5.

 Methods
5.1. Participants
Our participants were drawn from a larger study about peer relations at an independent University-
affiliated lab elementary school1 in the Northeast region of the US. We focused our analysis on the
school's mission statement, as publicly posted on their website, a 3rd and 6th grade classroom, their
respective two teachers, and 14 students (six third-graders; Mage = 9.00; SD = 0.56; Girls = 50%;
White = 100%; eight sixth-graders; Mage = 12.06; SD = 0.55; Girls =50%; White = 100%). The student
participants in both classrooms reflected the larger school population—mostly middle to upper
middle class and White. As values analysis requires an in-depth, textual, line-by-line analysis, we
wanted to focus on the richest data possible, while making this labor-intensive study feasible. Our
larger sample included six classrooms, and our initial selection criteria for teacher and class inclusion
included classes where (1) teachers had taught at the school for at least three years (giving them a
chance to develop their teaching practice within that school); (2) same gender teachers (as values and
expectations can be gendered); and (3) classroom participation rates of at least 70%, as lower rates of
participation may not capture the “classroom” level of experience (Hamilton, Fuchs, Fuchs, &
Roberts, 2000).
From our initial criteria we narrowed down our focus to one 3rd and one 6th grade classroom
because of their developmental differences in (a) peer relations and prosocial behaviors (Rubin,
Bukowski, & Parker, 2006), (b) cognitive development (Piaget, 1964), and (c) shifting student-
teacher expectations (Fredriksen & Rhodes, 2004). We had two criteria for student inclusion in this
study: students must have completed both the respect and disrespect narratives and attended the
school for at least three years, which provided ample time for all school stakeholders to get familiar
with the values enacted and negotiated at school. Our focus was to highlight that students who had
been engaged with school values for a substantial period of time do not necessarily follow and enact
school values, because, as we argue, socialization within schools entails the multilateral negotiation
of values, which may result in performing, modifying, or rejecting the given values. Our inclusion
criteria allowed us to understand how respect values are shared and maintained with students who
have spent a significant amount of time at a particular school. The principle author's Institutional
Review Board approved this study.

5.2. Procedures
In accordance with the School's research procedure and IRB approvals, parents were informed in
writing about the purpose, the benefits and risks of the research, the confidentiality protection
procedures, and their right to decline participation. The principal investigator and research assistants
visited the participating classrooms twice in the spring semester and each time before data collection
began, the children were informed of the research purpose, confidentiality, and about their right to
refuse or discontinue participation at any time with no penalty. Children whose parents had given
consent were asked to provide written assent to ensure that they were not coerced into participation.
Children who gave written assent were then given children approximately 20 minutes to respond to
the following narrative prompts “tell about a time you felt respected by a classmate” (March) and
“tell about a time you felt disrespected by a classmate” (April). Before writing, children were told
that these were private stories, in that teachers, the principal, or other students, would not read these
stories. Respect and disrespect were not defined, and if a child asked, researchers responded by
saying, “What do you think it means?” After the children had finished writing, they were instructed
to put their stories into an envelope that the researcher sealed before leaving the classroom, which
ensured that the students' stories would not be shared with others. Children whose parents did not
consent or children who did not provide written assent worked quietly on schoolwork during this
period. Narratives were de-identified and transcribed verbatim.

After attaining written consent, participating teachers were interviewed at the end of the school year.
Each semi-structured interview lasted between 60 and 90 minutes and focused on the teacher's
classroom socialization procedures, goals, and (dis)respect experiences among their respective
students. Example questions included, “what are your social goals and expectations for your
classroom?;” “can you tell me about a time this past year that you discussed respect or disrespect in
the classroom?”; “can you tell me about a time that you observed respect and disrespect occurring
among students in your classroom?” School mission values were identified through the school
mission statement that was found on their website, and we verified the relevance of the school
mission statement with the school's principal. It is important that all of the data was collected at
schools and written in schools, because we wanted the teachers and the students to think about their
stories through the context of the school and their particular classrooms, as we were interested in
value socialization within schools, and this institutional context would allow us to compare enacted
values within a given context. Our interest in the school experience and the collection of data in the
school helps provide further validation of our assembled narrative texts (Polkinghorne, 2007).