short article about the importance of education

Greater Good Science Center • Magazine • In Action • In Education

Parenting & Family Articles & More

Our best education articles of 2020, readers and editors pick the most interesting and insightful articles from the past year about teaching, learning, and the keys to well-being at school..

In February of 2020, we launched the new website Greater Good in Education , a collection of free, research-based and -informed strategies and practices for the social, emotional, and ethical development of students, for the well-being of the adults who work with them, and for cultivating positive school cultures. Little did we know how much more crucial these resources would become over the course of the year during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Now, as we head back to school in 2021, things are looking a lot different than in past years. Our most popular education articles of 2020 can help you manage difficult emotions and other challenges at school in the pandemic, all while supporting the social-emotional well-being of your students.

In addition to these articles, you can also find tips, tools, and recommended readings in two resource guides we created in 2020: Supporting Learning and Well-Being During the Coronavirus Crisis and Resources to Support Anti-Racist Learning , which helps educators take action to undo the racism within themselves, encourage their colleagues to do the same, and teach and support their students in forming anti-racist identities.

Here are the 10 best education articles of 2020, based on a composite ranking of pageviews and editors’ picks.

Can the Lockdown Push Schools in a Positive Direction? , by Patrick Cook-Deegan: Here are five ways that COVID-19 could change education for the better.

How Teachers Can Navigate Difficult Emotions During School Closures , by Amy L. Eva: Here are some tools for staying calm and centered amid the coronavirus crisis.

Six Online Activities to Help Students Cope With COVID-19 , by Lea Waters: These well-being practices can help students feel connected and resilient during the pandemic.

Help Students Process COVID-19 Emotions With This Lesson Plan , by Maurice Elias: Music and the arts can help students transition back to school this year.

How to Teach Online So All Students Feel Like They Belong , by Becki Cohn-Vargas and Kathe Gogolewski: Educators can foster belonging and inclusion for all students, even online.

How Teachers Can Help Students With Special Needs Navigate Distance Learning , by Rebecca Branstetter: Kids with disabilities are often shortchanged by pandemic classroom conditions. Here are three tips for educators to boost their engagement and connection.

How to Reduce the Stress of Homeschooling on Everyone , by Rebecca Branstetter: A school psychologist offers advice to parents on how to support their child during school closures.

Three Ways to Help Your Kids Succeed at Distance Learning , by Christine Carter: How can parents support their children at the start of an uncertain school year?

How Schools Are Meeting Social-Emotional Needs During the Pandemic , by Frances Messano, Jason Atwood, and Stacey Childress: A new report looks at how schools have been grappling with the challenges imposed by COVID-19.

Six Ways to Help Your Students Make Sense of a Divisive Election , by Julie Halterman: The election is over, but many young people will need help understanding what just happened.

Train Your Brain to Be Kinder (video), by Jane Park: Boost your kindness by sending kind thoughts to someone you love—and to someone you don’t get along with—with a little guidance from these students.

From Othering to Belonging (podcast): We speak with john a. powell, director of the Othering & Belonging Institute, about racial justice, well-being, and widening our circles of human connection and concern.

About the Author

Greater good editors, you may also enjoy.

This article — and everything on this site — is funded by readers like you.

Become a subscribing member today. Help us continue to bring “the science of a meaningful life” to you and to millions around the globe.

• Article Writing
• Article On The Importance Of Education

Article on the Importance of Education

Are you educated? Do you think education is a waste of time? This article on the importance of education will give you the answer to that question.

Table of Contents

What can be considered good education, the power of being educated.

• How Can Your Education Benefit Your Society
• FAQs on the Importance of Education

To put it in simple terms, education is the process of acquiring knowledge and skills, building morals, values, and developing habits. Education does not just consist of these. The process of education can be said to be complete only if you are able to put the knowledge you acquire to good use. So, education is not just gaining knowledge and gathering information but developing the ability to apply what you have learned to daily life scenarios.

Is there good education and bad education? This is a question that has been asked for years now. Good education works towards the goal of preparing and empowering individuals to lead a productive life that definitely impacts the economic growth of the society and country they are a part of. Good education is meant to stimulate logical and critical thinking in individuals. Good education does not mean scoring high marks in your assessments. People usually perceive the notion that schooling and scoring good marks in examinations is education. Education is beyond all that. Schooling alone does not lead to learning. Getting a good education depends on a lot of factors, including the environment or society you are in, the social and economic background and the ability of the individual to understand, analyse and act according to the need of the hour.

It is a fact that quality education and skill development comes from strong education systems. Having trained and empathetic teachers is one of the prerequisites to availing good education. Education includes learning about different cultures, religions, communities, economic and social standards and grooming oneself to become a socially responsible individual. With the advancement of technology, teachers have been taken for granted because most children nowadays have their own mobile phones and internet access with which they can find answers to any questions, sometimes questions their parents, siblings, or teachers cannot explain. This is a huge drawback in the process of building a healthy society.

Being educated often makes you feel powerful. Why is that?

Imagine you did not know how to use a mobile phone, a laptop, a match stick or a bulb. What is the use of possessing something that you do not know how to use? In the beginning of time, it was found out that hitting two rocks together produces sparks that can start a fire. Every little thing you come across can teach you something or the other. The more you know, the more powerful you become.

Knowing how to drive a car would come in handy when you have to go somewhere with more people travelling with you. Knowing how to fix a pipe can help you when someone accidentally breaks off a pipe and water keeps flowing. Likewise, everything you learn will help you in one or the other way. Therefore, good education can be defined as the general and specific knowledge people gain by being taught or by experience.

“Education is not the learning of facts, but the training of the mind to think”, according to Albert Einstein. Gathering a load of information is easily possible in the present age of the internet and technology. Being able to answer every question does not guarantee or prepare you for a life where experience and knowledge is accounted for.

How Can Your Education Benefit Your Society?

Society is an integral part of every nation. The growth and development of individuals help the betterment of the society they are a part of, which in turn helps the social and economic progress of the nation as a whole. The education system has been evolving from day one. The modes and means of education are improvised every now and then according to the changing times.

According to Benjamin Franklin, “An investment in knowledge pays the best interest”. Any amount of money or time spent on getting yourself educated never goes to waste. The more you learn, the more you benefit from it. Even if you think that something that you are learning is not what you are interested in or what you think you need, do not worry because everything you come across will help you in some stage of life. An educated individual has a lot more to give to a society and a nation than a rich person. Being educated shapes the characters and social behaviours of individuals. It changes the way people think and act. The way you look at your fellow beings and treat them varies with every day in the process of learning.

The ultimate goal of education should be action and not just knowledge. In order to attain this goal, it is important to let all kinds of people understand the importance of education and the benefits of being educated in this constantly changing world.

Frequently Asked Questions on the Importance of Education

Why is education important.

Education makes you a better person and gives you stability in life. You become a person people around you can rely on. You can become the hand that lifts up the lowly and provides solutions to all the problems they face. It can also boost your self-confidence and credibility as an individual.

What is the purpose of education?

The purpose of education is to help the development of an individual’s intellectual and emotional self. Education shapes the individual’s character and attitude towards life and fellow beings. It aims to promote the overall development of the individual’s personality.

Is education compulsory?

Most countries have the principle of providing free and compulsory education to all. In India, Article 21 A of the Constitution states that all children from ages six to fourteen should be provided with free and compulsory education and also reserves the right to education as a Fundamental Right.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Request OTP on Voice Call

Post My Comment

• Share Share

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Register with byju's & watch live videos.

How do we reinvent education? These TED Talks explore the latest thinking — from teachers, parents, kids — on how to build a better school.

Video playlists about Education

The Butterfly Effect: Talks from the TEDinArabic Summit

A love letter to science

The pursuit of curiosity and understanding

The most popular TED Talks in Hindi

Talks about education.

How do gas masks actually work?

The rise and fall of the Maya Empire’s most powerful city

Does math have a major flaw?

3 easy steps to build a real utopia

The Nazis recruited to win the Cold War

3 strategies to address the teacher shortage crisis

How to prevent political corruption

The true story behind the legend of the 47 Rōnin

This person isn't actually screaming

What is earwax — and should you get rid of it?

What Earth in 2050 could look like

The Greek myth of Demeter's revenge

The underground cities of the Byzantine Empire

What causes addiction, and why is it so hard to treat?

The miracle of organ donation — and a breakthrough for the future

Why was the Rosetta Stone so important?

Exclusive articles about education, even gritty people get discouraged, here’s one way to make solar energy more affordable and accessible: share it with your neighbors, how to raise emotionally intelligent kids.

Getting Into College , Tips for Online Students , Tips for Students , Why Go to College

Top 10 Reasons Why Is Education Important

Updated: February 1, 2024

Published: April 15, 2020

Most of us have grown up being taught the importance of education. But why is education important? Through your frustrating school years, you may have thought that it was a waste of time, or was just something that you needed to do in order to get a job. Truth be told, however, education goes so much beyond just getting a job and making your parents happy. In fact, it’s one of the most powerful tools out there.

What Is Education?

Education means studying in order to obtain a deeper knowledge and understanding of a variety of subjects to be applied to daily life. Education is not limited to just knowledge from books, but can also be obtained through practical experiences outside of the classroom.

Top 10 Reasons: Why Is Education Important?

There are many different understandings and definitions of what education is, but one thing can be universally agreed upon, which is the importance of education — and here’s why.

1. Provides Stability

Education provides stability in life, and it’s something that no one can ever take away from you. By being well-educated and holding a college degree , you increase your chances for better career opportunities and open up new doors for yourself.

2. Provides Financial Security

On top of stability, education also provides financial security, especially in today’s society. A good education tends to lead to a higher paying job, as well as provide you with the skills needed to get there. Educated and well-informed individuals also know how to use money-saving tactics. They are more likely to use coupon websites like EMUCoupon while shopping online to save their hard-earned money.

3. Needed For Equality

In order for the entire world to really become equal, it needs to start with education. If everyone was provided with the same opportunities to education , then there would be less gaps between social classes. Everyone would be able to have an equal chance at higher paying jobs — not just those that are already well-off.

4. Allows For Self-Dependency

The importance of education is evident when it comes to being self-dependent. If we are we educated, then it’s something that belongs to us, and only us, allowing us to rely on no one else other than ourselves. It can allow you to not only be financially independent, but also to make your own choices.

5. Make Your Dreams Come True

If you can dream it, you can achieve it. An education is the most powerful weapon you can possibly have, and with it, you can make all of your dreams come true. There are of course certain exceptions, depending on what you’re aiming for, but generally an education will take you as far as you’re willing to go.

6. A Safer World

Education is something that’s not only needed on a personal level, but also on a global level, as it’s something that keeps our world safe and makes it a more peaceful place. Education tends to teach people the difference between right and wrong, and can help people stay out of risky situations.

7. Confidence

Being self-confident is a major part of being successful in life. And what better way to gain that confidence than with an education? Your level of education is often considered a way to prove your knowledge, and it can give you the confidence to express your opinions and speak your mind.

8. A Part Of Society

In today’s society, having an education is considered a vital part of being accepted by those around you. Having an education is believed to make you a useful part of society, and can make you feel like a contributing member as well.

9. Economic Growth On A National Level

An educated society is crucial for economic growth. We need people to continue to learn and research in order to constantly stay innovative. Countries with higher literacy rates also tend to be in better economic situations. With a more educated population, more employment opportunities are opened.

10. Can Protect You

Education can protect you more than you know, not only on a financial level, but it can help prevent you from being taken advantage of by knowing how to read and write, such as knowing not to sign any bogus documents.

Photo by  Pixabay  from  Pexels

Education is important for children.

Children are the future of our world, making education crucial for them. Their knowledge is what’s going to keep our world alive and flourishing.

At Childhood

During the childhood development stages, the importance of education is stronger than ever. It’s a time for children to learn social and mental skills that will be crucial for their growth and success in the future. Education at childhood also offers a chance for self-discovery and to learn about their unique interests.

The importance of education in our lives goes far beyond what we can read in a textbook. Education also provides childhood with knowledge such as how to produce artwork and make music. Education allows us to analyze what’s in front of us, and even learn from our mistakes.

Goal Building

By learning from a young age, children are given the chance to start building goals for themselves. Education means having the logic to set your mind to something and achieve it.

Importance Of Education In Society

For a modern society, education is of utmost importance. There are so many influences coming from all directions, and education can help us decipher what we should take as true, and what we should take with a grain of salt. Education can mold people into functional members of society with the right kinds of values.

Productivity

Education is needed for a productive society. Our population only continues to increase, and in turn, so do our needs. We need a strong and efficient workforce of educated people to provide us with the services we need for everyday life.

Why Is Education Important For a Nation?

The importance of education is seen in every aspect of life, and is especially crucial for the growth of a nation.

The Impact Education Has On The World

With education, people can become better citizens, knowing right from wrong, allowing for a better society where laws are followed. An educated nation knows about the importance of voting, doing so with the knowledge not blindly, but also having an understanding of what their party truly stands for. Education can also help people get jobs, which is what a nation thrives on.

Inspiring Quotes On What Education Truly Is

Why is education important, and what is it exactly? While every person has a different understanding of its true meaning, here are some of the most inspiring quotes by some legendary people.

• “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” — Nelson Mandela
• “Education is the passport to the future, for tomorrow belongs to those who prepare for it today.” — Malcolm X
• “An investment in knowledge pays the best interest.” — Benjamin Franklin
• “Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself.” — John Dewey

What Are Some Other Reasons Why Education Is Important?

There are endless reasons why education is so important, especially since it also has endless connotations and meanings.

Mind And Body

Our mind and bodies are connected more than we know. With a powerful, well-educated mind, so too are our bodies.

We can not only know how to best take care of ourselves, but we can feel confident and good about ourselves, which will likely have a positive effect on our physical well-being . Education has even been proven to add years to our life . To be exact, each additional year of education was found to add as much as 1.7 years to our lives at the age of 35.

Personal Growth

The importance of education even extends itself to our personal growth. By constantly educating ourselves, asking questions and wanting to know more, we can move forward and achieve things we never imagined before.

Get To Know Yourself

Education can allow us to get to know ourselves better than ever. We can learn things about ourselves, whether it be through books, courses, or even consulting with a professional.

Photo by  Burst  from  Pexels

Worldwide value.

Education is the best way to ensure a positive world value and view. Without a proper education, how else do we know what’s considered appropriate and how to behave?

While world peace may unfortunately seem like a far-fetched concept, with education we can get closer to this goal than we know. Education can teach us about our place in this world, and about our responsibility to humanity.

Teaches Values

Values are taught through education! Education exists far beyond the classroom or an exam. It’s taught at home, through what our parents and peers show us, and although not necessarily written down somewhere, such a teaching method is still a large aspect of what education entails.

Sharpens Your Thinking

Education is needed to think sharply and clearly!

Makes You Informed

Education makes you informed about the world around you, what’s going on and what kind of people are around you. Education can help you be more self-aware about your strengths and weaknesses, showing you were to shift your focus.

Logical Reasoning

When in an argument, if you aren’t well educated and don’t have your facts straight, then you aren’t likely to win. If you get upset about something, then being educated can also help you logically work through the situation and make sense of it, understanding all aspects.

Stay Focused

Education can help you stay focused and on track in the right direction by knowing what the right path is for you.

Allows For Innovation And Creativity

When it comes to being creative, in any way, shape, or form, the mind can only really reach its full potential if it’s been fed with the knowledge it needs to think outside the box.

Develop Life Skills

Education is the foundation of basic life skills and street smarts. While education might sound like a fancy technical term, it’s really everything we learn in life about how to best conduct ourselves from day to day.

Education can be the most freeing and empowering thing in the entire world!

Live Life To The Fullest

Truly living life to the fullest means being well-educated and holding a vast amount of knowledge about the world around us. It also means we continue to learn every day in all kinds of forms, whether it be from the people around us, newspapers, experiences, research, or traditional classes.

Breaks Barriers

Education breaks barriers between people, and allows people from across the globe to be empowered.

University of the People, a tuition-free , online university, is one powerful example of how education is being revolutionized – they offer students of all socio-economic backgrounds an equal chance at education.

Once upon a time, such a thing wouldn’t have been possible, but today such places like UoPeople have proven that these barriers truly can be broken through to receive higher education.

You Become Your Highest You

Education can allow you to become the best, fullest version of yourself, learning about what interests you, what you’re good at, becoming self-aware and conscious about the world around you. It can help you establish your place in this world, and feel complete.

Education In The Modern World

Education today is more important than ever before, and has reached new heights with new understandings of what it truly entails. Ask yourself “Why is education important?” and it will surely not be the same as anyone else’s answer.

While in modern society, holding a college degree is considered to be highly beneficial for a successful career and to be socially accepted, it is not the only means of education. Education is all around us in everything that we do, so use it wisely!

Related Articles

Transforming lives through education

Transforming education to change our world

UNESCO provides global and regional leadership on all aspects of education from pre-school to higher education and throughout life. It works through its Member States and brings together governments, the private sector and civil society to strengthen education systems worldwide in order to deliver quality education for all. As a thought leader it publishes landmark reports and data for policy-makers, implements programmes on the ground from teacher training to emergency responses and establishes and monitors norms and standards for all to guide educational developments.  

Right to education in a ruined world

Southern Italy, 1950. Three children are huddled around a makeshift desk made out of reclaimed wood, scribbling in their notebooks. The classroom has an earthen floor and roughly clad walls. The children’s clothes are ragged. They are wearing home-made slippers because shoes and the money to buy them are rare commodities in the war-ravaged south. 

Although World War II ended five years earlier, the scars of conflict are still visible in this black and white photo from a report commissioned by UNESCO from legendary photojournalist David Seymour. 

At the time when the photograph was taken, less than half of Italy’s population could read and write and just a third completed primary school. 70 years later, these children’s grandchildren enjoy an over 99% literacy rate. In the wake of the war, UNESCO led a major education campaign in Europe to respond to the education crisis, to rebuild links between people and to strengthen democracy and cultural identities after years of conflict. The emphasis then was on the fundamental learning skill of literacy.  

Immediately after World War two UNESCO led a major education campaign in Europe to respond to the education crisis, fix and rebuild links between people and strengthen cultural identities after years of conflict. David Seymour’s images show the extent of the fight against illiteracy led by the post-war Italian government and non-governmental organisations backed by UNESCO. 

Looking back at the deprived surroundings Seymour captured in his photo essay, one can see the extent of success. Seventy-one years later, those children’s grandchildren enjoy a 99.16 per cent literacy rate. 

Similar programmes were held across the globe, for instance in devastated Korea where UNESCO led a major education textbook production programme in the 1950s. Several decades after, the former Secretary-General of the United Nations and Korean citizen Ban Ki-Moon expressed the importance of such a programme for the country's development: 

The flowering of literacy

In a Korea devastated by war and where UNESCO led a major education textbook production programme in the 1950s, one student, Ban Ki-Moon, now Former Secretary-General of the United Nations, saw the world open up to him through the pages of a UNESCO textbook. Several decades after, he expressed the importance of such a programme for his country's development on the world stage.

Reaching the remote villages perched atop the Andes in Peru during the early 1960s wasn’t without its challenges for UNESCO’s technical assistance programme to bring literacy to disadvantaged communities. While Peru’s economy was experiencing a prolonged period of expansion, not all Peruvians were able to benefit from this growth which was limited to the industrialised coast. Instead, Andes communities were grappling with poverty, illiteracy and depopulation. 

Today, the number of non-literate youths and adults around the world has decreased dramatically, while the global literacy rate for young people aged 15-24 years has reached 92 %. These astonishing successes reflect improved access to schooling for younger generations.

Photojournalist Paul Almasy has left us the poignant image of a barefoot older man while he’s deciphering a newspaper thanks to his newfound literacy skills.

The classroom at the UNESCO mission in Chinchera, in the Andean highlands of Peru, had allowed the old man to discover the world beyond his tiny village.

However, there are still huge obstacles to overcome. Data from the UNESCO Institute for Statistics shows that 617 million children and adolescents worldwide are not achieving minimum proficiency levels in reading and mathematics. Since the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals in 2015 it is still the case that globally more than 450 million children - six out of 10 - have failed to gain basic literacy skills by the age of 10. And beyond literacy programmes, massive investments in skills for work and life, teacher training, and education policies are needed in a world that is changing ever faster. 

Global priorities

Africa, home to the world’s youngest population, is not on track to achieve the targets of SDG 4. Sub-Saharan Africa alone is expected to account for 25% of the school-age population by 2030, up from 12% in 1990, yet it remains the region with the highest out-of-school rates. Girls are more likely to be permanently excluded from education than boys. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated inequalities, with 89% of learners not having access to computers and 82% lacking internet access to benefit from distance learning. The lack of trained teachers further jeopardizes progress towards SDG4: pre-pandemic only 64% of whom were trained at the primary level and 58% at the lower secondary level.

As part of its Priority Africa Flagship 2022 – 2029 , UNESCO has launched Campus Africa: Reinforcing Higher Education in Africa with the objective to build integrated, inclusive, and quality tertiary education systems and institutions, for the development of inclusive and equitable societies on the continent.

Gender    

There are immense gender gaps when it comes to access, learning achievement and education, most often at the expense of girls and women. It is estimated that some 127 million girls are out of school around the world. For many girls and women around the world, the classroom remains an elusive, often forbidden space. UNESCO monitors the educational rights of girls and women around the world and shares information on the legal progress toward securing the right to education for women in all countries. Despite important progress in recent decades, the right to education is still far from being a reality for many girls and women. Discriminatory practices stand in the way of girls and women fully exercising their right to participate in, complete, and benefit from education. And while girls have difficulty with access, boys face increasing challenges, and particularly disengagement , from education at later stages. Globally only 88 men are enrolled in tertiary education for every 100 women. In 73 countries, fewer boys than girls are enrolled in upper-secondary education.

UNESCO's Her Atlas analyzes the legal frameworks of nearly 200 states to track which laws are enabling---or inhibiting---the right to education for girls and women. This interactive world map uses a color-coded scoring system to monitor 12 indicators of legal progress towards gender equality in the right to education.

Monitoring the right to education for girls and women

What makes me proud is that soon I will finish building a new house. I have already been able to buy a cow and I will soon be able to have another pond

Madagascar’s coastal Atsinanana region is known for its lush rainforests and fish breeding.

The country has a young population, but only one out of three children can complete primary education. Among those who are able to finish primary school, only 17% have minimum reading skills, while just a fifth of them have basic maths competencies. Once they leave school, children face a precarious labour market and unstable jobs, just like their parents.

Natacha Obienne is only 21 years old, but she is already in charge of a small fish farm, a career that is usually pursued by men. As one of the many out-of-school women in her area, she was able to set up her own business after vocational training taught her the basics of financial management and entrepreneurship, as well as the practicalities of breeding fish.

She understood that fish feeding depends on the temperature of the water. If it’s well managed, a higher number of fish is produced. ‘I immediately applied everything I learnt’ she says.

The classroom she attended changed the course of her life and she hopes other young people will follow in her footsteps.

I no longer depend on my parents and I am financially independent

She’s not alone. Around 3,000 youths in Madagascar have been trained since the start of the UNESCO-backed programme, some of whom have set up their own business and achieved financial independence. Education was the best way to ease people's emancipation.

Like Emma Claudia, 25, who after her vocational training started a restaurant with just a baking tray and a saucepan.

What does my family think? They are surprised and amazed by my evolution because I haven’t been able to complete my studies. I don’t have any school diplomas.

While Natacha and Emma Claudia have been able to transform their world through education, millions of children out of school around the world are still denied that dream.

Discrimination against girls remains widespread and nearly one billion adults, mostly women, are illiterate. The lack of qualified teachers and learning materials continues to be the reality in too many schools.

Challenging these obstacles is getting harder as the world grapples with the acceleration of climate change, the emergence of digitization and artificial intelligence, and the increasing exclusion and uncertainty brought by the Covid-19 pandemic.

We resumed school a while ago and it’s been stressful. We are trying to retrieve what we lost during quarantine, the worst thing about not being in school is the number of things you miss. Learning behind a screen and learning in person are incomparable.

Aicha is lucky to be able to continue her education. Her country has the highest rate of out-of-school children in the world – 10.5 million – and nearly two-thirds are women. To compound the problem, Nigeria’s northern states suffer from the violence that targets education.

In Russia, too, Alexander and his school friends had to cope with virtual learning and the lack of interactions.

All Russian students were moved to online studying. Needless to say, it was a rough year for all of us, several friends were struggling with depressive moods. They were missing their friends and teachers. So did I.

To protect their right to education during this unprecedented disruption and beyond, UNESCO has launched the Global Education Coalition , a platform for collaboration and exchange that brings together more than 175 countries from the UN family, civil society, academia and the private sector to ensure that learning never stops.

Building skills where they are most needed

Crouched over a pedal-powered sewing machine, Harikala Buda looks younger than her 30 years. Her slim fingers fold a cut of turquoise brocade before deftly pushing it under the needle mechanism.

Harikala lives in rural Nepal, where many villagers, particularly women, don’t have access to basic education. Women like Harikala rely on local community UNESCO-supported learning centres to receive literacy and tailoring skills. In a country where 32% of people over 15 are illiterate, particularly women and those living in rural areas, education is the only route to becoming self-reliant.

I have saved a small amount. My husband’s income goes towards running the house, mine is saved. We must save today to secure our children’s future

Having access to a classroom is the first step to creating a better world for the student, the student’s children and the student’s community. This is a lesson that matters a lot to

Kalasha Khadka Khatri, a 30-year-old Nepali mother. She grew up in a family of 21, with no option to go to school. Two of her children didn’t survive infancy because she was unable to pay for medical treatment. After acquiring sewing skills at her local community learning centre, Kalasha can now provide for her family.

Harikala and Kalasha were able to learn their skills through the support of the UNESCO’s Capacity Development for Education Programme (CapED), an initiative that operates in some 26 least-developed and fragile countries. 

Reimagining the future of education

As the world slowly recovers after the COVID-19 crisis, 244 million children and youth worldwide are still out of school. And a 2022 survey by UNESCO, UNICEF, World Bank and OECD finds that one quarter of countries have yet to collect information on children who have and have not returned to school since the pandemic started.

Rebuilding how and where we learn requires policy advice, stronger education legislation, funds mobilisation, advocacy, targeted programme implementation based on sound analysis, statistics and global information sharing. Quality education also calls for the teaching of skills far beyond literacy and maths, including critical thinking against fake news in the digital era, living in harmony with nature and the ethics of artificial intelligence, to name a few of the critical skills needed in the 21st century. 

UNESCO  captured the debate around the futures of education in its landmark report from 2022 entitled Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education.

The Transformative Education Summit , that took place during the United Nations General Assembly in September 2022, as well as the Pre-Summit hosted by UNESCO to forge new approaches to education after the COVID-19 crisis, address the toughest bottlenecks to achieving SDG 4 and inspire young people to lead a global movement for education. World leaders committed to put education at the top of the political agenda. UNESCO has been mobilizing and consulting all stakeholders and partners to galvanize the transformation of every aspect of learning. UNESCO launched a number of key initiatives such as expanding public digital learning, making education responsive to the climate and environmental emergency, and improving access for crisis-affected children and youth.

The two children sitting at their makeshift desk in Italy in 1950 could not have imagined what a modern learning space might look like or how a modern curriculum or the tools and teacher training to deliver it might have been thought out and shaped to offer them the most from education. They could not have imagined the global drive to ensure that everyone was given a chance to learn throughout life. The only thing that has not changed since the photo was taken is the fact that education remains a fundamental and universal human right that can change the course of a life. To the millions still living in conditions of poverty, exclusion displacement and violence it opens a door to a better future.

Explore all the work and expertise of UNESCO in education

Related items.

• Our Mission

The 10 Most Significant Education Studies of 2021

From reframing our notion of “good” schools to mining the magic of expert teachers, here’s a curated list of must-read research from 2021.

It was a year of unprecedented hardship for teachers and school leaders. We pored through hundreds of studies to see if we could follow the trail of exactly what happened: The research revealed a complex portrait of a grueling year during which persistent issues of burnout and mental and physical health impacted millions of educators. Meanwhile, many of the old debates continued: Does paper beat digital? Is project-based learning as effective as direct instruction? How do you define what a “good” school is?

Other studies grabbed our attention, and in a few cases, made headlines. Researchers from the University of Chicago and Columbia University turned artificial intelligence loose on some 1,130 award-winning children’s books in search of invisible patterns of bias. (Spoiler alert: They found some.) Another study revealed why many parents are reluctant to support social and emotional learning in schools—and provided hints about how educators can flip the script.

1. What Parents Fear About SEL (and How to Change Their Minds)

When researchers at the Fordham Institute asked parents to rank phrases associated with social and emotional learning , nothing seemed to add up. The term “social-emotional learning” was very unpopular; parents wanted to steer their kids clear of it. But when the researchers added a simple clause, forming a new phrase—”social-emotional & academic learning”—the program shot all the way up to No. 2 in the rankings.

What gives?

Parents were picking up subtle cues in the list of SEL-related terms that irked or worried them, the researchers suggest. Phrases like “soft skills” and “growth mindset” felt “nebulous” and devoid of academic content. For some, the language felt suspiciously like “code for liberal indoctrination.”

But the study suggests that parents might need the simplest of reassurances to break through the political noise. Removing the jargon, focusing on productive phrases like “life skills,” and relentlessly connecting SEL to academic progress puts parents at ease—and seems to save social and emotional learning in the process.

2. The Secret Management Techniques of Expert Teachers

In the hands of experienced teachers, classroom management can seem almost invisible: Subtle techniques are quietly at work behind the scenes, with students falling into orderly routines and engaging in rigorous academic tasks almost as if by magic. 

That’s no accident, according to new research . While outbursts are inevitable in school settings, expert teachers seed their classrooms with proactive, relationship-building strategies that often prevent misbehavior before it erupts. They also approach discipline more holistically than their less-experienced counterparts, consistently reframing misbehavior in the broader context of how lessons can be more engaging, or how clearly they communicate expectations.

Focusing on the underlying dynamics of classroom behavior—and not on surface-level disruptions—means that expert teachers often look the other way at all the right times, too. Rather than rise to the bait of a minor breach in etiquette, a common mistake of new teachers, they tend to play the long game, asking questions about the origins of misbehavior, deftly navigating the terrain between discipline and student autonomy, and opting to confront misconduct privately when possible.

3. The Surprising Power of Pretesting

Asking students to take a practice test before they’ve even encountered the material may seem like a waste of time—after all, they’d just be guessing.

But new research concludes that the approach, called pretesting, is actually more effective than other typical study strategies. Surprisingly, pretesting even beat out taking practice tests after learning the material, a proven strategy endorsed by cognitive scientists and educators alike. In the study, students who took a practice test before learning the material outperformed their peers who studied more traditionally by 49 percent on a follow-up test, while outperforming students who took practice tests after studying the material by 27 percent.

The researchers hypothesize that the “generation of errors” was a key to the strategy’s success, spurring student curiosity and priming them to “search for the correct answers” when they finally explored the new material—and adding grist to a 2018 study that found that making educated guesses helped students connect background knowledge to new material.

Learning is more durable when students do the hard work of correcting misconceptions, the research suggests, reminding us yet again that being wrong is an important milestone on the road to being right.

4. Confronting an Old Myth About Immigrant Students

Immigrant students are sometimes portrayed as a costly expense to the education system, but new research is systematically dismantling that myth.

In a 2021 study , researchers analyzed over 1.3 million academic and birth records for students in Florida communities, and concluded that the presence of immigrant students actually has “a positive effect on the academic achievement of U.S.-born students,” raising test scores as the size of the immigrant school population increases. The benefits were especially powerful for low-income students.

While immigrants initially “face challenges in assimilation that may require additional school resources,” the researchers concluded, hard work and resilience may allow them to excel and thus “positively affect exposed U.S.-born students’ attitudes and behavior.” But according to teacher Larry Ferlazzo, the improvements might stem from the fact that having English language learners in classes improves pedagogy , pushing teachers to consider “issues like prior knowledge, scaffolding, and maximizing accessibility.”

5. A Fuller Picture of What a ‘Good’ School Is

It’s time to rethink our definition of what a “good school” is, researchers assert in a study published in late 2020.⁣ That’s because typical measures of school quality like test scores often provide an incomplete and misleading picture, the researchers found.

The study looked at over 150,000 ninth-grade students who attended Chicago public schools and concluded that emphasizing the social and emotional dimensions of learning—relationship-building, a sense of belonging, and resilience, for example—improves high school graduation and college matriculation rates for both high- and low-income students, beating out schools that focus primarily on improving test scores.⁣

“Schools that promote socio-emotional development actually have a really big positive impact on kids,” said lead researcher C. Kirabo Jackson in an interview with Edutopia . “And these impacts are particularly large for vulnerable student populations who don’t tend to do very well in the education system.”

The findings reinforce the importance of a holistic approach to measuring student progress, and are a reminder that schools—and teachers—can influence students in ways that are difficult to measure, and may only materialize well into the future.⁣

6. Teaching Is Learning

One of the best ways to learn a concept is to teach it to someone else. But do you actually have to step into the shoes of a teacher, or does the mere expectation of teaching do the trick?

In a 2021 study , researchers split students into two groups and gave them each a science passage about the Doppler effect—a phenomenon associated with sound and light waves that explains the gradual change in tone and pitch as a car races off into the distance, for example. One group studied the text as preparation for a test; the other was told that they’d be teaching the material to another student.

The researchers never carried out the second half of the activity—students read the passages but never taught the lesson. All of the participants were then tested on their factual recall of the Doppler effect, and their ability to draw deeper conclusions from the reading.

The upshot? Students who prepared to teach outperformed their counterparts in both duration and depth of learning, scoring 9 percent higher on factual recall a week after the lessons concluded, and 24 percent higher on their ability to make inferences. The research suggests that asking students to prepare to teach something—or encouraging them to think “could I teach this to someone else?”—can significantly alter their learning trajectories.

7. A Disturbing Strain of Bias in Kids’ Books

Some of the most popular and well-regarded children’s books—Caldecott and Newbery honorees among them—persistently depict Black, Asian, and Hispanic characters with lighter skin, according to new research .

Using artificial intelligence, researchers combed through 1,130 children’s books written in the last century, comparing two sets of diverse children’s books—one a collection of popular books that garnered major literary awards, the other favored by identity-based awards. The software analyzed data on skin tone, race, age, and gender.

Among the findings: While more characters with darker skin color begin to appear over time, the most popular books—those most frequently checked out of libraries and lining classroom bookshelves—continue to depict people of color in lighter skin tones. More insidiously, when adult characters are “moral or upstanding,” their skin color tends to appear lighter, the study’s lead author, Anjali Aduki,  told The 74 , with some books converting “Martin Luther King Jr.’s chocolate complexion to a light brown or beige.” Female characters, meanwhile, are often seen but not heard.

Cultural representations are a reflection of our values, the researchers conclude: “Inequality in representation, therefore, constitutes an explicit statement of inequality of value.”

8. The Never-Ending ‘Paper Versus Digital’ War

The argument goes like this: Digital screens turn reading into a cold and impersonal task; they’re good for information foraging, and not much more. “Real” books, meanwhile, have a heft and “tactility”  that make them intimate, enchanting—and irreplaceable.

But researchers have often found weak or equivocal evidence for the superiority of reading on paper. While a recent study concluded that paper books yielded better comprehension than e-books when many of the digital tools had been removed, the effect sizes were small. A 2021 meta-analysis further muddies the water: When digital and paper books are “mostly similar,” kids comprehend the print version more readily—but when enhancements like motion and sound “target the story content,” e-books generally have the edge.

Nostalgia is a force that every new technology must eventually confront. There’s plenty of evidence that writing with pen and paper encodes learning more deeply than typing. But new digital book formats come preloaded with powerful tools that allow readers to annotate, look up words, answer embedded questions, and share their thinking with other readers.

We may not be ready to admit it, but these are precisely the kinds of activities that drive deeper engagement, enhance comprehension, and leave us with a lasting memory of what we’ve read. The future of e-reading, despite the naysayers, remains promising.

9. New Research Makes a Powerful Case for PBL

Many classrooms today still look like they did 100 years ago, when students were preparing for factory jobs. But the world’s moved on: Modern careers demand a more sophisticated set of skills—collaboration, advanced problem-solving, and creativity, for example—and those can be difficult to teach in classrooms that rarely give students the time and space to develop those competencies.

Project-based learning (PBL) would seem like an ideal solution. But critics say PBL places too much responsibility on novice learners, ignoring the evidence about the effectiveness of direct instruction and ultimately undermining subject fluency. Advocates counter that student-centered learning and direct instruction can and should coexist in classrooms.

Now two new large-scale studies —encompassing over 6,000 students in 114 diverse schools across the nation—provide evidence that a well-structured, project-based approach boosts learning for a wide range of students.

In the studies, which were funded by Lucas Education Research, a sister division of Edutopia , elementary and high school students engaged in challenging projects that had them designing water systems for local farms, or creating toys using simple household objects to learn about gravity, friction, and force. Subsequent testing revealed notable learning gains—well above those experienced by students in traditional classrooms—and those gains seemed to raise all boats, persisting across socioeconomic class, race, and reading levels.

10. Tracking a Tumultuous Year for Teachers

The Covid-19 pandemic cast a long shadow over the lives of educators in 2021, according to a year’s worth of research.

The average teacher’s workload suddenly “spiked last spring,” wrote the Center for Reinventing Public Education in its January 2021 report, and then—in defiance of the laws of motion—simply never let up. By the fall, a RAND study recorded an astonishing shift in work habits: 24 percent of teachers reported that they were working 56 hours or more per week, compared to 5 percent pre-pandemic.

The vaccine was the promised land, but when it arrived nothing seemed to change. In an April 2021 survey  conducted four months after the first vaccine was administered in New York City, 92 percent of teachers said their jobs were more stressful than prior to the pandemic, up from 81 percent in an earlier survey.

It wasn’t just the length of the work days; a close look at the research reveals that the school system’s failure to adjust expectations was ruinous. It seemed to start with the obligations of hybrid teaching, which surfaced in Edutopia ’s coverage of overseas school reopenings. In June 2020, well before many U.S. schools reopened, we reported that hybrid teaching was an emerging problem internationally, and warned that if the “model is to work well for any period of time,” schools must “recognize and seek to reduce the workload for teachers.” Almost eight months later, a 2021 RAND study identified hybrid teaching as a primary source of teacher stress in the U.S., easily outpacing factors like the health of a high-risk loved one.

New and ever-increasing demands for tech solutions put teachers on a knife’s edge. In several important 2021 studies, researchers concluded that teachers were being pushed to adopt new technology without the “resources and equipment necessary for its correct didactic use.” Consequently, they were spending more than 20 hours a week adapting lessons for online use, and experiencing an unprecedented erosion of the boundaries between their work and home lives, leading to an unsustainable “always on” mentality. When it seemed like nothing more could be piled on—when all of the lights were blinking red—the federal government restarted standardized testing .

Change will be hard; many of the pathologies that exist in the system now predate the pandemic. But creating strict school policies that separate work from rest, eliminating the adoption of new tech tools without proper supports, distributing surveys regularly to gauge teacher well-being, and above all listening to educators to identify and confront emerging problems might be a good place to start, if the research can be believed.

• Current Students
• Faculty / Staff
• Paying for College
• Alumni Services
• Partnerships
• Program Finder
• Affordable, Flexible, Accessible
• Distance Education
• All Online Courses & Degrees
• Baccalaureate Online
• Graduate Online
• Start Dates
• Admissions, Costs & Aid
• Faculty and Contacts
• Academic and Career Support
• Student Testimonials
• Distance Education Advantage
• About Hybrid Learning
• Hybrid Learning Degrees
• Student Life
• Academic Support
• Academic Calendar
• Faculty & Contacts
• Technical Institute for Environmental Professions
• Term Calendar
• Sustainable Ventures
• Careers & Outcomes
• About Unity
• Office of the President
• Announcing Our Evolution
• Sustainable Achievements & Initiatives
• Reinventing College
• Extended Reality (XR)
• Commencement
• Give to Unity Environmental University
• Institutional Communications
• Unity Environmental University News

Home  /  News  /  Why Is Education Important? The Power Of An Educated Society

Why Is Education Important? The Power Of An Educated Society

Looking for an answer to the question of why is education important? We address this query with a focus on how education can transform society through the way we interact with our environment. 

Whether you are a student, a parent, or someone who values educational attainment, you may be wondering how education can provide quality life to a society beyond the obvious answer of acquiring knowledge and economic growth. Continue reading as we discuss the importance of education not just for individuals but for society as a whole. 

Harness the power of education to build a more sustainable modern society with a degree from  Unity Environmental University .

How Education Is Power: The Importance Of Education In Society

Why is education so important? Nelson Mandela famously said, “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” An educated society is better equipped to tackle the challenges that face modern America, including:

• Climate change
• Social justice
• Economic inequality

Education is not just about learning to read and do math operations. Of course, gaining knowledge and practical skills is part of it, but education is also about values and critical thinking. It’s about finding our place in society in a meaningful way. 

Environmental Stewardship

A  study from 2022 found that people who belong to an environmental stewardship organization, such as the Leave No Trace Center for Outdoor Ethics, are likely to have a higher education level than those who do not. This suggests that quality education can foster a sense of responsibility towards the environment.

With the effects of climate change becoming increasingly alarming, this particular importance of education is vital to the health, safety, and longevity of our society. Higher learning institutions can further encourage environmental stewardship by adopting a  framework of sustainability science .

The Economic Benefits Of Education

Higher education can lead to better job opportunities and higher income. On average, a  person with a bachelor’s degree will make $765,000 more  in their lifetime than someone with no degree. Even with the rising costs of tuition, investment in higher education pays off in the long run. In 2020, the return on investment (ROI) for a college degree was estimated to be  13.5% to 35.9% . 

Green jobs  like environmental science technicians and solar panel installers  have high demand projections for the next decade. Therefore, degrees that will prepare you for one of these careers will likely yield a high ROI. And, many of these jobs only require an  associate’s degree or certificate , which means lower overall education costs. 

Unity  helps students maximize their ROI with real-world experience in the field as an integral part of every degree program. 

10 Reasons Why School Is Important

Education is not just an individual pursuit but also a societal one.  In compiling these reasons, we focused on the question, “How does education benefit society?” Overall, higher education has the power to transform:

• Individuals’ sense of self
• Interpersonal relationships
• Social communities
• Professional communities

Cognitive Development

Neuroscience research  has proven that the brain is a muscle that can retain its neuroplasticity throughout life. However, like other muscles, it must receive continual exercise to remain strong. Higher education allows people of any age to improve their higher-level cognitive abilities like problem-solving and decision-making. This can make many parts of life feel more manageable and help society run smoothly. 

Emotional Intelligence

Emotional intelligence is key to workplace success.  Studies  show that people with emotional intelligence exhibit more:

• Self-awareness
• Willingness to try new things
• Innovative thinking
• Active listening
• Collaboration skills
• Problem-solving abilities

By attending higher education institutions that value these soft skills, students can improve their emotional intelligence as part of their career development in college.

Technological Literacy

Many careers in today’s job market use advanced technology. To prepare for these jobs, young people likely won’t have access to these technologies to practice on their own. That’s part of why so many STEM career paths require degrees. It’s essential to gain technical knowledge and skills through a certified program to safely use certain technologies. And, educated scientists are  more likely to make new technological discoveries .

Cultural Awareness

Education exposes individuals to different cultures and perspectives. Being around people who are different has the powerful ability to foster acceptance. Acceptance benefits society as a whole. It increases innovation and empathy. 

College also gives students an opportunity to practice feeling comfortable in situations where there are people of different races, genders, sexualities, and abilities. Students can gain an understanding of how to act respectfully among different types of people, which is an important skill for the workplace. This will only become more vital as our world continues to become more globalized.

Ethical and Moral Development

Another reason why school is important is that it promotes ethical and moral development. Many schools require students to take an ethics course in their general education curriculum. However, schools can also encourage character development throughout their programs by using effective pedagogical strategies including:

• Class debates and discussions
• Historical case studies
• Group projects

Unity’s distance learning programs  include an ethical decision-making class in our core curriculum. 

Ready To Learn More About Unity Environmental University?

Communication Skills

Effective written and verbal communication skills are key for personal and professional success. Higher education programs usually include at least one communication course in their general education requirements. Often the focus in these classes is on writing skills, but students can also use college as an opportunity to hone their presentation and public speaking skills. Courses such as  Multimedia Communication for Environmental Professionals  provide many opportunities for this. 

Civic Engagement

According to a  Gallup survey , people with higher education degrees are:

• More likely to participate in civic activities such as voting and volunteering
• Less likely to commit crimes
• More likely to get involved in their local communities

All these individual acts add up to make a big difference in society. An educated electorate is less likely to be swayed by unethical politicians and, instead, make choices that benefit themselves and their community. Because they are more involved, they are also more likely to hold elected officials accountable.

Financial Stability

The right degree can significantly expand your career opportunities and improve your long-term earning potential. Not all degrees provide the same level of financial stability, so it’s important to research expected salary offers after graduation and job demand outlook predictions for your desired field. Consider the return on investment for a degree from an affordable private school such as  Unity Environmental University .

Environmental Awareness

We have already discussed why education is important for environmental stewardship. Education can also lead to better environmental practices in the business world. By building empathy through character education and ethics courses, institutions can train future business leaders to emphasize human rights and sustainability over profits. All types and sizes of businesses can incorporate sustainable practices, but awareness of the issues and solutions is the first step.

Lifelong Learning

The reasons why education is important discussed so far focus on institutional education. However, education can happen anywhere. Attending a university that values all kinds of learning will set students up with the foundation to become lifelong learners.  Research  demonstrates that lifelong learners tend to be healthier and more fulfilled throughout their lives. When societies emphasize the importance of education, they can boost their overall prosperity.

The Role Of Unity Environmental University In Society

Environmentally conscious education is extremely valuable and should be accessible to all.   Unity Environmental University  offers tuition prices that are comparable to public universities, and financial aid is available to those who qualify. Courses last five weeks so that students can focus on only one class at a time. This ensures all learners are set up for academic success. 

Unity believes in supporting students holistically to maximize the power of education. This includes mental health services,  experiential learning opportunities , and  job placement assistance . Students in our  hybrid programs  can take classes at several field stations throughout Maine and enjoy the beautiful nature surrounding the campus for outdoor recreation.

Sustainable Initiatives

Some highlights from Unity Environmental University’s many sustainable initiatives:

• All programs include at least one sustainability learning outcome
• All research courses are focused on sustainability research
• Reduced building energy use by 25% across campus
• 100% of food waste is recycled into energy 
• Campus features a  net-zero LEED Platinum-certified classroom/office building

While many schools value sustainability, Unity stands out because  everything  we do is about sustainability. We also recognize our responsibility to model how a sustainable business can operate in a manner that’s fiscally viable and socially responsible.

Make An Impact At Unity Environmental University

While the phrase ‘education is power’ may sound cliche, it is also resoundingly true. Higher education has the power to transform individuals and societies. Unity Environmental University understands its power to make a positive impact on the world. That’s why we were the first university to divest from fossil fuels. 

This year, we celebrated our  largest incoming class ever , showing that students want an education system that aligns with their values. In addition to our commitment to sustainability, we offer flexibility to students with start dates all year round for our  online degree programs .

Start Your Journey

Looking for Answers

Get More Info

© Unity Environmental University 2024. “America’s Environmental University.™”

Privacy Overview

How technology is reinventing education

Stanford Graduate School of Education Dean Dan Schwartz and other education scholars weigh in on what's next for some of the technology trends taking center stage in the classroom.

Image credit: Claire Scully

New advances in technology are upending education, from the recent debut of new artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots like ChatGPT to the growing accessibility of virtual-reality tools that expand the boundaries of the classroom. For educators, at the heart of it all is the hope that every learner gets an equal chance to develop the skills they need to succeed. But that promise is not without its pitfalls.

“Technology is a game-changer for education – it offers the prospect of universal access to high-quality learning experiences, and it creates fundamentally new ways of teaching,” said Dan Schwartz, dean of Stanford Graduate School of Education (GSE), who is also a professor of educational technology at the GSE and faculty director of the Stanford Accelerator for Learning . “But there are a lot of ways we teach that aren’t great, and a big fear with AI in particular is that we just get more efficient at teaching badly. This is a moment to pay attention, to do things differently.”

For K-12 schools, this year also marks the end of the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funding program, which has provided pandemic recovery funds that many districts used to invest in educational software and systems. With these funds running out in September 2024, schools are trying to determine their best use of technology as they face the prospect of diminishing resources.

Here, Schwartz and other Stanford education scholars weigh in on some of the technology trends taking center stage in the classroom this year.

AI in the classroom

In 2023, the big story in technology and education was generative AI, following the introduction of ChatGPT and other chatbots that produce text seemingly written by a human in response to a question or prompt. Educators immediately worried that students would use the chatbot to cheat by trying to pass its writing off as their own. As schools move to adopt policies around students’ use of the tool, many are also beginning to explore potential opportunities – for example, to generate reading assignments or coach students during the writing process.

AI can also help automate tasks like grading and lesson planning, freeing teachers to do the human work that drew them into the profession in the first place, said Victor Lee, an associate professor at the GSE and faculty lead for the AI + Education initiative at the Stanford Accelerator for Learning. “I’m heartened to see some movement toward creating AI tools that make teachers’ lives better – not to replace them, but to give them the time to do the work that only teachers are able to do,” he said. “I hope to see more on that front.”

He also emphasized the need to teach students now to begin questioning and critiquing the development and use of AI. “AI is not going away,” said Lee, who is also director of CRAFT (Classroom-Ready Resources about AI for Teaching), which provides free resources to help teach AI literacy to high school students across subject areas. “We need to teach students how to understand and think critically about this technology.”

Immersive environments

The use of immersive technologies like augmented reality, virtual reality, and mixed reality is also expected to surge in the classroom, especially as new high-profile devices integrating these realities hit the marketplace in 2024.

The educational possibilities now go beyond putting on a headset and experiencing life in a distant location. With new technologies, students can create their own local interactive 360-degree scenarios, using just a cell phone or inexpensive camera and simple online tools.

“This is an area that’s really going to explode over the next couple of years,” said Kristen Pilner Blair, director of research for the Digital Learning initiative at the Stanford Accelerator for Learning, which runs a program exploring the use of virtual field trips to promote learning. “Students can learn about the effects of climate change, say, by virtually experiencing the impact on a particular environment. But they can also become creators, documenting and sharing immersive media that shows the effects where they live.”

Integrating AI into virtual simulations could also soon take the experience to another level, Schwartz said. “If your VR experience brings me to a redwood tree, you could have a window pop up that allows me to ask questions about the tree, and AI can deliver the answers.”

Gamification

Another trend expected to intensify this year is the gamification of learning activities, often featuring dynamic videos with interactive elements to engage and hold students’ attention.

“Gamification is a good motivator, because one key aspect is reward, which is very powerful,” said Schwartz. The downside? Rewards are specific to the activity at hand, which may not extend to learning more generally. “If I get rewarded for doing math in a space-age video game, it doesn’t mean I’m going to be motivated to do math anywhere else.”

Gamification sometimes tries to make “chocolate-covered broccoli,” Schwartz said, by adding art and rewards to make speeded response tasks involving single-answer, factual questions more fun. He hopes to see more creative play patterns that give students points for rethinking an approach or adapting their strategy, rather than only rewarding them for quickly producing a correct response.

Data-gathering and analysis

The growing use of technology in schools is producing massive amounts of data on students’ activities in the classroom and online. “We’re now able to capture moment-to-moment data, every keystroke a kid makes,” said Schwartz – data that can reveal areas of struggle and different learning opportunities, from solving a math problem to approaching a writing assignment.

But outside of research settings, he said, that type of granular data – now owned by tech companies – is more likely used to refine the design of the software than to provide teachers with actionable information.

The promise of personalized learning is being able to generate content aligned with students’ interests and skill levels, and making lessons more accessible for multilingual learners and students with disabilities. Realizing that promise requires that educators can make sense of the data that’s being collected, said Schwartz – and while advances in AI are making it easier to identify patterns and findings, the data also needs to be in a system and form educators can access and analyze for decision-making. Developing a usable infrastructure for that data, Schwartz said, is an important next step.

With the accumulation of student data comes privacy concerns: How is the data being collected? Are there regulations or guidelines around its use in decision-making? What steps are being taken to prevent unauthorized access? In 2023 K-12 schools experienced a rise in cyberattacks, underscoring the need to implement strong systems to safeguard student data.

Technology is “requiring people to check their assumptions about education,” said Schwartz, noting that AI in particular is very efficient at replicating biases and automating the way things have been done in the past, including poor models of instruction. “But it’s also opening up new possibilities for students producing material, and for being able to identify children who are not average so we can customize toward them. It’s an opportunity to think of entirely new ways of teaching – this is the path I hope to see.”

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

• Education /

Article on the Importance of Education in 100 to 350 Words

• Updated on  
• Jan 9, 2024

Education entails acquiring knowledge to have a greater understanding of the various disciplines that will be used in our everyday lives. ‘ Education ’ refers to the information we gain and experience outside of books or classrooms, as well as the knowledge that we receive and experience in schools, our homes, and as members of society. Our ideas on life alter as a result of learning, education is crucial for personal development and growth in society . In this blog, we will see why we need education for growth and will also look at some articles on the importance of education.

This Blog Includes:

Importance of education, mental aspect of education’s importance, the power of being an educated individual, how can your education benefit your society, articles on importance of education, article on importance of education: 100 words, article on importance of education: 200 words, article on importance of education: 350 words, article on importance of women’s education.

Also Read: Essay On Education System

Also Read: Importance of Education in Development

The value of education at a much younger age. Our first tryst with learning begins at home, and our first teachers are our parents, grandparents, and often siblings. The importance of education lies in its continuity, learning is a lifetime process that will stop with our death. It is the foundation for the development of a healthy individual and society. Our world cannot have a bright future if our culture lacks education.

Education is the key to change. It is an important tool that allows a person to understand his or her rights and responsibilities to his or her family, society, and nation. It improves a person’s ability to view the world and to fight against misdoings such as injustice, corruption, and violence, among other things.

Education is meant to hone talent, sharpen our mindsets and educate us on a myriad of things. In school, we cover a variety of topics such as history, arithmetic, geography, politics, and so on. These subjects sharpen children’s minds and allow the kid to absorb knowledge from all subjects, and his or her mental level is increased. Here are some cognitive benefits of learning and education that ensure growth and development in children:

Education’s importance in our lives provides us with stability in our everyday lives. Everything may be split, but not your education, you must be told. You can improve your chances of getting a better job with the aid of your degree and expertise.

Financial Security

Our financial stability is helped by education. Higher-qualified individuals receive higher-paying employment in this era, allowing them to guarantee their future.

Self-dependency

Education teaches us to be self-sufficient in our daily lives. A person’s education is his alone, and with it, he may feel safe and self-sufficient.

Equality is a right that everyone deserves. If everyone had the opportunity to pursue higher education, there would be a greater likelihood that everyone would earn a large sum of money, and there would be fewer disparities across social classes. It aids in the pursuit of equality.

Confidence is one of the finest aspects of success. Education boosts a person’s self-assurance. You can go further into a topic that you are already familiar with. With the information you’ve obtained through your schooling, you can converse about that issue far better than others.

If you are a Class 12 student, here are some important blogs for you:

Knowledge and education is power. Education enables individuals. Enables them to innovate, understand, adapt, and overcome. Everything we learn helps us in life in one way or the other. It helps make our life convenient and easy. Good education is basically the knowledge that gives people perspective and information about things which can range from being as simple as fixing a water pipe to building a rocket destined for moon. When we are educated, we can adapt to each and every aspect of life better and it also helps us overcome many hurdle of life and gives perspective about a lot things such as finance, planning, etc. All this can make any individual feel powerful because there remains nothing in life that they cannot tackle.

Every nation’s integral part is it’s society and the growth an development of the same is dependent upon the individuals which in turn helps the social and economic progress of the nation. The education system has been evolving from the very first day and now it has several mods and means of the same. It is quite correct to say that any amount or money spent of being educated never goes waste. The more you learn, the you will be able to grow in life. Every aspect of education will one way or the other, help you in your life. And when an individual is educated, he/she can significantly contribute to the growth of the society and the nation, much more than a rich person. Education helps develop characters, personalities and social behaviours. It helps shape the way people think and act. An ultimately it lead to how a society will grow. For this to happen, it is essential that all of the people understand the importance of education.

The process of learning and increasing abilities through courses, literature, training and other mediums is known as education. It assists us in developing our talents and seeking employment to suit our requirements and obligations.

Education is vital to one’s success in life. It is essential for an individual’s entire growth. The process of learning and improving one’s skills is referred to as education. Wisdom and the ability to handle challenges come with knowledge. Education enhances one’s quality of life while also granting social recognition. Though education is essential for everyone, the need for it is most acute during childhood. Starting with children under the age of 10, school education is critical. It serves as a solid basis for their life skills and goals. A person who lacks education is powerless and vulnerable. H/She will find it difficult to deal with life’s challenges.

Related Reads:

Education is a valuable tool for gaining learning and wisdom. Though books are essential to education, the notion encompasses more than just books and bookish knowledge. It isn’t required for education to be only based on books. 

The most important goal of education is to help people with how to read and write. The first step toward literacy is reading and writing. Education provides a person with endless opportunities for growth and advancement. People who have had an education tend to be more calm and self-assured. People who have been educated are disciplined and understand the importance of time. Education allows a person to be more expressive and opinionated. H/She was able to readily communicate his/her viewpoints, which were supported by a clear aim and rationale.

Education benefits not just the individual but also the community. The most important aspect of education is that it goes from one individual to another, then throughout society, and eventually throughout the country. An educated individual makes an effort to teach and inspire everyone with whom he or she comes into contact. Education brings one up to speed on technological advancements as well. A well-educated person can easily adjust to technological developments. Education, more than anything else, is a source of hope. The desire for a better life; the desire for a wealthy and poverty-free existence.

Must Read: Importance of School Education

Human education is a critical instrument in their lives. It is a significant distinction between a civilized and an undisciplined individual. Even if the country’s literacy rate has increased in recent years, more individuals need to be made aware of the importance of education. Every child, whether a male or a girl, must attend school and not drop out. Education is beneficial not just to the individual but also to society. A well-educated individual is a valuable asset to society, contributing to its social and economic development. Such a person is always willing to assist society and the country. It is true to say that education is a stairway to a person’s and a nation’s achievement.

Education makes a person productive, allowing him or her to contribute to society in a positive way. It teaches us how to face many challenges and conquer them. A well-educated individual understands how to act in a polite and non-offensive manner. It shows us how to live a disciplined life while yet making a respectable living. Our future is built on the basis of education. Education is also the sole weapon that may be used to combat numerous issues such as illiteracy, poverty, unemployment, and so on. A person’s education makes them more sensitive to the predicament of their fellow beings. A well-educated individual not only comprehends the issues but also possesses the essential abilities to address them.

An educated individual possesses competent skills and is more capable than someone who is uneducated. However, it is incorrect to think that education alone ensures success. Indeed, success necessitates a solid education, as well as devotion, attention, and hard effort. An educated individual is more sensible and capable of rational thought.

Education allows a person to become self-sufficient. An educated individual does not rely on others and is capable of meeting his or her own requirements. A well-educated person also educates their family, and education benefits, not just the individual but also society and the nation. Education has a significant influence on our outlook, making us more optimistic about life and its objectives.

Also Read: Importance of Education in Child’s Life

There was a period when it was considered that women didn’t need to be educated. We’ve now realized the importance of women’s education . The modern era is the phase of women’s awakening. In every aspect of life, women are striving to compete with males. Many individuals reject female education, claiming that women’s rightful domain is the home, and therefore that money spent on female education is squandered. This viewpoint is incorrect since female education has the potential to bring about a silent revolution in society.

Female education has numerous advantages; educated women may contribute significantly to the country’s growth by sharing the burdens of males in several fields. They may contribute to society as teachers, lawyers, physicians, and administrators, as well as play a key part in wartime. In this time of economic distress, education is a blessing for women. The days of wealth and prosperity are long gone. Middle-class families are finding it increasingly difficult to make ends meet these days. Female education is important for a country’s growth, thus it should be supported.

Everyone has hope for a better life if they have an education. It’s a type of magic that works in a person’s life to make it far better than it would be if he didn’t have knowledge. To sum up the blog, we believe that everyone should be educated so that they can contribute to making our country proud. Increasing literacy rates can prevent tens of thousands of crimes. Every country should encourage its citizens to receive an education.

Also Read: Importance of Education for Growth and Betterment

Related Articles

Education is a valuable tool for gaining learning and wisdom. Though books are essential to education, the notion encompasses more than just books and bookish knowledge. It isn’t required for education to be only based on books.  The most important goal of education is to help people with how to read and write. The first step toward literacy is reading and writing. Education provides a person with endless opportunities for growth and advancement.

Education teaches us the importance of teamwork, communication, and interpersonal relationships. Education plays an important role in building intellectual and mental development. Education enhances creativity and allows us to express ourselves through various mediums and discover our unique talents. Education serves as a powerful tool for breaking the cycle of poverty

Moral education teaches us important values such as Respect, honesty, compassion, hard work, kindness, gratitude, sharing, cooperation, etc.

This was all about articles on the importance of education! We hope the information provided was helpful! For more information on such informative topics for your school, visit our school education page and follow Leverage Edu .

Team Leverage Edu

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Contact no. *

Leaving already?

8 Universities with higher ROI than IITs and IIMs

Grab this one-time opportunity to download this ebook

Connect With Us

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. take the first step today..

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

September 2024

January 2025

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

Updated Biden administration rules will soon affect students across US: What to know

Students and school employees across America will be impacted in the fall by new changes to a rule that affects all federally-funded schools.

Practically, it's a sweeping update to how schools will have to handle sex discrimination and abuse cases. Politically, it's a part of a power struggle between the Trump and Biden administrations.

What's new? The Biden administration released a new set of rules this week overhauling the Trump administration's Title IX rules – which gave more rights to alleged perpetrators of sexual assault and harassment. The new rules also stipulate further protections for LGBTQ+ students as well as parenting and pregnant students.

What is Title IX? Title IX is a civil rights law that bans sex discrimination against students, employees and others at public schools, colleges and universities that receive federal funding.

What were some of the old rules? For cases of sexual assault, they stipulated that schools only had to investigate claims that met a certain threshold of sex discrimination and were made through a formal reporting process. It also raised the bar of proof for sexual misconduct on college campuses. They prohibited investigations of cases that occurred off campus.

Why does the change matter? Critics argued the Trump-era rules prevented people accused of sexual harassment, assault or discrimination from facing repercussions. Supporters contended the rules rightly strengthened due-process protections for accused students or faculty members.

Biden's new Title IX rules will affect people on the nation's school campuses starting in August.

What happened this week?

The Biden administration's new set of guidance overhauls Trump-era rules that in part narrowed which and how schools could investigate sex discrimination cases. President Joe Biden in his 2020 presidential campaign vowed to overturn the changes made under Education Secretary Betsy DeVos.

The new rules expand the definition of sexual assault and harassment. That means schools could investigate more cases of discrimination, abuse or harassment filed by people on school campuses under the scope of the law.

College student survivors will no longer be required to attend live hearings or go through cross examinations. And people will be given the right to "prompt and equitable grievance procedures," the rule reads.

LGBTQ+ students will be guaranteed protection under the law if they are discriminated against for their gender identity or sexual orientation.

Pregnant and parenting students who might receive unwanted sexual attention, shame or punishment at schools will also be granted more protections from sex discrimination in the admissions process and on campus.

“These final regulations build on the legacy of Title IX by clarifying that all our nation’s students can access schools that are safe, welcoming, and respect their rights," said U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona.

Who is impacted by the changes to Title IX?

The rule changes have a wide range of effects on students, among the most notable examples:

• Sexual assault survivors : The new rules will have sweeping effects on survivors of sexual misconduct and those accused of crimes. Among the changes: The definition of sexual assault will be expanded in K-12 schools and colleges.
• LGBTQ+ students : Biden's Title IX update stipulates protections from sex discrimination based gender identity for the first time.
• Pregnant and parenting students : The new regulations extend the definition of "sex-based harassment" to include pregnant people on campuses.

Ruling on transgender student participation in sports remains unsettled

The Biden administration did not rule on whether transgender and nonbinary students can participate on the sports teams that align with their gender.

The administration released a proposed rule in April 2023 that said schools and colleges largely could not ban nonbinary and transgender students from sports teams in the new Title IX rules.

Contact Kayla Jimenez at [email protected] .  Follow her on X at @kaylajjimenez.

Look closer at the value and attainability of a college education

Alarm over sticker price overlooks many nuances of college affordability

It would be great if we had a college pricing system that was transparent, sensible, and affordable. Unfortunately, that largely doesn’t exist. But it also does not help when scare tactics are used in identifying the failures of the system. Susan D’Agostino’s April 19 op-ed falls into that trap (“Six reasons why $90,000 college costs are bad news even if few pay that amount”).

I agree with D’Agostino that colleges do a poor job of communicating their pricing. Lower- and middle-income students have a tough time understanding need-based financial aid. Higher-income students do not know that they are likely to receive merit awards that reduce the sticker price at many institutions. For many students and families, the ultimate price that they pay is still beyond what they can afford.

Advertisement

However, except for students from higher-income families who attend highly selective institutions, very few students pay the sticker price. So harping on the $90,000 figure just confuses students further. It is the net price of college that reflects what students really have to pay, not the sticker price. Yes, that includes loans — a concern D’Agostino raises. When the net price is higher, students may borrow more. But for most students at most institutions, they should disregard the sticker price.

Finally, I strongly disagree with D’Agostino’s argument that financial aid is not “an antidote to exorbitant college costs.” More financial aid is the solution. Those institutions charging the highest sticker prices and meeting full need have very large endowments. They provide the most financial aid. They are the least expensive schools for lower- and middle-income students to attend (if the student can get in) because they have the resources to make that happen. Other institutions are less equipped or unable to do that because they don’t have the money. That money needs to come from somewhere, meaning either greater direct support from the state or more federal funding for financial aid. Along with better communication from the schools themselves, that is what is needed to solve the problem.

Phillip B. Levine

The writer is the Katharine Coman and A. Barton Hepburn Professor of Economics at Wellesley College and the author of “A Problem of Fit: How the Complexity of College Pricing Hurts Students — and Universities.”

Hard-working applicants shouldn’t be blinded by neon dollar signs

Families making the life-changing decision about college deserve better than misleading headlines about cost, especially when the message could make a hard-working, smart student think college isn’t worth it.

The headlines may draw clicks, but as Yvonne Abraham pointed out in a recent Metro column, for most families, college is not going to cost them $90,000 a year. In reality, it is less than half for most students, and for many low-income students, far less than that.

Other headlines question whether college is really worth it. But even critical stories often cite the obvious: For most students, it is life-changing on numerous levels. College graduates age 22 to 27 earn $24,000 a year more than their peers who did not get a degree, according to a study by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York . By age 55, the college graduate is earning 60 percent more annually than the peer without a degree. College graduates are more likely to be employed ; to have paid vacation, sick time, and health insurance ; and in general to report that they are happier with their lives.

For their sake and the sake of our economy and the Commonwealth’s competitiveness, let’s hope kids considering college don’t just read the alarming headlines and opt out of transformative opportunities.

Rob McCarron

President and CEO

Association of Independent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts

Globe Opinion

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

A short-term longitudinal study on the development of moral disengagement among schoolchildren: the role of collective moral disengagement, authoritative teaching, and student-teacher relationship quality.

• 1 Department of Primary Teacher Education, Kristianstad University, Kristianstad, Sweden
• 2 Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
• 3 Department of Developmental Psychology and Socialisation, University of Padua, Padua, Italy

The aim of this study was to examine whether collective moral disengagement and authoritative teaching at the classroom level, and student-teacher relationship quality at the individual level, predicted individual moral disengagement among pre-adolescent students 1 year later. In this short-term longitudinal study, 1,373 students from 108 classrooms answered a web-based questionnaire on tablets during school, once in fifth grade (T1) and once in sixth grade (T2). The results showed, after controlling for T1 moral disengagement, gender, and immigrant background, that students with better student-teacher relationship quality at T1 were more inclined to score lower on moral disengagement at T2, whereas students in classrooms with higher levels of collective moral disengagement at T1 were more inclined to score higher on moral disengagement at T2. In addition, both collective moral disengagement and authoritative teaching were found to moderate the associations between student-teacher relationship quality at T1 and moral disengagement at T2. These findings underscore the importance of fostering positive relationships between students and teachers, as well as minimizing collective moral disengagement in classrooms. These measures may prevent the potential escalation of moral disengagement in a negative direction.

Introduction

Although there exist different theories and research traditions of children’s moral development, most of them focus on how children progress in and increase their morality ( Jensen, 2020 ; Killen and Smetana, 2022 ). However, as Bussey (2020) notes, there is a lack of research regarding children’s adherence to moral standards, including the moral standards–behavior gap. For instance, already by age three, children typically recognize moral transgressions, such as being mean to others, independently of authority figures and rules (for a meta-analysis, see Yoo and Smetana, 2022 ), yet schoolchildren still engage in immoral actions, such as bullying. Considering the pervasive moral socialization of children taking place at home and in school, and despite their own progress and advancement in moral development, including the understanding by the time they are of preschool age that bullying is wrong, why do schoolchildren engage in such immoral behavior?

Bandura’s social cognitive theory provides insights into this possible moral standard–behavior gap, highlighting the role of moral disengagement in justifying immoral behaviors ( Bandura, 1999 , 2002 , 2016 ). Moral disengagement is a social cognitive process allowing individuals to justify harmful behaviors towards others, enabling them to act immorally without experiencing typical moral self-sanctions like remorse, guilt, or shame ( Bandura, 2002 , 2016 ). Previous research has established a clear link between moral disengagement and bullying ( Killer et al., 2019 ; Thornberg, 2023 ), a pervasive issue affecting children and adolescents worldwide in school settings ( Bradshaw et al., 2017 ; Cosma et al., 2020 ). Consequently, the development of moral disengagement emerges as a critical concern in the field of child development and education. Recognizing the pivotal role of moral development within educational contexts and the significant influence of school environments on students’ behavior ( Eccles and Roeser, 2015 ), longitudinal research on predictors of moral disengagement within a school context is needed. However, existing longitudinal studies often treat moral disengagement as a predictor rather than investigating its antecedents ( Thornberg, 2023 ). To address this gap, the aim of our study is to examine whether students’ moral disengagement in peer aggression is predicted by students’ perceptions of student-teacher relationships, the degree of authoritative teaching and collective moral disengagement within the classroom over the course of 1 year.

In Sweden, compulsory schooling comprises four stages: a pre-school class (age 6), lower elementary school (grades 1–3, ages 7–9), upper elementary school (grades 4–6, ages 10–12), and lower secondary school (grades 7–9, ages 13–15). In elementary school, students typically remain in a single classroom (homeroom) with the same classmates for most subjects, where one or two primary class teachers teach the majority of subjects, with only a few additional teachers (e.g., physical education, arts). Additionally, it is common for class teachers to stay with the same group of students from first to third grade (lower elementary teachers) and then from fourth to sixth grade (upper elementary teachers). Thus, the classroom, defined as the social setting in which students and teachers interact and influence each other’s attitudes and behaviors ( Farmer et al., 2011 ; Hendricks et al., 2016 ), emerges as an important unit of analysis when examining factors influencing the development of moral disengagement in Swedish children.

In the current study, we focus on early adolescence and the last 2 years of the Swedish elementary school, from age 11 to age 12. Focusing on this age group is particularly important because bullying seems to be most prevalent during these years, both in Sweden ( Friends, 2022 ) and elsewhere ( Due et al., 2005 ). Furthermore, studying moral disengagement development at the beginning of adolescence is crucial because it’s a phase where individuals start to actively shape their sense of identity and values ( Sawyer et al., 2012 ). This period offers a vital window for investigating the foundational aspects, precursors, and implications of morality, given its role in shaping lifelong ethical attitudes and behaviors ( Malti et al., 2021 ). Further, our focus on the role of teachers and peers in the present study aligns with Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) conceptualization of the microsystem , and thus aims to explore how specific factors—on their own and in interaction—within a student’s immediate and direct environment influence the development of moral disengagement. Relationships with teachers and peers play a significant role in shaping a students’ development, influencing their beliefs, behaviors, psychological health, and social relationships ( Hamre and Pianta, 2001 ; Cornelius-White, 2007 ; Farmer et al., 2019 ; Troop-Gordon et al., 2019 ).

Moral disengagement theory

Within the framework of moral disengagement theory, Bandura (2016) described eight mechanisms through which moral disengagement occurs: through moral justification, using euphemistic language to soften destructive actions, comparing one’s actions favorably to others’, avoiding personal responsibility by shifting blame elsewhere, diffusing responsibility within a group, distorting or minimizing the consequences of one’s actions, dehumanizing others to justify mistreatment, and attributing blame to victims. By selectively using these moral disengagement mechanisms, individuals can avoid negative self-sanction, thereby increasing the likelihood of engaging in harmful behaviors.

A fundamental principle in the social cognitive theory is viewing humans as active agents who can intentionally influence their functioning and life circumstances ( Bandura, 1986 ). Moral agency – the ability to refrain from immoral actions and act humanely - results from the interactions among personal factors (e.g., cognition, emotions), social and environmental factors (e.g., family, peer group reactions), and behaviors (e.g., aggression). In other words, behavior and cognition - such as moral disengagement - are partly the result of socialization processes within different socio-cultural contexts ( Bandura, 1999 ). Indeed, previous research has shown that poor parental supervision and monitoring ( Campaert et al., 2018 ), rejecting parenting, and neighborhood impoverishment ( Hyde et al., 2010 ) positively predict moral disengagement over time. Regarding the peer context, Fontaine et al. (2014) revealed that peer rejection predicted subsequent moral disengagement, while Caravita et al. (2014) found that in early adolescence (but not in late childhood), Italian students became more like their friends in terms of level of moral disengagement over time. In a recent study, Korean elementary school students were also found to become more like their friends concerning moral disengagement over time ( Kim et al., 2024 ).

Collective moral disengagement

Social cognitive theory does not only include personal agency but also collective agency as a central part of the self-regulatory process ( Bandura, 2002 ). Therefore, moral disengagement can also be considered a group characteristic ( White et al., 2009 ; Bandura, 2016 ). Specifically, collective moral disengagement is “an emergent group-level property arising from the interactive, coordinative, and synergistic group dynamics” ( White et al., 2009 , p. 43). In schools, collective moral disengagement may emerge at the school or classroom level, whereas it may operate more broadly in other contexts (e.g., the community; Bussey, 2020 ). At the classroom level, it captures the shared beliefs of students about the extent to which moral disengagement mechanisms are common among classmates ( Gini et al., 2014b ). Previous research from Sweden ( Thornberg et al., 2021 ; Bjärehed, 2022 ) and other European countries ( Gini et al., 2014b ; Kollerová et al., 2018 ) has demonstrated that students in classrooms characterized by higher levels of collective moral disengagement are more likely to engage in peer aggression and bullying. With the particular interest of the current study, a meta-analytical review ( Luo and Bussey, 2023 ) identified collective moral disengagement as one of the environmental correlates of moral disengagement, suggesting a positive association between the two constructs. In other words, in classrooms with higher levels of collective moral disengagement, students are also more prone to enlist moral disengagement mechanisms ( Gini et al., 2022 ).

Furthermore, collective moral disengagement has been found to moderate the association between individual moral disengagement and aggressive behaviors. For instance, in one Swedish study, Sjögren et al. (2021a) found that students more often reinforced or assisted in bullying situations if they belonged to classrooms with higher levels of collective moral disengagement and, at the same time, scored higher on individual moral disengagement. This aligns with the social cognitive theory, which suggests that collective processes interact with and influence individual behavior. Whether or not collective moral disengagement influences the development of individual students’ tendency to moral disengagement is still not well known. To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first to examine whether or not collective moral disengagement at the classroom level predicts students’ moral disengagement over time.

Authoritative teaching

The concept of authoritative parenting was introduced by Baumrind (1966) , in her influential work on parenting styles, and has been negatively linked with moral disengagement in young adults ( Di Pentima et al., 2023 ). Although this theory primarily addresses parents and child-rearing, scholars have highlighted the parallels between parents and teachers in their shared objective of fostering positive development and learning in their children and students ( Wentzel, 2002 ; Walker, 2009 ; Ertesvåg, 2011 ). Teachers play a significant role in shaping the growth of young individuals and can serve as influential socialization agents in their students’ personal and social development ( Farmer et al., 2011 , 2019 ). Authoritative teaching refers to high levels of support (responsiveness) and structure (demandingness). While support includes warmth, care, responsiveness, and open communication, structure is about high expectations, demandingness, and strict but fair enforcement of school rules and classroom order ( Walker, 2009 ; Gregory et al., 2010 ; Thornberg et al., 2018 ). Finne et al. (2018) have argued that an authoritative teaching style can counteract a destructive classroom power structure and foster moral engagement among students. Accordingly, authoritative schools and teaching have been linked to greater academic achievement in the United States ( Dever and Karabenick, 2011 ) and less bullying and victimization among Swedish children ( Thornberg et al., 2018 ; Kloo et al., 2023 ), Chinese adolescents ( Wang et al., 2022 ), and American adolescents ( Gregory et al., 2010 ; Cornell et al., 2015 ; Lau et al., 2018 ). However, less is known about the role of authoritative teaching for the development of students’ moral disengagement. Thus, the current study is the first to investigate whether authoritative teaching at the classroom level predicts students’ moral disengagement over time.

Student-teacher relationship quality

A warm, caring, and supportive student-teacher relationship is a vital part of authoritative teaching. However, the quality of the relationship between an individual student and the teacher does not necessarily align with the overall teaching style at the classroom level. Previous research has shown that a higher quality relationship between a student and teacher (warmer, more caring and supportive, more respectful interaction patterns) is associated with less bullying and peer victimization (for a meta-analysis, see ten Bokkel et al., 2023 ). Although it is our understanding that no studies have examined the predictive role of student-teacher relationship quality on student’s moral disengagement within a longitudinal design, a few cross-sectional studies on bullying and peer victimization have included both moral disengagement and student-teacher relationship quality (or aspects of the latter). For instance, one Swedish study showed that students demonstrating higher moral disengagement in conjunction with poorer student-teacher relationship quality were more prone to reinforce in bullying situations ( Sjögren et al., 2021b ). Another study on ethnic bullying in Italy showed that closeness to teachers might restrain morally disengaged children from bullying ( Iannello et al., 2021 ).

Furthermore, moral disengagement has been tested as a mediator between different school factors (e.g., school climate, teachers’ responses to bullying, student–student relationships) and bullying and aggression (e.g., Campaert et al., 2017 ; Ivaniushina and Alexandrov, 2022 ; Gao et al., 2023 ), suggesting that school factors may influence students’ moral disengagement. Concerning student-teacher relationships, one recent cross-sectional study examined whether moral disengagement mediated the association between student-teacher relationship quality and classroom incivility ( Gao et al., 2024 ). Classroom incivility here refers to student behaviors that negatively impact the learning environment, encompassing everything from minor disturbances to physical violence. The findings from this study showed that students with poorer student-teacher relationship quality scored also higher in moral disengagement, which in turn was linked to more classroom incivility behaviors. The authors suggest that a warm, caring, and supportive teacher may model positive communication patterns and behaviors, possibly helping students to “respect and understand others, strengthen their moral and rule constraints, and thereby reduce their levels of moral disengagement” ( Gao et al., 2024 , p. 508). Nevertheless, the cross-sectional design did not allow conclusions about the directionalities of these associations. The present study is the first to examine whether student-teacher relationship quality at the individual level predicts students’ moral disengagement over time.

The present study

The present study aimed to examine whether collective moral disengagement and authoritative teaching at the classroom level and student-teacher relationship quality at the individual level predicted individual moral disengagement among pre-adolescent students 1 year later. Given that previous studies suggest there are gender differences in moral disengagement ( Caravita et al., 2012 ; Thornberg et al., 2023 ; Gao et al., 2024 ), and considering that a student’s tendency to morally disengage may vary due to differing socialization practices across cultures ( Bussey, 2020 ), we included gender and immigrant background as control variables, along with the initial level of moral disengagement. Because Bandura (2016) argues that moral disengagement is “manifested differently depending on the sphere of activity” (p. 26), we delimited classroom collective moral disengagement and students’ moral disengagement in this study to the activity of peer aggression, including bullying and other forms of mean, unwanted or harmful behaviors toward peers. Thus, we did not study students’ proneness to morally disengage in general but how inclined they were to morally disengage when considering peer aggression.

Drawing on social cognitive theory, which posits that behaviors and cognitions are, in part, the result of socialization processes within different socio-cultural contexts ( Bandura, 1999 ), and empirical evidence from cross-sectional studies that collective moral disengagement at the classroom level is negatively associated with defending behavior ( Gini et al., 2015 ; Kollerová et al., 2018 ), and positively linked with peer aggression ( Gini et al., 2015 ), bullying perpetration ( Kollerová et al., 2018 ; Bjärehed et al., 2021 ; Thornberg et al., 2021 ), siding with peer aggressors ( Sjögren et al., 2021a ), and individual moral disengagement ( Luo and Bussey, 2023 ), we hypothesized that greater collective moral disengagement at the classroom level would predict greater individual moral disengagement 1 year later ( Hypothesis 1 ).

Based on previous cross-sectional findings showing that authoritative parenting is negatively linked with moral disengagement ( Di Pentima et al., 2023 ), that higher school structure (a dimension of an authoritative school construct) is associated with less moral disengagement ( Ivaniushina and Alexandrov, 2022 ), that authoritative teaching is negatively linked with bullying and pro-bullying behaviors ( Lau et al., 2018 ; Thornberg et al., 2018 ; Kloo et al., 2023 ), and that individually perceived authoritative school climate is negatively linked with moral disengagement ( Teng et al., 2020 ), we hypothesized that greater authoritative teaching at the classroom level would predict less moral disengagement 1 year later ( Hypothesis 2 ).

With reference to research showing that greater student-teacher relationship quality decreases the risk of bullying perpetration ( ten Bokkel et al., 2023 ) and cross-sectional studies showing a negative correlation between student-teacher relationship quality and moral disengagement ( Sjögren et al., 2021b ; Gao et al., 2024 ), we hypothesized that greater student-teacher relationship quality at the student level would predict less moral disengagement 1 year later ( Hypothesis 3 ).

Given that social cognitive theory ( Bandura, 1986 ) emphasizes the interplay between personal, behavioral, and environmental factors, and that previous research has not yet studied whether collective moral disengagement or authoritative teaching at the classroom level interacts with student-teacher relationship quality at the individual level to predict moral disengagement, we examined potential cross-level interaction effects in an exploratory manner.

Participants and procedure

Data were collected within a four-year longitudinal project that examined individual and classroom social and moral correlates of school bullying among Swedish school children from upper elementary school to the second year of lower secondary school. The overarching project started in the academic year 2015/2016. A total of 2,448 fifth-grade students in 64 schools were invited to participate in the current study. We used a strategic selection methodology which meant that the sample included students from different socio-geographical areas in Sweden (e.g., rural areas, small towns, and cities). Out of the original sample, 1,623 students filled in the questionnaire in grade 5 (51% girls). Reasons for non-participation included failure to submit parental consent (785 students) or absence on the day of data collection (40 students).

The students answered a web-based questionnaire on tablets in their regular classroom setting on two occasions: the first time in grade 5 and the second 1 year later in grade 6. Of those who answered the questionnaire in both grade 5 and grade 6, the final sample consisted of data from 1,373 students (grade 5,  M  = 11.5 and SD  = 0.3), nested in 108 classrooms. For attrition analyses, we assessed whether students who continued their participation ( n  = 1,373) from fifth to sixth grade differed from those who only participated in fifth grade ( n  = 250) in terms of their levels of individual moral disengagement, student-teacher relationship quality, and perceptions of authoritative teaching and collective moral disengagement in their classroom in fifth grade. Independent t tests showed that there were no group differences in any of these variables in fifth grade. Written informed parental consent and student assent were obtained from all participants, and no incentives were provided for participation. During each session, either a member of the research team or a teacher was present to explain the study procedures and aid participants as needed. This assistance included providing reading support and clarifying specific items or words on the questionnaire. Participants were also informed of their right to withdraw from the study at any time, with assurance that their individual responses would remain inaccessible to both parents and school personnel. Additionally, participants were instructed to sit at a distance from one another to prevent viewing each other’s responses. On average, participants took approximately 30 min to complete the questionnaire.

Moral disengagement

Moral disengagement at the individual level was measured with an 18-item self-report scale in grade 5 (T1) and grade 6 (T2). This scale was specifically developed in Swedish for the overarching longitudinal project to capture moral disengagement in peer aggression. Previous scales have commonly addressed either moral disengagement in more general antisocial behavior ( Bandura et al., 1996 ), or specifically in bullying situations ( Hymel et al., 2005 ; Thornberg and Jungert, 2014 ). The scale used in the current study has previously demonstrated adequate psychometric properties among Swedish school children ( Thornberg et al., 2019 ; Bjärehed et al., 2021 ; Sjögren et al., 2021a ; Bjärehed, 2022 ).

The students were asked to rate the extent to which they agreed (1 =  Strongly disagree to 7 =  Strongly agree ) with each of the 18 items (e.g., “If you cannot be like everybody else, it is your fault if you get bullied or frozen out.” or “If my friends begin to tease a classmate, I cannot be blamed for being with them and teasing that person too.”) The scale captured all eight moral disengagement mechanisms described by Bandura (2016) . CFAs with the MLM estimator displayed adequate fit: (grade 5: χ 2 (135) = 392.018, p  < 0.001, CFI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.067; 90% CI [0.059, 0.074], SRMR = 0.055; grade 6: χ 2 (135) = 405.179, p  < 0.001, CFI = 0.91, RMSEA = 0.063; 90% CI [0.056, 0.070], SRMR = 0.046). For the current sample, Cronbach’s α was 0.87 in the fifth and 0.89 in the sixth grades. Therefore, the mean score of all items was computed as an index for moral disengagement. This measured the students’ overall tendency to morally disengage in peer aggression situations.

Student–teacher relationship quality

Student-teacher relationship quality (STRQ) was measured in grade 5 (T1) with a 13-item self-report scale, specifically developed in Swedish for the overarching project. The scale has demonstrated adequate psychometric properties among Swedish school children ( Forsberg et al., 2023 ). The students were asked to rate the extent to which they agreed (1 =  Strongly disagree to 7 =  Strongly agree ) with each of the 13 items. Seven items were positively worded to capture positive student–teacher relationship qualities, and six were negatively worded to capture negative student–teacher relationship qualities (as perceived by the student). Some example items are: “My teachers really care about me” (positive STRQ) and “My teachers do not like me” (negative STRQ). The negatively worded items were reversed and the mean score of all thirteen items was computed as an index variable. Thus, higher values on the index variable represent a positive relationship. CFA with the MLM estimator (two factors and accounting for the nested structure) displayed adequate fit: χ 2 (64) = 364.825, p  < 0.001, CFI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.083; 90% CI [0.074, 0.091], SRMR = 0.048. Cronbach’s α for the whole scale (with reversed items) was 0.94.

Collective moral disengagement (CMD) was measured in grade 5 (T1) with an 18-item self-report scale, specifically developed in Swedish for the overarching project, that has demonstrated adequate psychometric properties among Swedish school children ( Alsaadi et al., 2018 ; Bjärehed et al., 2021 ; Sjögren et al., 2021a ; Bjärehed, 2022 ). The scale consisted of the same items as those measuring individual moral disengagement. However, to capture the collective dimension, this scale used the same procedure as in Gini et al.’s (2014b) classroom CMD scale and asked: “In your class, how many students think that…?” which the students then answered by selecting one of the following response categories: “None,” “About one quarter,” “About half,” “About three quarters,” and “Everyone.” At the individual level, the scale represented the individual’s perception of the degree to which moral disengagement was shared among peers in their classroom (referred to as student-perceived collective moral disengagement ; Gini et al., 2014a ). CFA with the MLM estimator (accounting for the nested structure) displayed adequate fit: χ 2 (135) = 558.574, p  < 0.001, CFI = 0.91, RMSEA = 0.070; 90% CI [0.064, 0.077], SRMR = 0.043. Cronbach’s α for the current sample was 0.92. Collective moral disengagement as a classroom-level construct was obtained by calculating the average score of all classroom members’ mean scores.

To measure authoritative teaching in grade 5 (T1), we used two subscales from the 15-item Authoritative Classroom Climate Scale ( Thornberg et al., 2018 ). This scale was specifically developed in Swedish for the overarching project and has demonstrated adequate psychometric properties among Swedish school children ( Thornberg et al., 2018 ). The scale consists of two subscales of authoritative teaching: teacher support (4 items, e.g., “our teachers really care about the students,” “our teachers really give the students good help and support”) and teacher structure (4 items, e.g., “our teachers bring order and undisturbed working atmosphere in the classroom,” “our teachers make clear demands on students”). The students were asked to rate the extent to which they agreed (1 =  Strongly disagree to 7 =  Strongly agree ) with the eight statements. CFA with the MLM estimator (two factors and accounting for the nested structure) displayed adequate fit: χ 2 (19) = 68.751, p  < 0.001, CFI = 0.97, RMSEA = 0.044; 90% CI [0.036, 0.052], SRMR = 0.021. Cronbach’s α for the current sample was 0.91. As with the scale measuring collective moral disengagement, we calculated each student’s mean and then averaged the scores for each classroom.

Control variables

Gender and immigrant background were included as control variables at the individual level. The students were asked whether they identified as a girl or a boy (girl = 0, boy = 1). For immigrant background, defined as not being born in Sweden or having two foreign-born parents, the students were asked whether they and their parents were born in Sweden. From these answers, a dummy variable was created indicating whether the students had a Swedish or immigrant background (0 = Swedish background, 1 = Immigrant background).

The students ( N  = 1,373) were nested within classrooms ( M  = 108). Thus, multilevel modeling techniques were used to analyze the data. This allowed us to disentangle individual-level and classroom-level effects on grade 6 moral disengagement (MD6). The individual-level variables were student-teacher relationship quality (STRQ5), immigrant background, gender, and moral disengagement (MD5), all reported in grade 5. The classroom-level variables examined were authoritative teaching (AUTH5) and collective moral disengagement (CMD5), also reported in grade 5.

First, we estimated an unconditional model with a random intercept. In this model, we estimated the overall classroom-level variance in moral disengagement (MD6). To test whether greater student-teacher relationship quality (STRQ5) predicted greater moral disengagement (MD6) 1 year later ( Hypothesis 3 ), we added the individual-level variables as fixed effects (Model 1). Thus, this model examined the influence of student-teacher relationship quality in grade 5 on grade 6 moral disengagement while controlling for grade 5 moral disengagement, gender, and immigrant background.

To test whether greater authoritative teaching ( Hypothesis 2 ) and less collective moral disengagement ( Hypothesis 1 ) at the classroom level would predict less moral disengagement 1 year later, the two grade 5 classroom variables (AUTH5 and CMD5) were added as fixed effects. That is, in model 2, we examined the contribution of authoritative teaching and collective moral disengagement on grade 6 moral disengagement, over and above the individual’s student-teacher relationship quality (STRQ5), and the control variables. Lastly, in Model 3, we added the four cross-level interaction effects between moral disengagement, student-teacher relationship quality, authoritative teaching, and collective moral disengagement (MD5 × AUTH5, STRQ5 × AUTH5, IMD5 × CMD5, and STRQ5 × CMD5). This final model examined whether the effects of the individual-level variables differed depending on different classroom levels of authoritative teaching and collective moral disengagement.

We examined model fit improvement for each new model to assess the added variables’ explanatory value to the overall model. To help interpretation, the individual-level variables (except immigrant background and gender) were grand-mean centered, whereas the classroom-level variables were centered around the mean of all classrooms. All multilevel regression analyses were conducted in RStudio (version 2023.06.2) with the package lme4 and the restricted maximum likelihood estimator (REML). All models were refitted with the maximum likelihood estimator (ML) to examine model improvement.

Descriptive statistics and correlations

Descriptive statistics and correlations of the individual-level and classroom-level variables are presented in Tables 1 , 2 . Moral disengagement in grade 5 was positively correlated with grade 6 moral disengagement ( r  = 0.54, p  < 0.001). In contrast, student-teacher relationship quality in grade 5 was negatively correlated with moral disengagement in grade 5 ( r  = −0.42, p  < 0.001) and grade 6 ( r  = −0.38, p  < 0.001). In other words, students with better student-teacher relationship quality in the fifth grade were more likely to score lower on moral disengagement in both grade 5 and grade 6. At the classroom level, collective moral disengagement in grade 5 was positively associated with the class mean of moral disengagement in grade 6 ( r  = 0.61, p  < 0.001), whereas authoritative teaching in grade 5 was negatively associated with the class mean of moral disengagement in grade 6 ( r  = −0.50, p  < 0.001). Thus, classrooms with greater authoritative teaching and classrooms with less collective moral disengagement were more likely to have a lower class mean of moral disengagement than other classrooms 1 year later. In addition, there was a negative correlation at the classroom level between authoritative teaching and collective moral disengagement in grade 5 ( r  = −0.71, p  < 0.001), which means that collective moral disengagement tended to be lower in classrooms where teachers displayed greater authoritative teaching.

Table 1 . Correlations, means, and standard deviations for individual-level variables.

Table 2 . Correlations, means, and standard deviations for classroom-level variables.

Multilevel regression analyses

Calculations of the intraclass coefficient (ICC) revealed variation at the classroom level, accounting for about 9% of the total variance in moral disengagement in the sixth grade. Therefore, the use of multilevel modeling was justified. As described earlier, Model 1 examined the influence of student-teacher relationship quality in grade 5 on grade 6 moral disengagement while controlling for grade 5 moral disengagement, gender, and immigrant background ( Hypothesis 3 ). In Model 2, Hypotheses 1 and 2 were examined. In the third model, interaction effects were added and examined in an exploratory manner. Reported coefficients, as presented in Table 3 and in the text, are unstandardized and thus indicate the expected change in moral disengagement for each unit of change in the independent variable. The results of the multilevel modeling are summarized in Table 3 .

Table 3 . Multilevel estimates for models predicting student moral disengagement in grade 6.

At the individual level, our results revealed that girls ( b  = 0.109, SE = 0.03, p  < 0.001) and students who reported less moral disengagement ( b  = 0.373, SE = 0.03, p  < 0.001) and greater student-teacher relationship quality in grade 5 ( b  = −0.096, SE = 0.02, p  < 0.001) were inclined to score lower on moral disengagement in grade 6 (see Table 3 , Model 3). In other words, we found support for our third hypothesis, as the quality of student-teacher relationship at the individual level negatively predicted students’ moral disengagement 1 year later, even when controlling for their moral disengagement in grade 5 and other variables in the model.

Additionally, we found support for our first hypothesis, as classroom levels of collective moral disengagement in grade 5 positively predicted individual students’ moral disengagement in grade 6 ( b = 0.285, SE = 0.09, p  < 0.01). Thus, students in classrooms characterized by higher levels of collective moral disengagement were more likely to score higher on moral disengagement 1 year later compared to students in classrooms with lower levels of collective moral disengagement in grade 5. Contrary to Hypothesis 2 , authoritative teaching in grade 5 did not significantly predict moral disengagement in grade 6. However, interaction effects were found for three of the four interactions tested (see Figures 1 – 3 ).

Figure 1 . Cross-level interaction between moral disengagement and authoritative teaching predicting moral disengagement in grade 6.

Figure 2 . Cross-level interaction between student-teacher relationship quality and authoritative teaching predicting moral disengagement in grade 6.

Figure 3 . Cross-level interaction between student-teacher relationship quality and collective moral disengagement predicting moral disengagement in grade 6.

First, there was a significant interaction between students’ moral disengagement and authoritative teaching in grade 5 ( b  = −0.26, SE = 0.05, p  < 0.001). To interpret these significant interaction effects, we computed simple slopes (see Preacher et al., 2006 ) for low (–1SD) and high (+1SD) levels of authoritative teaching. As shown in Figure 1 , the effect of moral disengagement in grade 5 on moral disengagement in grade 6 was stronger in classrooms characterized by low authoritative teaching ( b low  = 0.53, p  < 0.001) compared with classrooms characterized as high in authoritative teaching ( b high  = 0.21, p  < 0.001). Second, and as shown in Figure 2 , we found a significant interaction between student-teacher relationship quality and authoritative teaching in grade 5 ( b  = −0.13, SE = 0.03, p  < 0.001). Simple slope analysis for low (−1SD) and high classroom levels (+1SD) of authoritative teaching showed that in classrooms with high authoritative teaching, better student-teacher relationship quality was associated with less moral disengagement in the sixth grade ( b high  = −0.17, p  < 0.001), whereas in classrooms with low levels of authoritative teaching, grade 6 moral disengagement did not vary as a function of student-teacher relationship quality ( b low  = −0.02, p = 0 .31). Lastly, and as illustrated in Figure 3 , there was a significant interaction between student-teacher relationship quality and collective moral disengagement in grade 5 ( b = −0.340, SE = 0.09, p  < 0.001). The simple slope for low (–1SD) collective moral disengagement was not significant ( b low  = −0.02, p = 0 .42), whereas the simple slope for high (+1SD) collective moral disengagement was negative and significant ( b high  = −0.17, p  < 0.001). That is, in classrooms with high levels of collective moral disengagement, better student-teacher relationship quality was associated with lower levels of moral disengagement 1 year later.

With reference to social cognitive theory ( Bandura, 2016 ), children can develop their moral standards, self-regulatory processes, and behaviors but can also learn to use moral disengagement mechanisms from socialization agents such as teachers and peers in school. Understanding the antecedents of moral disengagement is crucial, given its well-established link to school bullying ( Killer et al., 2019 ; Luo and Bussey, 2023 ; Thornberg, 2023 ) and peer aggression more generally ( Gini et al., 2014a ; Luo and Bussey, 2023 ). In alignment with social cognitive theory and reciprocal determinism ( Bandura, 2016 ), this study offers insights into the complex interplay between personal factors, including cognitions, and social factors, that are transmitted through the influence of peers and teachers. It examines the impact of specific school microsystem factors ( Bronfenbrenner, 1979 ) on the development of moral disengagement in pre-adolescence, specifically focusing on collective moral disengagement, authoritative teaching, and the quality of student-teacher relationships. To our knowledge, the present study has been the first to examine how these factors, uniquely and interactively, predict moral disengagement within a longitudinal design.

As hypothesized, our study revealed that students in classrooms with higher levels of collective moral disengagement in fifth grade were more prone to endorse morally disengaged beliefs about peer aggression 1 year later ( Hypothesis 1 ). Thus, collective moral disengagement is a contextual factor that affects not only behaviors such as bullying ( Gini et al., 2014b ; Kollerová et al., 2018 ; Thornberg et al., 2021 ; Bjärehed, 2022 ) but also socio-cognitive processes, such as an individual’s moral disengagement. This underscores the significant influence of the peer group on the development of moral disengagement among pre-adolescents. Our finding adds to previous research by suggesting that not only do friends tend to become more similar in moral disengagement levels over time in early adolescence ( Caravita et al., 2014 ; Kim et al., 2024 ), but pre-adolescents who belong to a classroom with higher levels of collective moral disengagement are at an increased risk of developing greater individual moral disengagement.

While students’ moral disengagement is in itself a risk factor for peer aggression and bullying ( Gini et al., 2014a ; Luo and Bussey, 2023 ), and a predictor of later bullying perpetration (for a review see Thornberg, 2023 ), collective moral disengagement at the classroom level has also been shown to be associated with bullying behaviors, over and above individual moral disengagement ( Bjärehed et al., 2021 ; Sjögren et al., 2021a ). In addition to this existing research, and a recent longitudinal study showing that classroom collective moral disengagement explains between-classroom variability in later aggression ( Gini et al., 2022 ), the current findings contribute to the literature by demonstrating that classroom collective moral disengagement also predicts students’ moral disengagement over time. In other words, collective moral disengagement at the classroom level can be linked to a negative development of students’ moral cognition and behavior.

Although authoritative teaching was negatively associated with classroom levels of moral disengagement 1 year later in the bivariate analysis, there was no significant direct effect of authoritative teaching in fifth grade on moral disengagement in the sixth grade in the final model ( Hypothesis 2 ). One study has found that students perceiving school rules as transparent and fair are less likely to activate mechanisms of moral disengagement, resulting in decreased engagement in negative behaviors ( Ivaniushina and Alexandrov, 2022 ). The inconsistency with our findings may be explained by the focus of our study on students’ collective perceptions of their teacher’s teaching style rather than individual students’ perceptions. Ivaniushina and Alexandrov’s study also included a slightly older sample (ages 12–15). Further, they focused on structure as a school characteristic, while our measure included both structure and support and specifically examined the teacher and classroom setting. It is also plausible that support and structure are differentially associated with moral disengagement. In a Swedish study with grade 4 students, Kloo et al. (2023) distinguished between these two dimensions of authoritative teaching; their results suggest that teacher support drives the negative association between authoritative teaching and bullying perpetration. For example, high teacher structure might impact bullying through reduced moral disengagement, as proposed by Ivaniushina and Alexandrov (2022) , while a classroom characterized by support (i.e., warmth, open communication, and caring) might be directly linked to lower levels of bullying and victimization ( Lau et al., 2018 ; Thornberg et al., 2018 ; Kloo et al., 2023 ). In addition to the impact of collective moral disengagement at the classroom level found in the present study, another reasonable explanation could be that students’ perception of their relationship quality with the teacher ( Gao et al., 2024 ) is a more influential factor for their development and changes in moral disengagement over time than the overall teaching style at the classroom level. This suggestion is supported by the finding in our study that more positive, warm, and supportive student-teacher relationships predicted lower levels of moral disengagement.

The current results suggest that a higher quality of student-teacher relationships may protect against subsequent increases in moral disengagement ( Hypothesis 3 ). This indicates that how teachers establish and maintain relationships with their students, and how this relationship quality varies across their student cohort, may play an essential role in their students’ development of moral disengagement. This finding holds significance, particularly in light of the well-established connection between moral disengagement and later involvement in school bullying, as identified in other studies ( Thornberg, 2023 ). In our study, students with more negative, less supportive, and less caring student-teacher relationships were more likely to exhibit elevated levels of moral disengagement in the sixth grade, regardless of their initial level of moral disengagement. This result expands upon previous cross-sectional findings demonstrating a positive link between student-teacher relationships and moral disengagement ( Gao et al., 2024 ) that also incorporate two time points within a longitudinal design.

In Gao et al.’s study, the association between student-teacher relationships and moral disengagement was stronger in early adolescence (11–14 years) compared to middle adolescence (15–17 years). From a developmental standpoint, adolescents progressively gain independence, thus suggesting that the influence of adults, including teachers, on their socialization might diminish later in adolescence. Consistent with this notion, prior longitudinal studies have indicated that moral disengagement is influenced by factors in home environments until late childhood ( Hyde et al., 2010 ), after which it becomes more influenced by peers ( Caravita et al., 2014 ). Our study adds to this literature by suggesting that teachers are influential socialization agents impacting students’ tendency to morally disengage in pre-adolescence. Not only can higher student-teacher relationship quality be associated with less bullying ( ten Bokkel et al., 2023 ) and peer aggression ( Krause and Smith, 2023 ). According to our study it can also be associated with less moral disengagement. The literature, in turn, has linked low moral disengagement with less bullying ( Killer et al., 2019 ; Thornberg, 2023 ) and peer aggression ( Gini et al., 2014a ; Luo and Bussey, 2023 ). Altogether, this could be interpreted in terms of what Bandura (2016) calls triadic codetermination, which means that “human functioning is a product of the interplay of personal influences, the behavior individuals engage in, and the environmental forces that impinge on them” (p. 6). Personal influences would here be moral disengagement, behavior would refer to bullying or peer aggression, and environmental forces the student-teacher relationship quality. Our study contributes to the literature by showing that student-teacher relationship quality negatively predicted moral disengagement 1 year later. Since our study focused on changes between the ages of 11 and 12, it would be desirable to include a more extended period in future studies, both with younger school children and those in later adolescence. This could provide insights into the potentially changing influence of student-teacher relationship quality on moral disengagement across different developmental stages.

Cross-level interaction effects

In our study, three out of four tested cross-level interactions significantly predicted moral disengagement 1 year later: the interaction between moral disengagement and authoritative teaching, the interaction between student-teacher relationship quality and authoritative teaching, and the interaction between student-teacher relationship quality and collective moral disengagement.

Although we did not find that authoritative teaching at the classroom level predicted subsequent moral disengagement (when controlling for collective moral disengagement at the classroom level and student-teacher relationship quality, gender, immigrant background, and previous moral disengagement at the individual level), authoritative teaching was found to moderate the effects of moral disengagement and student-teacher relationship quality in grade 5 on subsequent moral disengagement. In classrooms with less authoritative teaching, the impact of moral disengagement on subsequent moral disengagement was more pronounced. This finding suggests that an authoritative teaching style can act as a buffer against a negative spiral of escalating moral disengagement over time, especially for students who already exhibit high levels of moral disengagement in grade 5.

Our findings further indicate that lower student-teacher relationship quality in grade 5 is associated with higher moral disengagement in grade 6. However, this association was only significant in classrooms with high levels of authoritative teaching. In other words, this result suggests that having poor student-teacher relationships when belonging to classrooms where teachers are high in authoritative teaching is a risk factor of moral disengagement. With reference to the self-categorization theory ( Turner and Oakes, 1989 ; Abrams and Hogg, 1990 ), a possible explanation for our findings might be that the few students who had poor relationships with their teachers compared themselves with the majority of their classmates who had more positive relationships with their teachers due to the authoritative teaching style (teachers showed greater warmth, care, support, and responsiveness to students in general). It is plausible to assume that these everyday social comparisons in school increase the risk of developing a sense of non-belonging in the classroom context together with a more deviant social identity. As a part of their self-categorization process ( Turner and Oakes, 1989 ), students with poor teacher relationships would be prone to develop a self-serving bias of favoring the social category they identify themselves with (e.g., anti-school, antisocial, or rejected in-group) while devaluating the majority group of others in the classroom and other peers whom they perceive belong to the same well-adjusted outgroup. These “upward comparisons” ( Laninga-Wijnen et al., 2023 ) might, in this case, contribute to an antisocial trajectory and a greater need for moral disengagement to maintain positive self-esteem and avoid self-sanctions.

In the final regression model, collective moral disengagement at the classroom level and the quality of the student-teacher relationship at the individual level were uniquely linked to moral disengagement in sixth grade. Nevertheless, the extent to which student-teacher relationship quality predicted moral disengagement also depended on the levels of classroom collective moral disengagement. Previous studies have demonstrated that collective moral disengagement can act as a protective group property within the classroom, reducing the risk of bullying perpetration ( Gini et al., 2014b ; Kollerová et al., 2018 ; Thornberg et al., 2019 ; Thornberg et al., 2021 ; Bjärehed, 2022 ). Our study contributes to this body of literature by suggesting that students with high student-teacher relationship quality score low on subsequent moral disengagement independently of classroom levels of collective moral disengagement. In contrast, students with low student-teacher relationship quality tend to score higher on subsequent moral disengagement in classrooms with high levels of collective moral disengagement compared to students in classrooms with low collective moral disengagement. Thus, having a positive student-teacher relationship appears to be an important protective factor against moral disengagement. The interaction effect in our results suggest that students who had positive, warm, and supportive relationships with their teachers were also better equipped to resist the bad influence of classroom collective moral disengagement on their moral development. One year later they still showed low levels of moral disengagement despite belonging to a classroom with high collective moral disengagement.

Limitations

The current study fills an important gap in the literature by examining the role played by specific school microsystem factors ( Bronfenbrenner, 1979 ) on the development of moral disengagement in pre-adolescence. Nevertheless, some methodological limitations need to be addressed. First, all the studied variables were assessed using self-report measures. Self-reports are vulnerable to social desirability biases, and there may be a risk that students underreport their moral disengagement while exaggerating how common it is among classmates. Nevertheless, as both moral disengagement and collective moral disengagement relate to students’ perceptions and beliefs, self-reports may be the best way to capture these constructs. Further, some controversy exists about whether students should rate their teachers’ behaviors ( den Brok et al., 2006 ), like authoritative teaching. Thus, future studies could examine whether the current findings hold when teacher reports and/or direct observations are used to capture authoritative teaching.

Although our study implemented a longitudinal design, only two time points over a relatively short period of 1 year were included. A more extensive longitudinal approach with additional time points could be employed to enhance the robustness of our findings. This would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the observed associations and enable us to capture potential developmental trends or variations over an extended period. In addition, changes in moral disengagement may also be influenced by several factors not included in the current study.

Furthermore, no classroom mean score of authoritative teaching was below 3.9 (max 7); for collective moral disengagement, no classroom score exceeded 2.6 (max 5). This suggests that our study compared classrooms characterized as relatively authoritative and with relatively low levels of collective moral disengagement. Consequently, caution is advised when generalizing findings to classrooms characterized by a lower degree of authoritative teaching and higher levels of collective moral disengagement. Finally, our study exclusively involved students in Swedish schools. Future studies should investigate the transferability of these findings to other countries and cultural contexts.

Practical implications

The current findings have implications for teacher educators and school personnel. First, fostering a positive and supportive relationship between students and teachers seems crucial in minimizing a negative developmental spiral of moral disengagement in pre-adolescence. Teacher educators should, therefore, focus on equipping pre-service teachers with the skills and knowledge to build positive and supportive relationships with their students ( Bouchard and Smith, 2017 ). Teachers who engage in authoritative teaching as a part of their bullying prevention strategy (see Lau et al., 2018 ; Thornberg et al., 2018 ; Kloo et al., 2023 ) need to make the effort to build warm, caring, and responsive relationships with all of the students in their classroom and include targeted actions for students they fail to reach and with whom they fail to develop supportive relationships. To prevent an adverse moral climate, pre-service teachers and teachers can also benefit from professional training on influencing group dynamics ( Hymel et al., 2015 ). This training should include strategies that proactively prevent collective moral disengagement from emerging in the first place and promote a moral climate defined by active engagement and social responsibility. In line with the democratic mission ( Swedish Education Act, SFS 2010:800, 2010 ), teachers could integrate discussions about ethics and moral decision-making into their ordinary lessons by making students aware of moral disengagement mechanisms and how these can contribute to explaining a range of negative, inhumane and aggressive behaviors, including bullying and peer aggression, delinquency/criminality, political oppression, terrorism, genocide, and war ( Bandura, 2016 ). When students are encouraged to reflect on ethical considerations and to identify moral disengagement mechanisms, they might be more likely to develop a moral compass and resist moral disengagement.

Data availability statement

The datasets generated for this study are available on request to the corresponding author.

Ethics statement

The studies involving humans were approved by Regional Ethical Review Board at Linköping. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for participation in this study was provided by the participants’ legal guardians/next of kin.

Author contributions

MB: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. BS: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. RT: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. GG: Writing – review & editing. TP: Writing – review & editing.

The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This research was supported by a grant awarded to RT from the Swedish Research Council (grant number D0775301).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Abrams, D., and Hogg, M. A. (1990). Social identification, self-categorization, and social influence. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 1, 195–228. doi: 10.1080/14792779108401862

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Alsaadi, S., Wänström, L., Thornberg, R., Sjögren, B., Bjärehed, M., and Forsberg, C. (2018) Paper presented at the 2018 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Retrieved from the AERA Online Paper Repository. (Accessed April 16, 2024).

Google Scholar

Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory . New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., and Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 71, 364–374. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.364

Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 3, 193–209. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bandura, A. (2002). Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. J. Moral Educ. 31, 101–119. doi: 10.1080/0305724022014322

Bandura, A. (2016). Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm and Live with Themselves . New York: Worth.

Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of authoritative parental control on child behavior. Child Dev. 37, 887–907. doi: 10.2307/1126611

Bjärehed, M. (2022). Individual and classroom collective moral disengagement in offline and online bullying: a short-term multilevel growth model study. Psychol. Sch. 59, 356–375. doi: 10.1002/pits.22612

Bjärehed, M., Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., and Gini, G. (2021). Individual moral disengagement and bullying among Swedish fifth graders: the role of collective moral disengagement and pro-bullying behavior within classrooms. J. Interpers. Violence 36, NP9576–NP9600. doi: 10.1177/0886260519860889

Bouchard, K. L., and Smith, J. D. (2017). Teacher–student relationship quality and children’s bullying experiences with peers: reflecting on the mesosystem. Educ. Forum 81, 108–125. doi: 10.1080/00131725.2016.1243182

Bradshaw, J., Crous, G., Rees, G., and Turner, N. (2017). Comparing children's experiences of schools-based bullying across countries. Child Youth Serv. Rev. 80, 171–180. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.06.060

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bussey, K. (2020). “Development of moral disengagement” in The Oxford Handbook of Moral Development . ed. L. A. Jensen (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 305–326.

Campaert, K., Nocentini, A., and Menesini, E. (2017). The efficacy of teachers’ responses to incidents of bullying and victimization: the mediational role of moral disengagement for bullying. Aggress. Behav. 43, 483–492. doi: 10.1002/ab.21706

Campaert, K., Nocentini, A., and Menesini, E. (2018). The role of poor parenting and parental approval for children’s moral disengagement. J. Child Fam. Stud. 27, 2656–2667. doi: 10.1007/s10826-018-1097-1

Caravita, S. C., Gini, G., and Pozzoli, T. (2012). Main and moderated effects of moral cognition and status on bullying and defending. Aggress. Behav. 38, 456–468. doi: 10.1002/ab.21447

Caravita, S. C., Sijtsema, J. J., Rambaran, J. A., and Gini, G. (2014). Peer influences on moral disengagement in late childhood and early adolescence. J. Youth Adolesc. 43, 193–207. doi: 10.1007/s10964-013-9953-1

Cornelius-White, J. (2007). Learner-centered teacher-student relationships are effective: a meta-analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 77, 113–143. doi: 10.3102/003465430298563

Cornell, D., Shukla, K., and Konold, T. (2015). Peer victimization and authoritative school climate: a multilevel approach. J. Educ. Psychol. 107, 1186–1201. doi: 10.1037/edu0000038

Cosma, A., Walsh, S. D., Chester, K. L., Callaghan, M., Molcho, M., Craig, W., et al. (2020). Bullying victimization: time trends and the overlap between traditional and cyberbullying across countries in Europe and North America. Int. J. Public Health 65, 75–85. doi: 10.1007/s00038-019-01320-2

den Brok, P. D., Bergen, T., and Brekelmans, M. (2006). “Convergence and divergence between students’ and teachers’ perceptions of instructional behaviour in Dutch secondary education” in Contemporary Approaches to Research on Learning Environments: Worldviews . eds. D. F. Fisher and M. S. Khine (Singapore: World Scientific Publishing), 125–160.

Dever, B. V., and Karabenick, S. A. (2011). Is authoritative teaching beneficial for all students? A multi-level model of the effects of teaching style on interest and achievement. Sch. Psychol. Q. 26, 131–144. doi: 10.1037/a0022985

Di Pentima, L., Toni, A., and Roazzi, A. (2023). Parenting styles and moral disengagement in young adults: the mediating role of attachment experiences. J. Genet. Psychol. 184, 322–338. doi: 10.1080/00221325.2023.2205451

Due, P., Holstein, B. E., Lynch, J., Diderichsen, F., Gabhain, S. N., Scheidt, P., et al. (2005). Bullying and symptoms among school-aged children: international comparative cross sectional study in 28 countries. Eur. J. Pub. Health 15, 128–132. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/cki105

Eccles, J. S., and Roeser, R. W. (2015). “School and community influences on human development” in Developmental Science: An Advanced Textbook . eds. M. H. Bornstein and M. E. Lamb. 7th ed (New York: Psychology Press), 645–728.

Ertesvåg, S. K. (2011). Measuring authoritative teaching. Teach. Teach. Educ. 27, 51–61. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2010.07.002

Farmer, T. W., Hamm, J. V., Dawes, M., Barko-Alva, K., and Cross, J. R. (2019). Promoting inclusive communities in diverse classrooms: teacher attunement and social dynamics management. Educ. Psychol. 54, 286–305. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2019.1635020

Farmer, T. W., McAuliffe Lines, M., and Hamm, J. V. (2011). Revealing the invisible hand: the role of teachers in children’s peer experiences. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 32, 247–256. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2011.04.006

Finne, J., Roland, E., and Svartdal, F. (2018). Relational rehabilitation: reducing harmful effects of bullying. Nordic Stud. Educ. 38, 352–367. doi: 10.18261/issn.1891-2018-04-05

Fontaine, R. G., Fida, R., Paciello, M., Tisak, M. S., and Caprara, G. V. (2014). The mediating role of moral disengagement in the developmental course from peer rejection in adolescence to crime in early adulthood. Psychol. Crime Law 20, 1–19. doi: 10.1080/1068316X.2012.719622

Forsberg, C., Sjögren, B., Thornberg, R., Hong, J. S., and Longobardi, C. (2023). Longitudinal reciprocal associations between, student-teacher relationship quality and verbal and relational bullying victimization. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 27, 151–173. doi: 10.1007/s11218-023-09821-y

Friends . (2022). Friendsrapporten 2022. 10 år av Barns Röster! [The Friend’s Report 2022. 10 Years of Children’s Voices!]. Available at: https://friends.se/uploads/2022/08/Friendsrapporten-2022_WEBB.pdf (Accessed April 16, 2024).

Gao, L., Kong, F., Cui, L., Feng, N., and Wang, X. (2024). Teacher–student relationships and adolescents’ classroom incivility: a moderated mediation model of moral disengagement and negative coping style. Psychol. Sch. 61, 496–513. doi: 10.1002/pits.23064

Gao, L., Li, X., Wu, X., and Wang, X. (2023). Longitudinal associations among student-student relationship, moral disengagement, and adolescents' bullying perpetration. Sch. Psychol. 38, 337–347. doi: 10.1037/spq0000534

Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., and Bussey, K. (2014b). Collective moral disengagement: initial validation of a scale for adolescents. Eur. J. Dev. Psychol. 11, 386–395. doi: 10.1080/17405629.2013.851024

Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., and Bussey, K. (2015). The role of individual and collective moral disengagement in peer aggression and by standing: a multilevel analysis. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 43, 441–452. doi: 10.1007/s10802-014-992

Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., and Hymel, S. (2014a). Moral disengagement among children and youth: a meta-analytic review of links to aggressive behavior. Aggress. Behav. 40, 56–68. doi: 10.1002/ab.21502

Gini, G., Thornberg, R., Bussey, K., Angelini, F., and Pozzoli, T. (2022). Longitudinal links of individual and collective morality with adolescents’ peer aggression. J. Youth Adolesc. 51, 524–539. doi: 10.1007/s10964-021-01518-9

Gregory, A., Cornell, D., Fan, X., Sheras, P., Shih, T.-H., and Huang, F. (2010). Authoritative school discipline: high school practices associated with lower bullying and victimization. J. Educ. Psychol. 102, 483–496. doi: 10.1037/a0018562

Hamre, B. K., and Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher–child relationships and the trajectory of children's school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Dev. 72, 625–638. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00301

Hendricks, M. M. H. G., Mainhard, M. T., Boor-Klip, H. J., Cillessen, A. H. M., and Brekelmans, M. (2016). Social dynamics in the classroom: teacher support and conflict and the peer ecology. Teach. Teach. Educ. 53, 30–40. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2015.10.004

Hyde, L. W., Shaw, D. S., and Moilanen, K. L. (2010). Developmental precursors of moral disengagement and the role of moral disengagement in the development of antisocial behavior. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 38, 197–209. doi: 10.1007/s10802-009-9358-5

Hymel, S., McClure, R., Miller, M., Shumka, E., and Trach, J. (2015). Addressing school bullying: insights from theories of group processes. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 37, 16–24. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2014.11.008

Hymel, S., Rocke-Hendersson, N., and Bonanno, R. A. (2005). Moral disengagement: a framework for understanding bullying among adolescents. J. Soc. Sci. 8, 1–11.

Iannello, N. M., Camodeca, M., Gelati, C., and Papotti, N. (2021). Prejudice and ethnic bullying among children: the role of moral disengagement and student-teacher relationship. Front. Psychol. 12:713081. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.713081

Ivaniushina, V., and Alexandrov, D. (2022). School structure, bullying by teachers, moral disengagement, and students' aggression: a mediation model. Front. Psychol. 13:883750. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.883750

Jensen, L. A. (Ed.) (2020). The Oxford Handbook of Moral Development: An Interdisciplinary Perspective . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Killen, M., and Smetana, J. G. (Eds.) (2022). Handbook of Moral Development . 3rd Edn. New York: Routledge.

Killer, B., Bussey, K., Hawes, D. J., and Hunt, C. (2019). A meta-analysis of the relationship between moral disengagement and bullying roles in youth. Aggress. Behav. 45, 450–462. doi: 10.1002/ab.21833

Kim, J., Sijtsema, J. J., Thornberg, R., Caravita, S. C. S., and Hong, J. S. (2024). Shaping citizenship in the classroom: peer influences on moral disengagement, social goals, and a sense of peer community. J. Youth Adolesc. 53, 732–743. doi: 10.1007/s10964-023-01916-1

Kloo, M., Thornberg, R., and Wänström, L. (2023). Classroom-level authoritative teaching and its associations with bullying perpetration and victimization. J. Sch. Violence 22, 276–289. doi: 10.1080/15388220.2023.2180746

Kollerová, L., Soukup, P., and Gini, G. (2018). Classroom collective moral disengagement scale: validation in Czech adolescents. Eur. J. Dev. Psychol. 15, 184–191. doi: 10.1080/17405629.2017.1292907

Krause, A., and Smith, J. D. (2023). The interconnected school context: Meta-analyses of the associations between peer aggression involvement and teacher-student relationship closeness. Sch. Psychol. Int. 44, 396–446. doi: 10.1177/01430343221138038

Laninga-Wijnen, L., Yanagida, T., Garandeau, C. F., Malamut, S. T., Veenstra, R., and Salmivalli, C. (2023). Is there really a healthy context paradox for victims of bullying? A longitudinal test of bidirectional within-and between-person associations between victimization and psychological problems. Dev. Psychopathol. , 1–15. doi: 10.1017/S0954579423001384

Lau, C., Wong, M., and Dudovitz, R. (2018). School disciplinary style and adolescent health. J. Adolesc. Health 62, 136–142. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.08.011

Luo, A., and Bussey, K. (2023). Moral disengagement in youth: a meta-analytic review. Dev. Rev. 70:101101. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2023.101101

Malti, T., Galarneau, E., and Peplak, J. (2021). Moral development in adolescence. J. Res. Adolesc. 31, 1097–1113. doi: 10.1111/jora.12639

Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., and Bauer, D. J. (2006). Computational tools for probing interactions in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. J. Educ. Behav. Stat. 31, 437–448. doi: 10.3102/10769986031004437

Sawyer, S. M., Afifi, R. A., Bearinger, L. H., Blakemore, S. J., Dick, B., Ezeh, A. C., et al. (2012). Adolescence: a foundation for future health. Lancet 379, 1630–1640. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60072-5

Sjögren, B., Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., and Gini, G. (2021a). Associations between students’ bystander behavior and individual and classroom collective moral disengagement. Educ. Psychol. 41, 264–281. doi: 10.1080/01443410.2020.1828832

Sjögren, B., Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., and Gini, G. (2021b). Bystander behaviour in peer victimisation: moral disengagement, defender self-efficacy and student-teacher relationship quality. Res. Pap. Educ. 36, 588–610. doi: 10.1080/02671522.2020.1723679

Swedish Education Act, SFS 2010:800 . (2010). Available at: https://rkrattsbaser.gov.se/sfst?bet=2010:800 (Accessed April 16, 2024).

ten Bokkel, I. M., Roorda, D. L., Maes, M., Verschueren, K., and Colpin, H. (2023). The role of affective teacher–student relationships in bullying and peer victimization: a multilevel meta-analysis. Sch. Psychol. Rev. 52, 110–129. doi: 10.1080/2372966X.2022.2029218

Teng, Z., Bear, G. G., Yang, C., Nie, Q., and Guo, C. (2020). Moral disengagement and bullying perpetration: a longitudinal study of the moderating effect of school climate. Sch. Psychol. 35, 99–109. doi: 10.1037/spq0000348

Thornberg, R. (2023). Longitudinal link between moral disengagement and bullying among children and adolescents: a systematic review. Eur. J. Dev. Psychol. 20, 1099–1129. doi: 10.1080/17405629.2023.2191945

Thornberg, R., and Jungert, T. (2014). School bullying and the mechanisms of moral disengagement. Aggress. Behav. 40, 99–108. doi: 10.1002/ab.21509

Thornberg, R., Jungert, T., and Hong, J. S. (2023). The indirect association between moral disengagement and bystander behaviors in school bullying through motivation: structural equation modelling and mediation analysis. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 26, 533–556. doi: 10.1007/s11218-022-09754-y

Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., Gini, G., Varjas, K., Meyers, J., Elmelid, R., et al. (2021). Collective moral disengagement and its associations with bullying perpetration and victimization in students. Educ. Psychol. 41, 952–966. doi: 10.1080/01443410.2020.1843005

Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., and Hymel, S. (2019). Individual and classroom social-cognitive processes in bullying: a short-term longitudinal multilevel study. Front. Psychol. 10:1752. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01752

Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., and Jungert, T. (2018). Authoritative classroom climate and its relations to bullying victimization and bystander behaviors. Sch. Psychol. Int. 39, 663–680. doi: 10.1177/0143034318809762

Troop-Gordon, W., MacDonald, A. P., and Corbitt-Hall, D. J. (2019). Children’s peer beliefs, friendlessness, and friendship quality: reciprocal influences and contributions to internalizing symptoms. Dev. Psychol. 55, 2428–2439. doi: 10.1037/dev0000812

Turner, J. C., and Oakes, P. J. (1989). “Self-categorization theory and social influence” in Psychology of Group Influence . ed. P. B. Paulus . 2nd ed (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum), 233–275.

Walker, J. M. T. (2009). Authoritative classroom management: how control and nurturance work together. Theory Pract. 48, 122–129. doi: 10.1080/00405840902776392

Wang, C., Li, B., Zhang, L., Liu, Y., and Xu, P. (2022). Prosocial behavior and teachers’ attitudes towards bullying on peer victimization among middle school students: examining the cross-level moderating effect of classroom climate. Sch. Psychol. Rev. , 1–14. doi: 10.1080/2372966X.2021.2009313

Wentzel, K. R. (2002). Are effective teachers like good parents? Teaching styles and student adjustment in early adolescence. Child Dev. 73, 287–301. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00406

White, J., Bandura, A., and Bero, L. A. (2009). Moral disengagement in the corporate world. Accountability in Research 16, 41–74. doi: 10.1080/08989620802689847

Yoo, H. N., and Smetana, J. G. (2022). Distinctions between moral and conventional judgments from early to middle childhood: a meta-analysis of social domain theory research. Dev. Psychol. 58, 874–889. doi: 10.1037/dev0001330

Keywords: moral disengagement, collective moral disengagement, authoritative teaching, student-teacher relationship quality, bullying, peer aggression

Citation: Bjärehed M, Sjögren B, Thornberg R, Gini G and Pozzoli T (2024) A short-term longitudinal study on the development of moral disengagement among schoolchildren: the role of collective moral disengagement, authoritative teaching, and student-teacher relationship quality. Front. Psychol . 15:1381015. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1381015

Received: 02 February 2024; Accepted: 09 April 2024; Published: 01 May 2024.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2024 Bjärehed, Sjögren, Thornberg, Gini and Pozzoli. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Marlene Bjärehed, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.