Schools with high relational trust showed marked gains in student learning while schools with weak trust relations saw virtually no improvement in reading or mathematics scores¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr?·q2
Currency · newest study 2002 · checked against its sources 2026-10-18 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2007: baselines and conditions change
Evidence quality · No study behind this claim is a peer-reviewed article with a DOI: it rests on a source with no registered publication record (a web page, book or unpublished report). It is kept because 3 design pages cite it; treat it as a lead to check, not an established finding.
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? In schools with high relational trust, gains in student learning were marked, whereas schools with weak trust relations saw virtually no improvement in reading or mathematics scores. → Bryk 2002
Evidence¶
Bryk 2002¶
Bryk, A. S. and Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in Schools: A Core Resource for Improvement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. https://www.amazon.com
q2 · i? · associational · r?
Overview of a three-year study of reform in 12 Chicago elementary schools drawing on longitudinal survey and achievement data plus interviews. The authors report schools with high relational trust "were also more likely to demonstrate marked gains in student learning," while weak-trust schools saw virtually no improvement.
"As a result, these schools were also more likely to demonstrate marked gains in student learning. In contrast, schools with weak trust relations saw virtually no improvement in their reading or mathematics scores."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Many Annenberg schools had weak human and social resources, including low trust among teachers, limiting their capacity for school development — related
- Fewer than 10 percent of elementary schools with a sustained weakness in one essential support showed improvements in student outcomes (attributed to Bryk et al., 2010) — a broader claim this one bears on
- Elementary schools strong in three or more of the five essential supports were ten times more likely to substantially improve student math and reading scores (attributed to Bryk et al., 2010) — a broader claim this one bears on
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
relational-trust-predicts-learning-gains-chicago-elementary |
title |
Schools with high relational trust showed marked gains in student learning while schools with weak trust relations saw virtually no improvement in reading or mathematics scores |
description |
Schools with high relational trust showed marked gains in student learning while schools with weak trust relations saw virtually no improvement in reading or mathematics scores |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2002 |
source_checked |
2026-10-18 |
recheck_by |
2007 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-08 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — bryk-2002 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.