Resilient students can be defined those who show outstanding academic achievement despite their low socio-economic status (SES). Although it is well known that there is a negative relationship between SES and achievement of students (Kalender & Berberoglu, 2009; Yayan & Berberoglu, 2004), resilient students somehow develop some ways to overcome the barriers, such as bad family structures, school resources, that result due to low SES (Martin, 2002).

In the literature, there are lots of studies who focused on the relationship between variables and achievement of resilient students such as teacher, problem-solving skills etc. (Aydiner & Kalender, 2014,; Benard, 1993; Findik & Kavak, 2013; OECD, 2010; Rutter & Quinton, 1994).

Investigation of factors influential on low SES students is of significant importance because these factors can help explain mechanisms which make students resilient.  Increasing resiliency rate is not only of importance in increasing academic achievement but also in like stronger social relations, less emotional and behavioural problems and alike (Hanson & Austin, 2003). Furthermore additional help was suggested by OECD to increase academic resiliency of students (OECD, 2013).

But most of studies in the literature focused mean differences in variables, and interaction between them were overestimated. But dependent variables may vary differently in different levels of independent variables (Wigington, Tollefson, & Rodriguez, 1989). Interactions between variables can help explain the resiliency-related models between literacy scores and independent variables since adding interaction terms increase scope of models. This was also supported by the findings reported by Aydin and Kalender (2014) who stated that there is a difference in patterns regarding teacher-related factors between resilient and low-achieving students.

Turkish data of PISA 2012 data set was used for the study. Turkey, a candidate country of European Union, has a special position in resilient student since Turkey is one of the countries which had the highest resiliency rates (OECD, 2013). Mean resiliency rate across OECD members is 6%, whereas in Turkey it was above 40%. Most of the resilient students in Turkey are at 3^rd proficiency level, while disadvantaged student could reach only to 2^nd level in reading literacy.

In the present study, two groups of students were selected: (i) low-SES and low-achievers (non-resilient) and (ii) low-SES and outstandingly high achievers, that is, resilient students. Then, differences in reading levels were compared with respect to some teacher-related factors between two groups. To this end, factorial ANOVAs were conducted with interaction terms to reveal differences between interaction models across resilient and non-resilient groups. Teacher-related factors were selected since they are easier to change than other factors which are known to be related to increasing resiliency.

Findings of the present study are expected to help understanding the mechanisms which make low-SES students resilient. Implication for practice and future studies were also provided.

Aydin, G. & Kalender, I. (2014). Importance levels attributed by resilient and low-achieving students for teacher-related factors in PISA 2012. Paper presented at annual meeting of European Educational Research Association (ECER) in Portugal. Aydiner, A. & Kalender, I. (2014). Problem solving skills-related determinants associated with performance of resilient students in PISA 2012. Paper presented at annual meeting of European Educational Research Association (ECER) in Portugal. Benard, B. (1993). Fostering resiliency in kids. Educational Leadership, 51(3), 44-48. Fındık, L. Y., & Kavak, Y. (2013). Assessing the PISA 2009 Achievement of Disadvantaged Students in Turkey. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 19(2), 249-273. Hanson, T. L. & Austin, G.A. (2003). Are student health risks and low resilience assets an impediment to the academic progress of schools? California Healthy Kids Survey Factsheet 3. Los Alamitos, CA: WestEd. Kalender, I. & Berberoglu, G. (2009). An assessment of factors related to science achievement of Turkish students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(10), 1379-1394. Martin, A. (2002). Motivation and academic resilience: developing a model for student enhancement. Australian Journal of Education, 46(1), 34-49. OECD (2010), PISA 2009 results: overcoming social background: equity in learning opportunities and outcomes (Volume II), OECD Publishing. OECD (2013), PISA 2012 Results: excellence through equity: giving every student the chance to succeed (Volume II), PISA, OECD Publishing. Rutter, M. & Quinton, D. (1994). Long-term follow-up of women institutionalized in childhood: Factors promoting good functioning in adult life. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 18, 225-234. Wigington, H., Tollefson, N., & Rodriguez, E. (1989). Students' ratings of instructors revisited: Interactions among class and instructor variables. Research in Higher Education, 30(3), 331-344. Yayan, B. & Berberoğlu, G. (2004). A re-analysis of the TIMSS 1999 mathematics assessment data of the turkish students. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 30, 87-104.