988) found to be

significantly related to children’s prosocial behavior was cooperative activities. These

cooperative activities within the intervention program that fostered prosocial development gave

children opportunities to work toward a common goal in a collaborative way (Staub, 1979).

These included both academic and nonacademic activities within the classroom. To best foster

the development of prosocial behaviors through these activities, children must be provided with

clear guidance on how to incorporate key prosocial values into the task as they work with their

team.
Running Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER 9

Spivak and Howes’ (2011) research further supports these findings of the influence of

collaborative interactions on prosocial development. This research found that child’s engagement

in social pretend play with peers was significantly associated with the prosocial behavioral

development of children across three ethnocultural groups. Peer relations leads to prosocial

behavior because these interactions enable children to utilize their peers as guides for learning

social behaviors. Thus, when children who display fewer prosocial behaviors interact with those

who display more, the interactions boost the prosocial behavior of both children because this

history of engaging in and receiving prosocial behavior creates a desire to respond in a prosocial

manner to others in the future (Staub, 1975; Wentzel et al., 2004). More specifically, social peer

interactions that involve pretend play positively influence prosocial behavior in children by

requiring them to actively notice and distinguish the roles each individual plays in the

collaborative exchange (Spivak & Howes, 2011). Further, toddlers who engage in complex

forms of social pretend play more often are more prosocial and less aggressive towards peers by

age nine (Howes & Phillipsen, 1998). The children who engage in this play are also more skilled

in cognitive, linguistic, and social domains than their peers, thus the children who have higher

competence in social pretend play more fully understand how and when to respond prosocially

(Spivak & Howes, 2011).

Which Construct is More Influential?

The analysis of much research on the impacts of both teaching approaches and strategies

has demonstrated that though both constructs are vital to the development of prosocial

development in children, teaching approaches are more influential. Teaching approaches are

more influential due to the way teacher-student relationships and the social-emotional

competence of a teacher impact the effectiveness of teaching strategies and their implementation.

To illustrate this point further, revisit the diagram in Appendix A that showcases the findings
Running Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER 10

from Jennings & Greenberg’s (2009) research. Such findings demonstrate the way in which the

social-emotional competence of the teacher underlies all other components that are important to

the creation of a prosocial classroom environment that promotes the development of lasting

prosocial behavior in children. A teacher can choose to utilize the best empirically-based

teaching strategies to foster prosocial development, yet if they do not have the social-emotional

competence to implement the curriculum properly or do not have the important interpersonal

relationships with the students to make them receptive to the instruction, the strategies will fail.

Conclusion
It is evident that both teaching approaches and strategies are vital to the development of

prosocial behavior in children from a young age. The best prosocial classroom model is one

where supportive teacher-student interpersonal relationships and effective classroom

management are present to contribution to the creation of a healthy classroom environment that

fosters the development of prosocial behavior in children, while placing a large emphasis and

importance on the social-emotional competence of the teacher (Jennings & Greenberg, 2009).

The large importance of teaching approaches and the affective component of teaching on

student prosocial outcomes provides implications for the need to incorporate more about how to

cultivate student-teacher relationships in the classroom within teacher education programs.

A major issue that has remained unaddressed by researchers is the importance of

emotional support and other affective components of teaching on the development of prosocial

behavior. Specifically, research has not studied the impact of emotional support on prosocial

behavior while isolating it from the impacts of classroom management. Thus, research must be

conducted on these constructs in isolation. Further, more research must be conducted on the

impact of particular educational contexts on the development of prosocial behavior.

Running Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER 11

Appendix A

References

Battistich, V., Solomon, D., Watson, M. S., & Schaps, E. (1997). Caring school com munities.

Educational Psychologist, 32, 137-151.

Buskist, W., Sikorski, J., Buckley, T., & Saville, B. K. (2013). Elements of master teaching.

In The Teaching of Psychology (pp. 47-60). Psychology Press.

Carter, J., & Sugai, G. (1988). Teaching social skills. Teaching Exceptional Children, 20(3), 68-

71.

Elizabeth, Y. H. (2005). From the Laboratory to the Classroom and Back: The Science of

Interpersonal Relationships Informs Teaching. Journal of Social and Clinical

Psychology, 24(1), 3-10. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/jscp.24.1.3.59168

Harjusola–Webb, S., Hubbell, S., & Bedesem, P. (2012). Increasing Prosocial Behaviors of

Young Children with Disabilities in Inclusive Classrooms Using a Combination of Peer-

Running Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER 12

Mediated Intervention and Social Narratives. Beyond Behavior, 21(2), 29-36. Retrieved

from www.jstor.org/stable/24011813

Hoffman, M. (1970). Moral Development. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.), Carmichael's manual of child

psychology (third edition, pp. 261-360). New York

Howes, C. (2000). Social-emotional classroom climate in child care, child-teacher relationships

and children’s second grade peer relations. Social Development, 9, 191–204.

Howes, C., & Phillipsen, L. C. (1998). Continuity in children’s relations with peers. Social

Development, 7, 340–349.

Jennings, P., & Greenberg, M. (2009). The Prosocial Classroom: Teacher Social and Emotional

Competence in Relation to Student and Classroom Outcomes. Review of Educational

Research,79(1), 491-525. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/40071173

Leiberg, S., Klimecki, O., & Singer, T. (2011). Short-term compassion training increases

prosocial behavior in a newly developed prosocial game. PLoS One, 6(3)

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0017798

Malti, T., Gummerum, M., Keller, M., & Buchmann, M. (2009). Children’s moral motivation,

sympathy, and prosocial behavior. Child development, 80(2), 442-460.

Martin, A., & Olson, K. R. (2015). Beyond good and evil: What motivations underlie children’s

prosocial behavior?. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2), 159-175.

Merritt, E. G., Wanless, S. B., Rimm-Kaufman, S., Cameron, C., & Peugh, J. L. (2012). The

contribution of teachers' emotional support to children's social behaviors and self-

regulatory skills in first grade. School Psychology Review, 41(2), 141-159. Retrieved

from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1022331903?accountid=12043
Running Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER 13

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Early Child Care Research

Network. (2005). A day in third grade: A large-scale study of classroom quality and

teacher and student behavior. Elementary School Journal, 105, 305–323.

Padilla-Walker, L. M. (2014). Parental socialization of prosocial behavior: A multidimensional

approach.

Solomon, D., Watson, M., Delucchi, K., Schaps, E., & Battistich, V. (1988). Enhancing

Children's Prosocial Behavior in the Classroom. American Educational Research

Journal, 25(4), 527-554. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/1163128

Spivak, A. L., & Howes, C. (2011). Social and relational factors in early education and prosocial

actions of children of diverse ethnocultural communities. Merrill - Palmer

Quarterly, 57(1), 1-24. Retrieved from

https://search.proquest.com/docview/818561807?accountid=12043

Staub, E. (1979). Positive social behavior and morality: Vol. 2. Socialization and development.

New York: Academic Press

What is the difference between strategy, technique, method and approach in terms of teaching.

(n.d.). Retrieved from

http://ulyarosyita.blogspot.com/2011/03/what-is-difference-between-strategy.html.

Wentzel, K. R., Barry, C. M., & Caldwell, K. A. (2004). Friendship in middle school: Influences

on motivation and school adjustment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 195–203.

Wilson, H. K., Pianta, R. C., & Stuhlman, M. (2007). Typical classroom experiences in first

grade: The role of classroom climate and functional risk in the development of social

competencies. The Elementary School Journal, 108, 81–96.