Learn more about the complexities of Developmental Relationships.
Although this Toolkit focuses on five distinct elements of Developmental Relationships—Express Care, Provide Support, Challenge Growth, Share Power, and Expand Possibilities—they are all interrelated. Helping young people learn often requires multiple elements at the same time (e.g., challenging a student’s growth while sharing power by giving them the option to choose which problems to tackle), and it takes practice and patience as you learn which approach to use as you help your students.

Additionally, Developmental Relationships exist within many different relational contexts at the same time, each impacting the learning experience. These include: relationships between educators/tutors, between youth, between youth and the program/classroom, and larger community and cultural contexts. Fostering Developmental Relationships in math learning spaces needs to have these various dynamics in mind. The following pages offer more insights as you navigate the complexities of contextualizing Developmental Relationships.

Further Reading

Research Cited in the DR+Math Toolkit

[1] Moliner, L., & Alegre, F. (2020). Effects of peer tutoring on middle school students' mathematics self-concepts. PloS one: 15(4); Nickow, A. J., Oreopoulos, P., & Quan, V. (2020). The impressive effects of tutoring on prek-12 learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. EdWorkingPaper: 20-267; Samuelsson, J. (2021). Developing students’ relationships with mathematics. Educational Action Research.

[2] National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2019). Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2019. Special Report NSF 19-304. Alexandria, VA. Available at https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd

[3] Topornycky, J., & Golparian, S. (2016). Balancing openness and interpretation in active listening. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 9, 175-184.

[4] Gladstone, J. R., & Cimpian, A. (2021). Which role models are effective for which students? A systematic review and four recommendations for maximizing the effectiveness of role models in STEM. International Journal of STEM Education. 

[5] Emily Q. Rosenzweig, Allan Wigfield & Jacquelynne S. Eccles (2022). Beyond utility value interventions: The why, when, and how for next steps in expectancy-value intervention research, Educational Psychologist, 57:1, 11-30

[6] Beasley, M .A., & Fischer, M. J. (2012). Why they leave: The impact of stereotype threat on the attrition of women and minorities from science, math and engineering majors. Social Psychology Education, 15, 427-448; Grossman, J. M., & Porche, M. V. (2014). Perceived gender and racial/ethnic barriers to STEM success. Urban Education, 49, 698-727; McGee, E. O. (2016). Devalued Black and Latino racial identities: A by-product of STEM college culture? American Educational Research Journal, 53, 1626-1662; Museus, S. D., & Liverman, D. (2010). High-performing institutions and their implications for studying underrepresented minority students in STEM. New Directions for Institutional Research, 148, 17-27; Nasir, N. S., & Vakil, S. (2017). STEM-focused academies in Urban Schools: Tensions and possibilities, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 26, 376-406.

[7] Kuperminc, G. P., Seitz, S., Joseph, H., Khatib, N., Wilson, C., Collins, K., & Guessous, O. (2019). Enhancing program quality in a national sample of after-school settings: The role of youth-staff interactions and staff/organizational functioning. American Journal of Community Psychology, 63, 391-404. 

[8]  Yu, M. B. V., Hsieh, T., Lee, G, Jiang, S., Simpkins, S. D., & Pantano, A. (2022). Promoting adolescents’ math motivational beliefs through competence support: Culturally responsive practices in an afterschool program context. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 68, 102028. 

[9] Jones, J. I. (2014) An overview of employment and wages in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) groups. Beyond the Numbers: Employment and Unemployment, 3(8). Retrieved from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2019). Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2019. Special Report NSF 19-304. Alexandria, VA. Available at https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd; Taningco, M. T. V., Mathew, A. B., & Pachon, H. P. (2008). STEM Professions: Opportunities and challenges for Latinos in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. A review of literature. Tomas Rivera Policy Institute.

[10] Simpkins, S. D., Riggs, N. R., Ngo, B., Vest Ettekal, A., & Okamoto, D. (2017). Designing Culturally Responsive Organized After-School Activities. Journal of Adolescent Research, 32(1), 11–36. 

Additional Research 

Brisson, B. M., Dicke, A.-L., Gaspard, H., Häfner, I., Flunger, B., Nagengast, B., & Trautwein, U. (2017). Short Intervention, Sustained Effects: Promoting Students’ Math Competence Beliefs, Effort, and Achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 54(6), 1048–1078. 

Curry, S. (2017). Equity and inclusion: An action agenda for youth development professionals. Afterschool Matters, 26: Fall. 

Gladstone, J. R., & Cimpian, A. (2021). Which role models are effective for which students? A systematic review and four recommendations for maximizing the effectiveness of role models in STEM. International Journal of STEM Education. 

Harackiewicz, J. M., Rozek, C. S., Hulleman, C. S., & Hyde, J. S. (2012). Helping parents to motivate adolescents in mathematics and science: An experimental test of a utility-value intervention. Psychological Science, 23, 899–906.

National Center on Afterschool and Summer Enrichment (2021). Addressing equity in out-of-school time. Voices from the Field, 5.

Rosenzweig, E. Q., Harackiewicz, J. M., Priniski, S. J., Hecht, C. A., Canning, E. A., Tibbetts, Y., & Hyde, J. S. (2019). Choose your own intervention: Using choice to enhance the effectiveness of a utility-value intervention. Motivation Science, 5(3), 269–276.

Rosenzweig, E. Q., & Wigfield, A. (2016) STEM Motivation Interventions for Adolescents: A Promising Start, but Further to Go. Educational Psychologist, 51, 146-163.

Rosenzweig, E. Q., Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2022). Beyond utility value interventions: The why, when, and how for next steps in expectancy-value intervention research. Educational Psychologist, 57(1), 11–30.

Simpkins, S. D., Riggs, N. R., Ngo, B., Vest Ettekal, A., & Okamoto, D. (2017). Designing Culturally Responsive Organized After-School Activities. Journal of Adolescent Research, 32(1), 11–36.

Find additional resources at Search Institute's Resources Hub.