Special Education Teacher Preparation in Classroom

Management: Implications for Students With Emotional

and Behavioral Disorders

Regina M. Oliver and Daniel J. Reschly

Peabody College of Vanderbilt University

ABSTRACT: Special education teachers’ skills with classroom organization and behavior
management affect the emergence and persistence of behavior problems as well as the success of
inclusive practice for students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD). Adequate special
education teacher preparation and strong classroom organization and behavior management skills
are critical for teachers of students with EBD. Little research has been conducted to determine the
extent to which special education teacher preparation programs provide teachers with adequate
instruction on classroom organization and behavior management techniques. Course syllabi from 26
special education teacher preparation programs were reviewed. Results indicate a highly variable
emphasis on classroom organization and management between programs. Programs tended to
emphasize reactive procedures. Only 27% (n 5 7) of the university programs had an entire course
devoted to classroom management. The remaining 73% (n 5 19) of university programs had content
related to behavior management dispersed within various courses. Limitations and implications for
special education teacher preparation and inclusive practices are discussed.

& The education of students with emotional
and behavioral disorders (EBD) continues to be
a great challenge, due in large part to the
complex nature of the disorder (Reddy &
Richardson, 2006; Reid, Gonzalez, Nordness,
Trout, & Epstein, 2004). Children and adoles-
cents with EBD exhibit a range of chronic
problems that interfere with learning that
include both externalizing behaviors (e.g.,
classroom disruptions, aggression) and inter-
nalizing behavior (e.g., anxiety, social with-
drawal; Kaufman, 2005). Academic deficits
are also pervasive for students with EBD. In a
meta-analysis of the academic abilities of
students with special needs, Reid and col-
leagues (2004) found that students with EBD
had significant deficits in academic achieve-
ment across academic subjects and settings.
Although it is unclear whether academic
difficulties precede behavioral problems or if
behavioral issues create academic difficulties,
researchers currently believe that there is a
reciprocal influence of both (Kauffman, 2005;
Sutherland, Lewis-Palmer, Stichter, & Morgan,
2008). Children who perform low academi-
cally are at greater risk for behavioral problems
because inappropriate behavior typically re-
sults in escape from difficult academic tasks. A
cycle of negative reinforcement is created for
both the teacher and the student in which the
student is reinforced because the demand has
been removed and the teacher is reinforced
because the student and disruptive behavior
have been removed from the classroom. In
fact, children with behavioral problems have
been shown to receive fewer instructional
opportunities (Gunter, Denny, Jack, Shores, &
Nelson, 1993). Because of the behavioral
excesses exhibited by students with EBD,
teacher skills in classroom organization and
behavior management are necessary to ad-
dress these challenging behaviors, attenuate
academic deficits, and support successful
inclusion efforts.
Teachers often find it more challenging to
meet the instructional demands of the class-
room without the expertise and competency to
address disruptive student behavior (Emmer &

188 / May 2010 Behavioral Disorders, 35 (3), 188–199

Stough, 2001). Poor classroom management
typically leads to less instruction and worse
student outcomes (Cameron, Connor, Morrison,
& Jewkes, 2008; Tooke, 1997). In fact, a study
by Espin and Yell (1994) examined teacher
behavior and categorized teachers as effective
or ineffective based on their observations. The
authors identified an inability to manage the
classroom environment with corresponding
high rates of discipline problems and low rates
of teacher responses to those problems as the
main reasons teachers were rated as ineffective
(Espin & Yell, 1994). Unfortunately, students
with EBD are at higher risk for not receiving
adequate instruction due to the disruptive
behaviors typically exhibited by these students
(Gunter et al., 1993). Well-designed and imple-
mented classroom management systems might
allow teachers the opportunity to increase
instruction for students with EBD.
Beyond the issue of adequate instructional
opportunities, early intervention and treatment
for students with EBD are essential to prevent
more serious maladaptive behaviors (Greer-
Chase, Rhodes, & Kellam, 2002; Kauffman,
2005). The progression and malleability of
maladaptive behaviors are affected by class-
room management practices of teachers in the
early grades. Aggressive students in aggressive,
disruptive classroom environments are more
likely to be aggressive in later grades (Greer-
Chase et al., 2002; Kellam, Ling, Merisca,
Hendricks Brown, & Ialongo, 1998; Kellam,
Mayer, Rebok, & Hawkins, 1998). The long-
term effect of classroom management practices
on aggressive student behavior was examined
in a randomized controlled study conducted in
a large urban school district (Greer-Chase et
al., 2002; Kellam, Ling, et al., 1998; Kellam,
Mayer, et al., 1998). A relatively simple
procedure, the Good Behavior Game (Barrish,
Saunders, & Wolf, 1969), was taught to
teachers in one afternoon of continuing
education with a half-day follow-up a few
months later. Rates of disruptive and aggres-
sive behaviors declined significantly in the
experimental classrooms while student en-
gagement increased, and the decreased rates
of aggressive behaviors for boys persisted
through sixth grade. This research highlights
the importance of effective classroom man-
agement practices and the need for teachers to
be adequately prepared in this area.
Adequate preparation in effective class-
room management is increasingly necessary
for special education teachers as greater
Behavioral Disorders, 35 (3), 188–199
numbers of students with significant behavior
problems are integrated into the general
education environment due to the highly
qualified teacher provisions and inclusive
practices mandates of No Child Left Behind
(Reschly, Smartt, Oliver, & Holdheide, 2007).
Special education teachers play a critical role
in the successful inclusion of these students in
three ways. First, special education teachers
can work with general education teachers on
establishing effective classroom management
plans to prevent the worsening of behavioral
problems for students at risk for EBD. Second,
special education teachers can provide a
supportive behavioral environment for stu-
dents already in self-contained settings to
teach important prosocial behavior and skills
necessary to function in general education
settings. Finally, special educators are increas-
ingly taking the role of co-teachers to support
the successful inclusion of students with
significant behavior concerns.
Teacher Preparation
Inadequate general and special education
teacher preparation hinders inclusion efforts.
Specifically, the inclusion of students with
challenging behavior or EBD in regular educa-
tion classrooms is affected by teachers’ abilities
to handle the disruptive behaviors typically
exhibited by these students (Gunter et al.,
1993). General education teachers who feel
inadequately prepared to effectively manage
classrooms, or who report a low ability to
address challenging behaviors, are also (a) less
willing to implement individualized behavior
support plans and reinforcement strategies, (b)
vary reinforcement schedules, and (c) docu-
ment student progress for systematic evaluation
(Baker, 2005). Consequently, behavior support
plans designed to ameliorate the challenging
behaviors exhibited by students with EBD in
general education settings often fail, leading to
placement in more segregated settings. Special
educators can support general education teach-
ers with effective classroom management plans
and behavior management skills to provide
adequate behavior support for students with
challenging behaviors in general education
settings, thus reducing the amount of time
students are placed in self-contained settings.
Adequate special education teacher prep-
aration and strong classroom organization and
behavior management skills are critical for
students with EBD who spend most of their
May 2010 / 189
time in segregated settings (Landrum, Tankers-
ley, & Kauffman, 2003; Oliver & Reschly,
2007). Special education teachers are respon-
sible for teaching students adequate behavior-
al, social, and academic skills to be successful
in inclusive settings. However, research indi-
cates that teachers of students with EBD may
not be adequately prepared, have less experi-
ence, and receive less education (Billingsley,
Fall, & Williams, 2006; Katsiyannis, Zhang, &
Conroy, 2003). In a national longitudinal
survey regarding the education of students
with emotional disturbance, only 25% to 33%
of students in the sample had teachers who
reported receiving at least 8 hr of in-service
training regarding issues related to working
with students with disabilities (Wagner, Friend,
Bursuck, Kutash, Duchnowski, et al., 2006).
Moreover, only 22.9%, 30%, and 13.1% of
elementary, middle, and high school general
education teachers, respectively, strongly
agreed that they had been given adequate
training (Wagner, Friend, et al., 2006). Based
on these data, it appears that many classroom
teachers, in regular and special education
classrooms, believe they are insufficiently
prepared to handle challenging behavior. This
has implications for policy makers and teacher
preparation programs alike because of the
legal requirements regarding inclusion in the
least restrictive educational environment and
access to the general education curriculum.
Classroom Management Practices
The various components of typical class-
room management approaches have been
documented in the literature through observa-
tion studies of effective teachers and experi-
mental studies, although very few experimen-
tal control studies have examined classroom
management specifically (Oliver, 2009). Early
studies collecting observational data on effec-
tive teachers found specific practices that
established effective classroom management.
In a series of studies, Anderson and colleagues
(Anderson & Evertson, 1978; Anderson, Ev-
ertson, & Emmer, 1979) identified five factors
that were associated with better classroom
managers. Teachers were identified as effec-
tive classroom managers if they (a) had clear
expectations about behavior and communicat-
ed them clearly; (b) explicitly taught classroom
rules and routines using examples and non-
examples; (c) acknowledged students for ap-
propriate behavior using behavior-specific
190 / May 2010
praise; (d) provided quick, prompt responses
to inappropriate behavior before behaviors
escalated; and (e) were consistent with conse-
quences to both appropriate and inappropriate
behavior.
Experimental studies have also examined
classroom management approaches as a col-
lection of specific components. Reductions in
disruptive behavior have been found with
packaged interventions using antecedent strat-
egies (e.g., posting of rules, teacher movement,
precision requests), reinforcement strategies
(e.g., token economy, mystery motivator),
and consequence strategies to respond to
inappropriate behavior (e.g., response cost;
Di Martini-Scully, Bray, & Kehle, 2000; Kehle,
Bray, Theodore, Jenson, & Clark, 2000). This
classroom management package of strategies
has also been used to decrease disruptive
behavior for students with EBD (Musser, Bray,
Kehle, & Jenson, 2001).
In their review of the research on class-
room management, Emmer and Stough (2001)
found that teachers who effectively managed
their classrooms focused on prevention rather
than reactive approaches and explicitly taught
desirable student behaviors. Preventive class-
room management practices consist of (a)
structuring the physical environment to ac-
commodate traffic patterns and minimize
distractions as well as structuring instructional
time and transitions, (b) establishing a few
positively stated behavioral expectations that
are linked to the schoolwide plan, (c) identi-
fying rules that provide behavioral examples of
the expectations, (d) establishing routines for
classroom tasks such as turning in homework,
(e) planning to actively teach the rules and
routines, (f) establishing procedures to rein-
force appropriate behavior, (g) using effective
procedures to reduce and respond to inappro-
priate behavior, and (h) collecting data to
monitor student behavior and modify the
classroom management plan as needed (Em-
mer & Stough, 2001; Kerr & Nelson, 2002;
Lewis & Sugai, 1999; Martella, Nelson, &
Marchand-Martella, 2003).
One systematic best evidence review was
conducted to identify evidence-based practic-
es in classroom management in an attempt to
inform research and practice (Simonsen, Fair-
banks, Briesch, Myers, & Sugai, 2008). Re-
searchers in this study initially reviewed 10
classroom management texts to identify typical
topics described within texts and systematical-
ly searched to identify experimental studies
Behavioral Disorders, 35 (3), 188–199
that addressed these topics. The researchers
used criteria for evidence-based similar to the
What Works Clearinghouse criteria to evaluate
the evidence of each practice (Simonsen et al.,
2008). Results of the evaluation of 81 studies
identified 20 general practices that met the
criteria for evidence based. These 20 general
practices fell into five broad categories: (a)
maximize structure and predictability; (b) post,
teach, review, and provide feedback on
expectations; (c) actively engage students in
observable ways; (d) use a continuum of
strategies to acknowledge appropriate behav-
ior; and (e) use a continuum of strategies to
respond to inappropriate behavior (Simonsen
et al., 2008). A range of two to six practices
were classified under each broad category,
and the empirical studies supporting each
practice ranged from three to eight studies
per practice. ‘‘Responding to inappropriate
behavior’’ had the highest amount of empirical
studies, whereas ‘‘maximizing structure and
predictability’’ had the fewest (Simonsen et al.,
2008). Logically, teachers should receive
adequate training on these skills prior to their
first day of teaching. However, to date, little
research has been conducted to determine to
what extent special education teacher prepa-
ration programs provide instruction and super-
vised practice in these areas.
The purpose of the current study was to
examine special education teacher preparation
in classroom organization and behavior man-
agement. A review of course syllabi from 26
special education teacher preparation programs
was conducted to determine if the critical
features of classroom organization and behav-
ior management were included in their courses
of study. An Innovation Configuration (IC) map
(Hall & Hord, 2001) was developed based on a
review of the classroom management literature
and applied to course syllabi to answer the
following questions: (a) Do special education
teacher preparation programs provide adequate
training in classroom organization and behavior
management? and (b) Which components of
classroom organization and behavior manage-
ment are taught more intensely in special
education teacher preparation?
Method
Sample
Data collected for this study were part of a
larger evaluation of institutions of higher
Behavioral Disorders, 35 (3), 188–199
education (IHEs) that included both academic
and behavior. For the purposes of this study,
only classroom management data are reported.
The sample of course syllabi was obtained
from a large Midwestern state. The state
recently updated its special education licen-
sure requirements by removing specific en-
dorsements for licensure (e.g., Learning Dis-
abilities, LD, Seriously Emotionally Disturbed,
SED) and moving to a cross-categorical license
in an effort to improve integration of students
with disabilities in the general education
curriculum. Based on the state board of
education’s desire to evaluate all special
education teacher preparation programs across
the state, permission and authority to solicit
course syllabi were obtained from the state
board of education. A letter from the state
associate superintendent and director of spe-
cial education was then sent to the deans of
the College of Education at all 31 public and
private IHEs. These 31 IHEs comprised the
entire population of special education teacher
preparation programs located in the state. The
IHEs represented in the sample were a mixture
of public and private universities, including
large R1 universities. Each dean was asked to
submit a copy of each course syllabus that was
required as part of the licensing requirement
for special education teacher certification at
their IHE. If necessary, a follow-up letter was
sent encouraging submission of course syllabi
followed by additional reminder e-mails.
Course syllabi from 26 IHEs were ob-
tained, for an overall response rate of 83.9%.
Each course syllabus was reviewed for content
related to classroom management. If a sylla-
bus had any content that could be rated on the
measurement instrument used in this study, it
was included in the sample. The rationale for
rating any course containing content that
could be scored on the IC was based on the
fact that not every IHE had an entire course
devoted to classroom management but rather
content dispersed throughout courses. A sample
of 135 course syllabi was identified and used for
this review. Syllabi were identified as either
courses on classroom management (n 5 7) or
courses containing content related to classroom
organization and behavior management (n 5
128). This sample included courses specific to
individualized behavior management. Syllabi
that did not contain content related to classroom
organization or behavior management were
excluded from this review (e.g., a course
syllabus related only to reading).
May 2010 / 191
Measurement
Course syllabi review was used as the
primary data collection method for two pri-
mary reasons. First, course syllabi are used
widely as important indicators of program
quality in accreditation, teacher licensing,
and research (Steiner & Rozen, 2004; Walsh,
Glaser, Wilcox, 2006). Second, course syllabi
are almost always prepared in higher educa-
tion coursework, easily accessed, and an
efficient reflection of course content and
experiences. Although course syllabi may not
contain all information related to actual
content and experiences, it is a relatively
strong indicator of the scope and sequence of
a university course.
Instrument
The authors developed a rubric based on
the format of an IC (Hall & Hord, 2001) to
measure the degree to which the essential
components of classroom management are
represented in coursework required for certifi-
cation. Innovation Configurations have been
used for at least 30 years in the development
and implementation of educational innova-
tions (Hall & Hord, 2001; Hall, Loucks,
Rutherford, & Newton, 1975; Hord, Ruther-
ford, Huling-Austin, & Hall, 1987; Roy &
Hord, 2004). These tools were originally
developed by experts in a national research
center studying educational change and are
used in the Concerns Based Adoption Model
(Hall & Hord, 2001) as a professional devel-
opment tool. They have also been used for
program evaluation (Roy & Hord, 2004).
An IC identifies and describes the major
components of a practice or innovation. With
ICs, innovations are assessed along a contin-
uum of configurations, ranging from nonuse to
ideal implementation practice. An instrument
parallel to an IC was developed to describe the
range of implementation of teacher prepara-
tion coursework related to classroom organi-
zation and behavior management at various
levels of implementation. In this case, imple-
mentation refers to whether the critical com-
ponents are being taught with supervised
experience as evidenced by course syllabi.
The classroom organization and manage-
ment rubric was constructed in a table listing
essential components and degree of imple-
mentation. Essential components of classroom
organization and behavior management were
listed in the rows of the far left column, along
192 / May 2010
with descriptors and examples to guide appli-
cation of the criteria to course syllabi. For
instance, under the essential component Ac-
tive Supervision and Student Engagement were
the examples teacher scans, moves in unpre-
dictable ways, and monitors student behavior;
teacher uses more positive to negative teacher-
student interactions; teacher provides high
rates of opportunities for students to respond;
and teacher uses multiple observable ways to
engage students (e.g., response cards, peer
tutoring). The content validity of the classroom
organization and behavior management rubric
is based on a review of research and practice
(e.g., Simonsen et al., 2008). The essential
components developed were (a) structured
environment, (b) active supervision and stu-
dent engagement, (c) schoolwide behavioral
expectations, (d) classroom rules, (e) classroom
routines, (f) encouragement of appropriate
behavior, and (g) behavior reduction strategies.
Bulleted items accompanied each component
to provide further detail regarding the definition
of each component (e.g., group contingencies).
The second dimension used in the rubric
was the degree of implementation. In the top
row, several levels of implementation were
defined, ranging from the lowest level of
implementation to the highest level. Increasing
levels of implementation were assigned pro-
gressively higher scores from 0 to 4. Each level
required evidence of implementation from
lower levels plus requirements for that level.
Descriptors used were (0) no evidence that the
component is included in the course syllabi, (1)
syllabi mentioned the component, (2) required
readings and tests and/or quizzes, (3) required
assignments or projects for application and
finally the highest level of implementation,
and (4) teaching application with feedback.
Scores to represent different levels of
implementation were created on an ordinal
scale in which a higher score indicated a more
thorough implementation of an IC component.
These scale points cannot, however, be
interpreted as if the intervals between the
scores are equal. That is, the difference
between 1 and 2 cannot be assumed to be
the same amount as the difference between 3
and 4. Furthermore, a score of 4 indicates more
thorough implementation than a score of 2, but
it cannot be interpreted as twice as much of
some quality as a score of 2. A copy of the
Classroom Organization and Behavior Manage-
ment IC (Oliver & Reschly, 2007) can be
obtained from the primary author upon request.
Behavioral Disorders, 35 (3), 188–199
Course Syllabi Rating
Researchers were trained on the use of the
IC over a 2-week period of time. The research
assistant had 11 years of experience in the field
of education working for a state department of
education. The first author was a doctoral
student in special education at the time of the
study with 6 years of experience in education
as well as the primary developer of the IC.
Prior to the syllabi review, two raters indepen-
dently scored a small sample of course syllabi
and discussed the scoring criteria until 100%
agreement was reached. Once researchers
were trained, the IC was used to rate each
course syllabus related to classroom organiza-
tion and behavior management.
Each course syllabus from all universities
was rated for each component of the IC;
however, the analysis of the results was at
the university syllabi level rather than individ-
ual course level. Therefore, a final score on
each IC component was given to each
university based on the highest rating that
was obtained. For example, a university might
have several courses related to behavior, and
each syllabus was rated on the IC component
‘‘structured environment.’’ Individual course
syllabus scores may have ranged from 0 to 3,
but the university would receive a final score
of 3 for that IC component based on the
highest individual course syllabus score re-
ceived. Results are reported at the university
level of analysis. The rationale for a university-
level score relates to the unit of analysis in the
research question. That is, the state department
of education and the researchers desired to
evaluate each IHE in terms of how they were
preparing individuals enrolled in special edu-
cation teacher preparation programs on class-
room management content and supervised
practice. If the purpose of the study had been
to develop improvement plans for IHEs, a
within-university analysis would have been a
more appropriate analysis.
Interrater Reliability
From the total 135 course syllabi that
covered classroom management, 25% (n 5
31) were randomly selected by researchers to
be evaluated for interrater reliability. Two
raters independently scored the same syllabi
at separate points in time. The secondary rater
scored the syllabi in the opposite order as the
primary rater to control for observer drift. Two
methods, exact agreement and adjacent agree-
Behavioral Disorders, 35 (3), 188–199
ments, were determined for reliability by the
following formula:
Total IC components exact points
Total IC components exact pointszmisses
|100%
Exact agreements occurred when both
raters awarded the same number of points for
a specific IC component. The exact agree-
ments were totaled for each IC component and
placed in the numerator of the above formula.
The exact agreements plus the misses were
totaled and entered as the denominator.
Adjacent number agreements were also
studied. An adjacent number agreement oc-
curred if the two raters independently rated an
IC component within 1 point. For example, on
the classroom rules component of the IC, an
adjacent number agreement occurred if the
two independent ratings were within 1 point of
each other. In a second analysis, adjacent
agreements were totaled and entered in the
numerator. In the second analysis, the denom-
inator was composed of the adjacent agree-
ments plus the misses (2 or more points apart).
Exact agreement and adjacent agreement
reliability results were 86% and 97%, respec-
tively. These reliability scores are sufficient for
the purposes of this research.
Results
The syllabi scores on the classroom
organization and behavior management IC
were highly variable (see Table 1). Only 27%
(n 5 7) of the university special education
programs had an entire course devoted to
classroom management. The remaining 73%
(n 5 19) of university programs had content
related to behavior management dispersed
within various courses or had courses specific
to individual behavior management interven-
tions. The highest component ratings obtained
were for the behavior reduction strategies
component, in which 96% (n 5 25) of the
university programs received scores of either 3
(thorough coverage in class) or 4 (teaching
application with feedback). Second to behav-
ior reduction strategies, 58% (n 5 15) of
university programs scored either 3 or 4 on
the IC component for encouragement of
appropriate behavior. A breakdown of each
IC component by the percentage of universi-
ties scoring 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 is provided in
Figure 1.
May 2010 / 193
 TABLE 1
Percentages of 26 University Programs Meeting Classroom Management Essential Components
IC Component 0 1 2 3 4
Structured environment 54 8 8 19 12
Active supervision and student engagement 65 12 8 4 12
Schoolwide behavioral expectations 62 4 15 8 12
Classroom rules 42 0 19 27 12
Classroom routines 50 8 0 23 19
Encouragement of appropriate behavior 19 12 12 31 27
Behavior reduction strategies 0 0 4 31 65

Note. Values are rounded percentages of universities scoring at each Innovation Configuration (IC) level. 0 5 no evidence, 1 5
syllabi mentioned component, 2 5 required readings and/or test and/or quizzes, 3 5 required assignments or projects for
application, 4 5 teaching application with feedback.

Results indicated that universities provided The emphasis on behavior reduction

less preparation in other components of the IC,
particularly structured environment, active
supervision and student engagement, school-
wide behavioral expectations, and classroom
routines. More than half of the universities’
scores indicated no evidence of these compo-
nents in their course syllabi. Surprisingly, the
classroom rules component of the IC was
notably underrepresented in course syllabi as
well; more than 42% (n 5 11) of university
programs had no courses in which the topic of
establishing classroom rules was mentioned in
any syllabus. Considering the fundamental
importance of preventive strategies such as
establishing behavioral expectations and rules,
these results are sources of significant concern.
strategies and encouragement of appropriate
behavior found in the course syllabi reviewed
may very likely meet significant needs of many
students with EBD in inclusive settings. Scores
indicate that special education teacher prepa-
ration programs are providing content on
reactive, behavior reduction procedures and
some supervised experience. However, further
emphasis on preventive strategies such as
schoolwide positive behavior supports and
classroom rules and routines likely would
enhance successful integration of students with
EBD by teaching appropriate behavior and
preventing disruptive behavior. Coursework
should contain content in these areas as well
as supervised experience.

Figuer 1. Percentages of 26 University Programs Scoring 0 to 4 for Each IC Component.

194 / May 2010 Behavioral Disorders, 35 (3), 188–199

Discussion
Effective classroom organization and be-
havior management are essential skills for any
teacher, particularly teachers of students with
EBD and other behavioral challenges (Gunter
& Denny, 1996). In general, observations in
applied, special education classroom settings
indicate poor classroom practices occurring
and a lack of teacher skills in establishing
environments that support the needs of stu-
dents with behavioral challenges (Gunter et
al., 1993). The purpose of the current study
was to examine one state’s preparation of
special education teachers in the area of
classroom management to establish if this lack
of observed effective classroom procedures is
related to teacher preparation in the area of
classroom management. Previous research on
classroom management indicates that effective
managers use preventive procedures such as
clear and consistent classroom rules and
routines, structured environment, and active
supervision and student engagement (Ander-
son & Evertson, 1978; Espin & Yell, 1994;
Simonsen et al., 2008).
To determine the level of preparation for
special educators, an IC was developed and
used to evaluate course syllabi to determine
the extent of classroom management content
and supervised practice represented in course-
work required for special education teacher
licensure. Course syllabi were rated based on
the degree of implementation of essential
classroom management components from no
evidence to the highest level of implementa-
tion including supervised practice. The results
suggest a conspicuous absence of comprehen-
sive, classroom management procedures in
course syllabi. More specifically, the majority
of attention in course syllabi was placed on
reactive procedures to reduce inappropriate
behavior with little attention given to preven-
tion strategies. These findings mirror field
observations in which primary classroom
management has placed a heavy reliance on
punitive, reactive procedures (Shores, Gunter,
& Jack, 1993).
Given the role of disordered behavior in
identifying students for special education, one
would expect that special educators would
have a higher degree of preparation and
training on classroom organization and behav-
ior management. The results from the sample
of universities in this study suggest special
education teachers may not be adequately
Behavioral Disorders, 35 (3), 188–199
prepared to meet the behavioral needs of
diverse learners. The most surprising result in
this study, however, was that only 7 of the 26
universities had an entire course devoted to
classroom management. The majority of IHEs
in this sample provided some level of class-
room organization and behavior management
throughout coursework, although the level of
detail and quantity varied.
Whether a concentrated course with su-
pervised practice is a superior training ap-
proach to interspersing classroom manage-
ment content throughout a number of courses
is unknown. Although it is unclear what
method of teaching classroom management
strategies provides adequate teacher prepara-
tion for implementation and maintenance, it is
interesting to note that other instructional
topics (e.g., reading) often have at least one
course devoted to the topic in preservice
teacher preparation (Smartt & Reschly, 2007).
Which approach is most effective for teaching
classroom management strategies is probably
an empirical question. What is clear is that in
comparison with other preservice content, the
coverage of classroom management practices
seems woefully inadequate. If these results
from one large state are indicative of special
education teacher preparation across the
country in general, much needs to be done
to provide special education teachers with
classroom management knowledge and skills
necessary to establish contexts that support the
academic and behavioral needs of all students
with behavioral challenges.
Recommendations for Future Research
One area of future research is the exam-
ination of preventive classroom management
strategies for special education teachers. Al-
though there has been significant observation-
al research on effective classroom manage-
ment and single-subject research on individ-
ualized strategies for changing behavior,
there does not appear to be research-based
consensus in the field regarding what needs to
be taught for universal classroom management
procedures (Oliver, 2009). More research has
been done and more is known about the use of
individualized approaches for students with
behavioral concerns, for example, functional
behavioral assessments. Future research should
experimentally examine universal classroom
management approaches to establish what
practices are necessary to provide the maxi-
May 2010 / 195
mum benefit and therefore what should be
taught in special education teacher preparation
programs.
Another area for future research is to
determine the appropriate approach for pre-
paring preservice teachers to be highly skilled
and fluent with classroom organization and
behavior management principles prior to their
first day of teaching. Research should deter-
mine whether classroom organization and
behavior management are taught most effec-
tively in sections throughout the curriculum, in
one concentrated course, or a combination of
the two. Teacher reports (Baker, 2005; Siebert,
2005) indicate inadequate preparation in the
area, but what is not known is the appropriate
amount of content knowledge, practice, and
support that is optimal to prepare teachers to
address the behavioral challenges of today’s
classrooms. A greater understanding of how to
adequately prepare teachers will likely ame-
liorate some of the issues around teacher
retention and persistence in the field.
Future research should also investigate
the preparation of general education teachers
in classroom organization and behavior man-
agement and how this training intersects with
or parallels what special educators are being
taught. Prevention of more serious behavior
concerns begins in the early grades when
students are still involved and participating in
general education. Therefore, general educa-
tion teachers play a significant role in these
preventive efforts, and special education
teachers have the opportunity to work with
general education teachers in these efforts.
Special education teachers who take part in
prereferral teams can identify weaknesses in
universal classroom management in the gen-
eral education context, thereby preventing
improperly diagnosed students as behavioral
disordered. A greater understanding of wheth-
er general and special educators are being
trained with prevention of behavioral disor-
ders as a focus of universal classroom
management procedures is necessary to en-
hance prevention efforts and inclusive prac-
tices.
Implications for Inclusive Practices and
Special Education Teacher Preparation
Inadequate special education teacher
preparation in classroom organization and
behavior management presents several signif-
icant barriers. These results indicate possible
196 / May 2010
barriers to the inclusion of students with EBD
and other disabilities in general education
settings. Teachers who are insufficiently pre-
pared in preventive classroom management
practices may lean toward the use of more
reactive procedures. The use of reactive
procedures such as time-out and removal from
the classroom excludes students from general
education and access to the general education
curriculum. Moreover, students may be placed
in more restrictive settings due to insufficient
management in the regular education class-
room. Special education teachers who are
inadequately prepared hinder inclusion efforts
because students with EBD do not learn the
skills necessary to be successful in general
education settings.
Second, inadequate teacher preparation
may also act as a barrier to the prevention of
behavioral disorders. Young children with
aggressive, disruptive behaviors, particularly
boys, will remain disruptive and aggressive in
later grades without preventive classroom
management procedures (Greer-Chase et al.,
2002; Kellam, Ling, et al., 1998; Kellam,
Mayer, et al., 1998; van Lier, Muthen, van
der Sar & Grijnen, 2004). Effective classroom
organization and behavior management can
prevent the progression of maladaptive behav-
iors that place children at risk for EBD.
Insufficient teacher preparation in classroom
management is a barrier to the prevention of
behavioral disorders.
Finally, inadequate teacher preparation
hinders successful early intervention and
response-to-intervention (RTI) efforts in gen-
eral education. Inclusive in the conceptuali-
zation of a three-tier system of support is the
assumption of strong core programs at Tier I,
including classroom organization and behav-
ior management. If classroom behavior is
ineffectively managed, indicating a weak
core program, it is more likely that larger
percentages of students will be identified
inaccurately and referred for additional sup-
port. Moreover, the success of Tier II inter-
ventions will likely be hindered by poorly
managed classroom environments that in-
clude high rates of off-task behavior and less
instructional time. Effective classroom man-
agement is an essential part of successful
early intervention and RTI systems of support.
Comprehensive teacher preparation in all
components of classroom organization and
behavior management therefore is required at
the preservice level.
Behavioral Disorders, 35 (3), 188–199
Limitations
There are several limitations to these
findings. First, the content validity of the
components of the classroom organization
and behavior management IC used to rate
course syllabi has not been directly validated
through research with the IC but rather is
based on other supporting research of each
component. A second limitation is what
information can be obtained about special
education teacher preparation from a review
of course syllabi alone. Course syllabi are a
valid representation of what is taught in
teacher preparation programs only to the
extent that the syllabi information is accurate
and the content, learning activities, and
experiences are actually implemented in the
course as described. Third, although the large
percentage of programs participating in this
research represents a large proportion in the
state, the generalizability of these results is
limited to the IHEs with special education
teacher preparation programs participating in
this evaluation and the degree to which the
syllabi submitted were the actual syllabi used
in courses. Finally, the course syllabi re-
viewed were only for required courses for
the special education license, so it is unclear
how well classroom organization and behav-
ior management components are implement-
ed in the preparation of general education
teachers. Although it appeared that many
courses were required in both general educa-
tion and special education requirements,
required courses for general education were
not studied directly.
Conclusion
As schools struggle to meet significant
requirements of inclusive practices for students
with EBD and the educational and behavioral
needs of all students, the adequate preservice
preparation of teachers becomes critical.
Federal law embraces teacher quality as a
critical factor in improving achievement,
prevention of learning and behavioral disor-
ders, and attaining broad outcomes such as
school completion and positive early adult
participation in education and careers (Ele-
mentary and Secondary Education Act, 2002;
IDEA Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act, 2004, 2006). Examination of special
education teacher preparation programs in
classroom organization and management in-
Behavioral Disorders, 35 (3), 188–199
dicates both inadequate preservice teacher
preparation and potential barriers to inclusive
educational practices. This has implications for
school leadership and teacher preparation
programs alike.
REFERENCES
Anderson, L. M., & Evertson, C. M. (1978). Class-
room organization at the beginning of school:
Two case studies. Austin, TX: Research and
Development Center for Teacher Education.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED166193)
Anderson, L. M., Evertson, C. M., & Emmer, E. T.
(1979). Dimensions in classroom management
derived from recent research. Austin, TX:
Research and Development Center for Teacher
Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Ser-
vice No. ED166193)
Baker, P. H. (2005). Managing student behavior:
How ready are teachers to meet the challenge?
American Secondary Education, 33, 51–64.
Barrish, H., Saunders, M., & Wolf, M. (1969). Good
behavior game: Effects of individual contingen-
cies for group consequences on disruptive
behavior in a classroom. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 2, 119–124.
Billingsley, B. S., Fall, A. M., & Williams, T. O.
(2006). Who is teaching students with emotional
and behavioral disorders? A profile and com-
parison to other special educators. Behavioral
Disorders, 31, 252–264.
Cameron, C. E., Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., &
Jewkes, A. M. (2008). Effects of classroom
organization on letter-word reading in first grade.
Journal of School Psychology, 46, 173–192.
Di Martini-Scully, D., Bray, M. A., & Kehle, T. J.
(2000). A packaged intervention to reduce
disruptive behaviors in general education stu-
dents. Psychology in the Schools, 37, 149–156.
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (No Child
Left Behind) of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107, 115 Stat.
14 (2002).
Emmer, E. T., & Stough, L. M. (2001). Classroom
management: A critical part of educational
psychology, with implications for teacher edu-
cation. Educational Psychologist, 36, 103–112.
Espin, C. A., & Yell, M. L. (1994). Critical indicators
of effective teaching for preservice teachers:
Relationships between teaching behaviors and
ratings of effectiveness. Teacher Education and
Special Education, 17, 154–169.
Greer-Chase, M., Rhodes, W. A., & Kellam, S. G.
(2002). Why the prevention of aggressive
disruptive behaviors in middle school must
begin in elementary school. The Clearing
House, 5, 242–245.
Gunter, P., & Denny, R. (1996). Research issues and
needs regarding teacher use of classroom
management strategies. Behavioral Disorders,
22, 15–20.
May 2010 / 197
Gunter, P. L., Denny, R. K., Jack, S. L., Shores, R. E.,
& Nelson, C. M. (1993). Aversive stimuli in
academic interactions between students with
serious emotional disturbance and their teach-
ers. Behavioral Disorders, 18, 265–274.
Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2001). Implementing
change: Principles, patterns and potholes. Need-
ham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Hall, G. E., Loucks, S. F., Rutherford, W. L., &
Newton, B. W. (1975). Levels of use of the
innovation: A framework for analyzing innova-
tion adoption. Journal of Teacher Education, 26,
52–56.
Hord, S., Rutherford, W., Huling-Austin, L., & Hall,
G. (1987). Taking charge of change. Alexandria,
VA: ASCD.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement
Act 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq. 34 C.F.R. 300 (2004,
2006).
Katsiyannis, A., Zhang, D., & Conroy, M. A. (2003).
Availability of special education teachers:
Trends and issues. Remedial and Special Edu-
cation, 24, 246–251.
Kauffman, J. M. (2005). Characteristics of emotional
and behavioral disorders of children and youth
(8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education.
Kehle, T. J., Bray, M. A., Theodore, L. A., Jenson, W.
R., & Clark, E. (2000). A multi-component
intervention designed to reduce disruptive class-
room behavior. Psychology in the Schools, 37,
475–481.
Kellam, S., Ling, X., Merisca, R., Hendricks Brown,
C., & Ialongo, N. (1998). The effect of the level
of aggression in the first grade classroom on the
course and malleability of aggressive behavior
into middle school. Development and Psycho-
pathology, 10, 165–185.
Kellam, S. G., Mayer, L. S., Rebok, G. W., &
Hawkins, W. E. (1998). The effects of improving
achievement on aggressive behavior and im-
proving aggressive behavior on achievement
through two prevention interventions: An inves-
tigation of causal paths. In B. Dohrenwend (Ed.),
Adversity, stress, and psychpathology (pp. 486–
505). New York: Oxford Press.
Kerr, M. M., & Nelson, C. M. (2002). Strategies for
addressing behavior problems in the classroom
(5th ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Landrum, T. J., Tankersley, M., & Kauffman, J. M.
(2003). What’s special about special education
for students with emotional and behavioral
disorders? Journal of Special Education, 37,
148–156.
Lewis, T. J., & Sugai, G. (1999). Effective behavior
support: A systems approach to proactive
schoolwide management. Focus on Exceptional
Children, 31, 1–24.
Martella, R. C., Nelson, J. R., & Marchand-Martella,
N. E. (2003). Managing disruptive behaviors in
the schools: A schoolwide, classroom, and
198 / May 2010
individualized social learning approach. Boston,
MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Musser, E. H., Bray, M. A., Kehle, T. J., & Jenson, W.
R. (2001). Reducing disruptive behaviors in
students with serious emotional disturbance.
School Psychology Review, 30, 294–304.
Oliver, R. M. (2009). The effects of teachers’
universal classroom management practices on
behavior: A meta-analysis. Unpublished manu-
script.
Oliver, R. M., & Reschly, D. J. (2007, December).
NCCTQ connections paper. Improving out-
comes in general and special education: Teach-
er preparation and professional development in
effective classroom management. Washington,
DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teach-
er Quality.
Reddy, L. A., & Richardson, F. D. (2006). School-
based prevention and intervention programs for
children with emotional disturbance. Education
and Treatment of Children, 29, 379–404.
Reid, R., Gonzalez, J. E., Nordness, P. D., Trout, A.,
& Epstein, M. H. (2004). A meta-analysis of the
academic status of students with emotional/
behavioral disturbance. Journal of Special Edu-
cation, 38, 130–143.
Reschly, D., Smartt, S., Oliver, R., & Holdheide, L.
(2007). Innovation configurations to improve the
availability of highly qualified teachers for
students with disabilities and at-risk character-
istics. Washington, DC: National Comprehen-
sive Center for Teacher Quality.
Roy, P., & Hord, S. M. (2004). Innovation configu-
rations chart a measured course toward change.
Journal of Staff Development, 25, 54–58.
Shores, R. E., Gunter, P. L., & Jack, S. L. (1993).
Classroom management strategies: Are they
setting events for coercion? Behavioral Disor-
ders, 18, 92–102.
Siebert, C. J. (2005). Promoting preservice teacher’s
success in classroom management by leveraging
a local union’s resources: A professional devel-
opment school initiative. Education, 125,
385–392.
Simonsen, B., Fairbanks, S., Briesch, A., Myers, D., &
Sugai, G. (2008). Evidence-based practices in
classroom management: Considerations for re-
search to practice. Education and Treatment of
Children, 31, 351–380.
Smartt, S. M., & Reschly, D. J. (2007). Barriers to the
preparation of highly qualified teachers in
reading (TQ Research and Policy Brief). Wash-
ington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for
Teacher Quality.
Steiner, D. M., & Rozen, S. D. (2004). Preparing
tomorrow’s teachers: An analysis of syllabi from
a sample of America’s schools of education. In
F. M. Hess, A. J. Rotherham, & K. Walsh (Eds.),
A qualified teacher in every classroom? Apprais-
ing old answers and new ideas (pp. 119–
148). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Behavioral Disorders, 35 (3), 188–199
Sutherland, K. S., Lewis-Palmer, T., Stichter, J., & learning. Washington, DC: National Council on
Morgan, P. L. (2008). Examining the influence Teacher Quality.
of teacher behavior and classroom context
on the behavioral and academic outcomes
for students with emotional and behavioral AUTHORS’ NOTE
disorders. Journal of Special Education, 41,
223–233. Preparation of this article was funded in part
Tooke, J. (1997). Middle school math teachers: What by the National Comprehensive Center for
do they need from preservice programs? The
Teacher Quality (S283B050051). The opinions
Clearing House, 71, 51–52.
expressed in this article are those of the
van Lier, P. A. C., Muthén, B. O., van der Sar, R. M.,
& Crijnen, A. A. M. (2004). Preventing disrup- authors and do not necessarily reflect those
tive behavior in elementary schoolchildren: of the funding agency.
Impact of a universal classroom-based interven-
tion. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychol- Address correspondence to Regina M. Oliver,
ogy, 72, 467–478. Peabody #228, 230 Appleton Place, Nash-
Wagner, M., Friend, M., Bursuck, W., Kutash, K., ville, TN 37203-5721; E-mail: regina.m.
Duchnowski, A., Sumi, W., & Epstein, M. oliver@vanderbilt.edu.
(2006). Educating students with emotional dis-
turbances: A national perspective on school
programs and services. Journal of Emotional and
Behavioral Disorders, 14, 12–30.
MANUSCRIPT
Walsh, K., Glaser, D. R., & Wilcox, D. D. (2006).
What education schools aren’t teaching about Initial Acceptance: 3/28/08
reading and what elementary teachers aren’t Final Acceptance: 2/27/09

Behavioral Disorders, 35 (3), 188–199 May 2010 / 199