Journal of Education for Teaching

International research and pedagogy

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/cjet20

First-year primary teachers’ classroom

management strategies: Perceptions of use,
confidence, and effectiveness

Stuart Woodcock & Andrea Reupert

To cite this article: Stuart Woodcock & Andrea Reupert (29 May 2023): First-year primary
teachers’ classroom management strategies: Perceptions of use, confidence, and effectiveness,
Journal of Education for Teaching, DOI: 10.1080/02607476.2023.2219218

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2023.2219218

© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group.

Published online: 29 May 2023.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1386

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cjet20
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR TEACHING
https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2023.2219218

First-year primary teachers’ classroom management

strategies: Perceptions of use, confidence, and effectiveness
a b
Stuart Woodcock and Andrea Reupert
a
School of Education and Professional Studies, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia; bKrongrold School of
Educational Psychology and Counselling, Faculty of Education, Monash University Clayton, Melbourne,
Australia

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

As newly qualified teachers begin their teaching career, the Received 7 January 2021
first year can be a challenging one where they need to learn new Accepted 30 April 2023
skills and handle many stresses, including classroom management. KEYWORDS
Managing the class in order to teach is a challenging skill for newly Classroom management;
qualified teachers. This study investigated 156 primary school tea­ prevention; correction;
chers who are based in New South Wales, Australia, in their first year differentiation; rewards
of teaching and their classroom management strategies. The results
showed that newly qualified teachers frequently employ rewards,
preventative strategies, differentiated strategies, and low-level cor­
rective approaches. They were most confident using rewards and
preventative strategies. Furthermore, they found that low-level
correction strategies were not as effective as other strategies,
such as rewards, prevention, and differentiated approaches. As
new teachers transition from pre-service into in-service teachers, it
is important to support them and provide appropriate professional
development opportunities.

The first year of teaching can be challenging. Amongst the many skills that first-year
teachers need to develop, classroom management is arguably one of the most important,
but challenging to acquire. Though the research is clear that pre-service (trainee) and
beginning teachers struggle to manage their class (Dicke et al. 2015; Woodcock and
Reupert 2017), it is less clear which classroom management strategies they employ nor
which strategies they feel confident using. Being able to effectively promote teaching and
learning is essential for all teachers, and especially pertinent for beginning teachers as
a foundation for their future career. It is important to know about the specific classroom
management skills beginning teachers use, what they feel confident using and what they
perceive as effective. Such information can be used to inform initial teacher education
programmes and professional development activities so that the transition into the
profession is eased and beginning teachers’ positive impact on students is strengthened.
A frequently cited definition of classroom management comes from the
Handbook of Classroom Management (Evertson and Weinstein 2006, 4) which

CONTACT Stuart Woodcock s.woodcock@griffith.edu.au School of Education and Professional Studies, Griffith
University, Brisbane, Australia
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any med­
ium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. The terms on which this article
has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.
2 S. WOODCOCK AND A. REUPERT

suggested it involves ‘the actions teachers take to create an environment that

supports and facilitates both academic and social-emotional learning’. Effective class­
room management is a main predictor of student learning (Emmer and Sabornie
2015; Marquez et al. 2016) and self-directed learning (Rothstein 2000). Conversely,
concerns regarding classroom management can lead to teacher strain, low levels of
wellbeing, and is one of the main causes for teacher attrition, especially in the first
five years of teaching (Arnup and Bowles 2016). According to Darling-Hammond
et al. (2009), anxiety around classroom management was a major concern for
beginner teachers. Nonetheless, according to Podolsky et al. (2016) only 45% of
early career teachers reported addressing classroom management issues during their
induction programme.
Several studies have found that pre-service teachers do not understand the com­
plex interrelationships among classroom management, behaviour, and learning, and
their role in balancing these demands. Reupert and Woodcock (2010) surveyed 336
Canadian pre-service teachers and found that when managing misbehaviour, pre-
service teachers focus predominately on reactive, short-term responses, including
moving closer to a student, rather than investing in long-term proactive strategies,
such as building relationships with students. These gaps may be the result of inade­
quate teacher preparation programmes. In the US, Oliver and Reschly (2010) reviewed
teacher preparation programmes by examining course syllabi and found only 27% of
the universities included subjects on classroom management. Another Australian study
found that classroom management content was not given sufficient coverage (O’Neill
and Stephenson 2011). Likewise, principals and senior teachers indicated that begin­
ning teachers are inadequately prepared to manage their classrooms (Freeman et al.
2014). Despite the considerable differences in teacher preparation programmes around
the world, Dicke et al. (2015) pointed out that a common concern for beginning
teachers was classroom management.
Some studies have shown that experience, even in the early stages of a teacher’s
career, makes a difference to the way they manage their classrooms. For example, one
study examined the differences between the types of classroom management strategies
124 English primary student teachers used at the start and at the end of a one-year
teaching programme (which included field work experiences), finding a significant
increase in the use of preventative strategies over the year (Reupert and Woodcock
2015). Similarly, longer teacher preparation programmes were related to higher classroom
management preparedness scores of teachers from the United Kingdom and United
States of America (Boe, Shin, and Cook 2007; Kee 2012). Likewise, in Australia, those
who attended a four-year teacher preparation programme compared to those who had
attended a one-year programme employed significantly more prevention-based strate­
gies (Woodcock and Reupert 2013).
Other studies demonstrated further gains once teachers commenced teaching, even
after a relatively short period of time. In Turkey, Akdağ and Haserb (2017) followed 16
early childhood educators in their first year and found that though all participants were
concerned about their ability to manage their classes, when they started they experienced
fewer problems than expected. This was chiefly due to building relationships with the
children and involving children in setting classroom rules. In a mixed-method study of
primary and secondary beginning teachers working in urban US schools, Kwok (2017)
 JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR TEACHING 3

found that participants were beginning to appreciate the complexities of managing the
classroom environment and focus on both student behaviour as well as learning.
Overall however, many beginning teachers struggle in managing their classroom. On
the basis of review of papers in the field, Dicke et al. (2015) claimed that problems with
classroom management are the biggest threat to new teachers. Similarly, Girardet (2018)
highlighted the disjoint between teacher preparatory programmes and the traditional
school culture confronted by beginning teachers, where their beliefs about effective
teaching practices were challenged, and where they needed to comply with schools’
expectations for predominantly teacher-centred practices, rather than student-centred
approaches.
Though the research is clear that beginning teachers need more support in classroom
management, the specific areas of strength, as well as those that require further devel­
opment is less clear. Classroom management involves various complex, interrelated skills
including but not limited to setting up an appropriate learning environment, ensuring
that the curriculum is appropriate to students’ learning needs, building positive relation­
ships with students, and appropriately dealing with disruptive behaviour. Knowing more
about the specific strategies beginning teachers employ and do not employ, alongside
those strategies they feel confident in using (and not confident in using) can be used to
inform future professional development and mentoring programmes at the pre-service
and in-service level. This study aimed to investigate the frequency of various classroom
management strategies that newly qualified primary teachers, from the state of New
South Wales (NSW), Australia, self-reported using in their classrooms. This study also
examined the confidence that these teachers held in their ability to employ various
classroom strategies. Finally, the study identified the strategies that newly qualified
teachers considered to be the most effective strategies for managing classrooms.
Identifying what beginning teachers consider to be effective classroom strategies is
important for understanding what prompts them to use certain strategies, and not others.
Even though the study focuses on teachers from NSW, it has applicability to other
Australian early career teachers given the similarity in pre-service education across
Australia (Mayer 2014).
Other variables for consideration were teacher gender and age. A small body of
research has examined gender differences in classroom management. One study found
that male teachers are more ‘controlling’ than female teachers (N. K. Martin, Yin, and
Baldwin 1998). Conversely, McCormack (1997) found that amongst physical education
teachers, females made use of a greater range of corrective strategies than their male
counterparts. Another study found no significant differences between male and female
teachers (Y. K. Martin, Yin, and Mayall 2006) a finding supported in a study of experienced
Turkish teachers (Oktan and Ç 2015). In relation to teachers’ age, Bayraktar and Dogan
(2017) found no difference in the use of different strategies according to age, but Dincer
and Akgun (2015) reported that teachers in the 25 and over age group demonstrated
what they classified to be ‘better’ classroom management skills than the teachers in the
20–24 age group. Given the inconclusive nature of previous research, potential differ­
ences in teacher gender and age were also considered in this study.
The research aim of this study was to examine primary school teachers in their first year
of teaching to identify the classroom management strategies they used the most, which
4 S. WOODCOCK AND A. REUPERT

ones they felt most confident in using, and which ones they believed were most effective.
The specific research questions were:

(1) Which classroom management strategies do first-year in-service teachers use the
most frequently?
(2) Which classroom management strategies do first-year in-service teachers feel most
confident in using?
(3) Which classroom management strategies do first-year in-service teachers believe
are most effective when managing classroom issues?
(4) Are there any differences in (frequency, confidence, perceived effectiveness) class­
room management strategies between male and female first-year in-service
teachers?
(5) Are there any differences in classroom management strategies (frequency, con­
fidence, perceived effectiveness) between younger (under 25 years) and older (25
years and older) first-year in-service teachers?

Methods
Context of the study
The in-service, first year teachers in this study were drawn from schools across New South
Wales. New South Wales is the largest State in Australia with a population of 7.8 million (NSW
GOV 2017), 32% of the country’s population (ABS 2017). The education system consists of 13
years of schooling through two school settings. The primary (elementary) school setting
consists of the first 7 years of schooling (Kindergarten to Year 6) and the secondary (high)
school setting consists of the final 6 years of schooling (Year 7 to Year 12). All students are
required to complete Year 10 before they are able to leave school, and once completed Year
10 students are only able to leave (prior to completing Year 12) if they are registered for home
schooling; in full-time paid employment (average 25 hours per week); in approved education
or training; or a combination of work, education and/or training (NSW DET 2023).
Teachers in New South Wales must complete a pre-service training degree to become
teachers (like many states in Australia, and many other countries). There are two approaches
to becoming a teacher in New South Wales. One is to complete a four-year teacher training
degree, and where pre-service teachers complete a set number of professional experience
programmes/days in schools under supervision as well as core units (or subjects) around
teaching and their specific subject areas (either domain specific as in secondary/high school
area or more generalised subject areas as in primary/elementary school area). Alternatively,
pre-service teachers complete a Bachelor’s degree in their chosen area and then complete
a two-year postgraduate degree. Both pathways require pre-service teachers to complete
curriculum on classroom management and to apply their knowledge of classroom manage­
ment when out on placement (professional experience) in schools.

Participants
Participants included 156 in-service primary school teachers within New South Wales, 17%
of whom were male and 83% female, a similar ratio of male and female primary teachers
 JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR TEACHING 5

in New South Wales (NSW GOV 2015). The participants in this study were all newly
qualified teachers who had recently (within two to three months) graduated. All were in
full-time, permanent jobs in New South Wales. Seventy-five percent of participants were
under the age of 25, while 20% were between 25–35 years of age, and 5% were above the
age of 35.1

Instrument
The Survey Of Behaviour Management Practices (SOBMP) was specifically developed by
the authors based on a review of the literature (Reupert and Woodcock 2010). More
recently, others have found the same types of strategies to be effective for managing
classrooms (Caldarella et al. 2023; Rambe and Harahap 2023). The SOBMP aims to assess
the frequency, confidence and perceived effectiveness that teachers have regarding
various classroom management strategies (for further details see Reupert and
Woodcock 2010). The SOBMP incorporates strategies ranging from preventative measures
(such as ‘verbally acknowledged positive behaviour’) and rewards (such as: ‘provided
educational rewards such as extra time on the computer’) to corrective strategies (such as:
‘said the student’s name as a warning’), based on extensive review of the research and
literature. Participants were asked to rate their frequency use, confidence, and effective­
ness in each of the strategies on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) through to 5
(extremely). Thus, the higher the teacher’s score, the more frequent/confident/effective
they reported to be in using each strategy.
The SOBMP consisted of 31 classroom management strategies, categorised into five
subscale variables through factor analysis using principal components extraction and
varimax rotation. The subscale variables resulted in preventative strategies, curriculum
differentiation, rewards, low-level correction strategies, and more intrusive correction
strategies. The preventative subscale consisted of strategies aiming to minimise and
prevent behavioural issues such as promoting students’ social and emotional compe­
tence, negotiating class rules and managing transition times. The curriculum differentia­
tion subscale included adapting and differentiating the curriculum to different learning
needs. The reward subscale included the use of rewards, such as providing stickers and
time on the computers for appropriate behaviours. The low-level correction subscale
involved strategies aimed to deal with inappropriate behaviour but with minimal disrup­
tion to the learning environment. Strategies included moving closer to the student and
ignoring inappropriate behaviour. The more intrusive correction subscale consisted of
strategies that were relatively more intrusive, including sending the student to time out,
behavioural contracts, and referring the student to the principal.
According to Hair et al. (2018), factor loadings greater than .30 are considered
to meet the minimal level. Moreover, loadings of .40> are considered more impor­
tant, and loadings that are more than .50> are considered practically significant.
This study used .40> factor loading scores as a minimum cut-off value. As can be
seen in Table 1, internal reliability analyses (Cronbach’s alpha) for all subscales
resulted in acceptable (.70>) alpha coefficient scores of reliability for frequency,
confidence, and perceived effectiveness. From the original 31 items in the SOBMP
four items did not load substantially onto either of the dimensions and were
therefore deleted from subsequent analyses. They were: ‘established the class
6 S. WOODCOCK AND A. REUPERT

Table 1. Reliability of subscale variables from the factor analyses results.

Subscale Variable Frequency Confidence Success
Prevention .901 (7) .925 (7) .918 (7)
Differentiation .895 (3) .912 (3) .888 (3)
Rewards .875 (3) .923 (3) .922 (3)
Minor Corrections .941 (9) .945 (9) .940 (9)
Intrusive Corrections .836 (5) .861 (5) .887 (5)

rules without student input’; ‘changed the seating positions of targeted students’;
‘changed the whole class seating arrangements’; and, ‘employed teacher centred
teaching’.

Procedure
A pilot study of the SOBMP was originally conducted on 42 Australian pre-service
teachers. From the feedback of the participants in the pilot study, minor modifications
were made to some of the survey items (see Reupert and Woodcock 2010 for more
details). For this study, participants came from schools in several, randomly selected
regional areas of New South Wales. Once regional areas were (randomly) selected, schools
within those regions were then randomly selected. Principals at each selected school were
initially approached. Once approved, newly qualified teachers (those in the first year of
teaching) were informed of the study and given the opportunity to participate.
Participants received the survey and returned it anonymously in a locked box at
a reception at the school within a week for the researchers to collect. Ethics approval
was obtained by the relevant university and education committees. There were no
incentives given to participants or to participating schools and participation was
voluntary.

Results
Means, standard deviations, multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA), and paired
samples t-tests were carried out to examine participants’ frequency, confidence, and
perceived effectiveness of various management practices. The results from this study
are first presented by comparing the gender and age of participants in relation to the
frequency, confidence, and perceived effectiveness of the various classroom management
practices. Second, the results present the overall findings of participants’ frequency use,
confidence, and perceived effectiveness comparing the various classroom management
strategies.

Gender comparison of classroom management strategies

As Table 2 indicates, there were no significant differences in the frequency of use between
male and female participants in regard to preventative strategies (F(1, 156) = 0.411,
p = .522, ηp2 = .003); differentiation (F(1, 156) = 0.001, p = .974, ηp2 = .000); rewards
(F(1, 156) = 3.824, p = .052, ηp2 = .025); low-level correction (F(1, 156) = 0.001, p = .982,
ηp2 = .000); or intrusive correction strategies (F(1, 156) = 0.603, p = .439, ηp2 = .004).
 JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR TEACHING 7

Table 2. Comparison between male and female newly qualified teachers’ behaviour management
strategies.
Frequency/Confidence/Success Subscale Variable Gender Mean SD P ηp2
Frequency Prevention Female 3.75 0.84 .522 .003
Male 3.89 0.99
Differentiation Female 3.73 1.19 .974 .000
Male 3.74 1.01
Rewards Female 3.94 1.18 .052 .025
Male 3.42 1.24
Initial Correction Female 3.69 1.06 .982 .000
Male 3.70 1.26
Intrusive Correction Female 1.84 1.01 .439 .004
Male 2.02 1.14
Confidence Prevention Female 3.88 1.02 .583 .002
Male 4.01 0.91
Differentiation Female 3.55 1.17 .379 .005
Male 3.78 1.01
Rewards Female 4.11 1.21 .108 .017
Male 3.67 1.32
Initial Correction Female 3.74 1.09 .645 .001
Male 3.86 1.30
Intrusive Correction Female 2.21 1.15 .068 .022
Male 2.69 1.30
Success Prevention Female 3.84 0.99 .783 .001
Male 3.90 0.93
Differentiation Female 3.79 1.18 .585 .002
Male 3.93 1.10
Rewards Female 3.95 1.24 .086 .020
Male 3.47 1.27
Initial Correction Female 3.57 1.08 .853 .000
Male 3.62 1.26
Intrusive Correction Female 2.65 1.32 .167 .013
Male 3.07 1.46

Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the confidence between male

and female participants in regard to using prevention (F(1, 156) = 0.303, p = .583,
ηp2 = .002); differentiation (F(1, 156) = 0.778, p = .379, ηp2 = .005); rewards (F(1, 156) =
2.619, p = .108, ηp2 = .017); low-level correction (F(1, 156) = 0.213, p = .645, ηp2 = .001); or
intrusive correction strategies (F(1, 156) = 3.368, p = .068, ηp2 = .022).
In regard to the perceived effectiveness, there were no significant differences between
male and female participants, in relation to prevention (F(1, 156) = 0.076, p = .783,
ηp2 = .001); differentiation (F(1, 156) = 0.299, p = .585, ηp2 = .002); rewards (F(1, 156) =
2.989, p = .086, ηp2 = .020); low-level correction (F(1, 156) = 0.035, p = .853, ηp2 = .000); or
intrusive correction strategies (F(1, 156) = 1.931, p = .167, ηp2 = .013).

Age comparison of classroom management strategies

As outlined in Table 3, with the exception of differentiation, there were no signifi­
cant differences in the frequency of use between participants under the age of 25
and those who were 25 years of age and older in regard to using prevention (F(1,
156) = 2.712, p = .070, ηp2 = .036); rewards (F(1, 156) = 1.118, p = .330, ηp2 = .015); low-
level correction (F(1, 156) = 1.587, p = .208, ηp2 = .021); or intrusive correction strate­
gies (F(1, 156) = 0.652, p = .523, ηp2 = .009). There was a minor significant difference
regarding differentiation (F(1, 156) = 3.321, p = .039, ηp2 = .044). Beginning teachers
8 S. WOODCOCK AND A. REUPERT

Table 3. Comparison of the age of newly qualified teachers’ behaviour management strategies.
Frequency/Confidence/Success Subscale Variable Age Mean SD P ηp2
Frequency Prevention <25 3.78 0.99 .070 .036
25> 3.81 0.85
Differentiation <25 3.73 1.18 .039* .044
25> 3.83 1.08
Rewards <25 3.87 1.25 .330 .015
25> 3.87 1.11
Initial Correction <25 3.65 1.15 .208 .021
25> 3.85 0.88
Intrusive Correction <25 1.91 1.02 .523 .009
25> 1.79 1.10
Confidence Prevention <25 3.89 1.04 .073 .036
25> 3.97 0.86
Differentiation <25 3.56 1.17 .052 .040
25> 3.74 1.09
Rewards <25 4.07 1.30 .177 .024
25> 4.01 1.08
Initial Correction <25 3.73 1.18 .249 .019
25> 3.81 0.97
Intrusive Correction <25 2.33 1.19 .231 .020
25> 2.11 1.18
Success Prevention <25 3.83 1.02 .139 .027
25> 4.02 0.80
Differentiation <25 3.80 1.19 .162 .025
25> 3.94 1.11
Rewards <25 3.85 1.32 .324 .015
25> 4.04 1.10
Initial Correction <25 3.54 1.59 .134 .027
25> 3.74 0.93
Intrusive Correction <25 2.80 1.30 .319 .016
25> 2.51 1.47

under the age of 25 used differentiated strategies less often than their older
counterparts.
Moreover, there were no significant differences regarding confidence between parti­
cipants under the age of 25 and those who were 25 years of age and older when using
prevention (F(1, 156) = 2.671, p = .073, ηp2 = .036); differentiation (F(1, 156) = 3.021,
p = .052, ηp2 = .040); rewards (F(1, 156) = 1.750, p = .177, ηp2 = .024); low-level correction
(F(1, 156) = 1.405, p = .249, ηp2 = .019); or intrusive correction strategies (F(1, 156) = 1.480,
p = .231, ηp2 = .020).
In regard to perceived effectiveness when using these strategies there were no
significant differences between participants under the age of 25 and those who
were 25 years of age and older in relation using prevention (F(1, 156) = 1.998,
p = .139, ηp2 = .027); differentiation (F(1, 156) = 1.845, p = .162, ηp2 = .025); rewards
(F(1, 156) = 1.135, p = .324, ηp2 = .015); low-level correction (F(1, 156) = 2.037, p = .134,
ηp2 = .027); or intrusive correction strategies (F(1, 156) = 1.150, p = .319, ηp2 = .016).

Overall comparison of classroom management strategies

Frequency
As Table 4 indicates, the most commonly reported classroom management strategies by
participants were using rewards (M = 3.80), prevention (M = 3.72), differentiation
(M = 3.69), and low-level correction strategies (M = 3.64). There were no significant
 JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR TEACHING 9

Table 4. Frequency use of behaviour man­

agement strategies.
M SD
Prevention 3.72 .95
Rewards 3.80 1.18
Differentiation 3.69 1.12
Initial Correction 3.64 1.05
Intrusive Correction 1.85 .93

differences between each of these in regard to frequency use. However, intrusive correc­
tion strategies were used significantly less frequently than rewards (t = 20.19, p < .001),
prevention (t = 22.14, p < .001), differentiation (t = 19.28, p < .001), and low-level correc­
tion strategies (t = 21.42, p < .001). In particular, the most commonly employed strategies
included ‘verbally acknowledged positive behaviour’ (M = 4.45), ‘used non-verbal body
language’ (M = 4.25), ‘established a regular routine’ (M = 4.15), and ‘said the student’s
name as a warning’ (M = 4.13). The least frequently reported strategies overall were those
grouped in the intrusive correction subscale, with the least commonly reported strategies
including ‘contacted the student’s parents’ (M = 1.41) and ‘referral of student to other
professionals’ (M = 1.60).

Confidence
As can be seen in Table 5, participants were most confident in using rewards (M = 3.99).
Participants were significantly more confident in using rewards than they were using
preventative strategies (t = 3.09, p < .01), differentiation (t = 6.60, p < .001), low-level cor­
rection strategies (t = 5.94, p < .001), and intrusive correction strategies (t = 17.56, p < .001.
Furthermore, participants were more confident using preventative strategies (M = 3.85)
than they were using differentiation (t = 6.33, p < .001), low-level correction strategies (t =
3.63, p < .01), and intrusive correction strategies (t = 18.58, p < .001). They were more
confident using low-level correction strategies (M = 3.700) than they were using differ­
entiation (t = 3.13, p < .01), and intrusive correction strategies (t = 27.35, p < .001).
Participants were less confident using intrusive correction strategies (M = 2.26) than
they were differentiating (t = 14.36, p < .001). More specifically, it was ‘verbally acknowl­
edged positive behaviour’ (M = 4.50), ‘used non-verbal body language’ (M = 4.21), ‘estab­
lished a regular routine’ (M = 4.17), and ‘said the student’s name as a warning’ (M = 4.16)
that were the strategies participants reported feeling most confident in applying. The
reported strategies with the least confidence overall were those grouped in the intrusive
correction subscale, with the least confident strategies including ‘contacted the student’s
parents’ (M = 1.99) and ‘referral of student to other professionals’ (M = 2.01).

Table 5. Confidence of behaviour management

strategies.
M SD
Prevention 3.85 .99
Rewards 3.99 1.23
Differentiation 3.55 1.10
Initial Correction 3.70 1.09
Intrusive Correction 2.26 1.09
10 S. WOODCOCK AND A. REUPERT

Table 6. Success of applying behaviour

management strategies.
M SD
Prevention 3.90 .97
Rewards 3.91 1.24
Differentiation 3.86 1.13
Initial Correction 3.42 1.07
Intrusive Correction 2.69 1.26

Perceived effectiveness
As shown in Table 6, participants reported the following strategies to be most effective
when managing classrooms; rewards (M = 3.91), preventative strategies (M = 3.90), and
differentiated strategies (M = 3.86). Participants found that applying low-level correction
strategies was less effective (M = 3.42) than applying rewards (t = 5.94, p < .001), preven­
tative strategies (t = 3.63, p < .01), and differentiated strategies (t = 3.13, p < .01).
Furthermore, they found applying intrusive correction strategies less effective (M = 2.69)
than applying rewards (t = 17.56, p < .001), preventative strategies (t = 18.58, p < .001),
differentiation (t = 14.34, p < .001), and low-level correction strategies (t = 17.35, p < .001).
In particular, participants found the following strategies to be most effective; ‘used non-
verbal body language’ (M = 4.20), ‘verbally acknowledged positive behaviour’ (M = 4.17),
‘differentiated the curriculum’ (M = 3.96), and ‘provided rewards such as stickers, lollies’
(M = 3.92). The least effective strategies reported were those grouped in the intrusive
correction subscale, with the least effective strategies including ‘referral of student to
other professionals’ (M = 2.44), and ‘contacted the student’s parents’ (M = 2.54).

Discussion
This study sought to ascertain the classroom management strategies that primary, first-
year teachers based in NSW, Australia employed, those that they felt confident in using
and those that they considered to be effective. The most frequently employed strategies
included the provision of rewards, various preventative strategies (e.g. establishing reg­
ular routines), differentiating the curriculum and providing low-level correction strategies
(e.g. saying the student’s name as a warning). They employed intrusive correction strate­
gies comparatively less. It is somewhat concerning that they did not act to prevent
classroom-based problem behavioural issues from occurring or differentiate the curricu­
lum at a higher rate than they applied intrusive, albeit low-level correction strategies.
Richmond (2007) in her book tellingly titled ‘Teach more, manage less’ argued that when
teachers engage students with curricula that is engaging and aligned to their learning
needs, the need for correction is minimised. This argument aligns with several studies
which identified the association between student learning and engagement with well
organised and structured classrooms, and an engaging, well-designed curriculum
(Marzano, Marzano, and Pickering 2003; Oliver and Reschly 2010). Indeed, the beginning
teachers in the present study confirmed the value of prevention, curriculum differentia­
tion, and positive rewards; they self-reported that all three strategies were more effective
when addressing behavioural issues than other options. Although others have high­
lighted the classroom management issues faced by beginning teachers (e.g. Shank and
 JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR TEACHING 11

Santiague 2022), this study was able to specify their areas of strength and particular areas
for future development. Moreover, though the study was conducted in NSW, Australia,
given the challenges many early career teachers face when managing classroom beha­
viour (Dicke et al. 2015), it provides possible signs as to the types of challenges they face,
and how confident they are (or are not) in using different approaches, noting that such
a claim would need to be confirmed in studies conducted in other countries.
Several previous studies on pre-service teachers reported their preference for employ­
ing corrective strategies more than preventative strategies, in Australia (Woodcock and
Reupert 2012), Turkey (Atici 2007), Canada (Reupert and Woodcock 2010) and Malaysia
(Zakaria, Reupert, and Sharma 2013). It appeared that the first-year teachers in this study
were at least using more preventative based strategies than what these previously studies
indicated. Notwithstanding, the challenges teachers may face when transitioning from
preparatory programmes into schools (Miles and Knipe 2018), compared to pre-service
teachers, it could be that first-year teachers may assume greater ownership of their
classrooms, with longer time available than previously for engaging with students,
thereby allowing them to establish appropriate, prevention-based strategies. To illustrate,
Akdağ and Haserb (2017) found that once teachers have established a relationship with
students, they are then able to establish rules and routines. Likewise, having this relation­
ship with students allowed teachers to focus not only on the student behaviour but also
students’ learning (Kwok 2017).
In this study, teachers reported employing rewards at the same rate as prevention and
curriculum differentiation. The use of rewards is somewhat contentious, with some
suggesting that the practice of giving rewards (e.g. gold stars for good work) does not
sustain the desired behaviour in the longer term, does not promote deep, authentic
learning and may have a detrimental impact on intrinsic motivation (e.g. Hanus and Fox
2018). Other research however showed that as long as students perceive rewards as being
related to tasks that they considered meaningful, then intrinsic motivation will not be
negatively impacted (Cameron et al. 2005). Lepper, Corpus, and Iyengar (2005) argued
that students can simultaneously undertake activities they find intrinsically interesting,
and pay attention to the consequences of those activities, such as a teacher’s praise and
attention. They summarised;

Seeking only immediate enjoyment with no attention to external contingencies and con­
straints may substantially reduce a student’s future outcomes and opportunities. Conversely,
attending only to extrinsic constraints and incentives can substantially undermine intrinsic
interest and the enjoyment that can come from learning itself (Lepper, Corpus, and Iyengar
2005, 191).

Further research is required in this area, to investigate how beginning teachers are using
rewards and for what purpose.
In regard to confidence, those surveyed were most confident in using rewards, fol­
lowed by preventative strategies, differentiation and low-level correction strategies. They
were least confident in using intrusive correction strategies which is perhaps not surpris­
ing given they did not use them frequently either. One possible explanation for this result
is that it is possibly easier to provide rewards (e.g. providing stickers) than it might be to
establish and deliver what can be longer term and more complex strategies, such as
establishing routines (prevention) and differentiating the curriculum, and hence the
12 S. WOODCOCK AND A. REUPERT

reasons for beginning teachers’ higher level of confidence in this domain. Further
research is required to test this hypothesis.
Beginning teachers were relatively less confident at curriculum differentiation, even
though they used these strategies frequently and found them to be effective.
Differentiating the curriculum refers to Tomlinson’s framework (Tomlinson 1999) for
structuring the curriculum in response to students’ learning needs, readiness and interest.
The framework covers content (examining the depth, level and readability of material
taught), process (how students obtain access to the content), product (providing multiple
ways for students to demonstrate their learning) and the environment (including physical
and emotional factors). Though others have shown that teachers often struggle to
differentiate the curriculum because of workload issues and insufficient time for planning
(VanTassel-Baska and Stambaugh 2005), the beginning teachers surveyed here reported
being able to differentiating the curriculum at least some of the time. However, in
a mixed-methods study with newly graduated teachers Casey and Gable (2012) found
that many beginning teachers had employed what the researchers labelled surface-level
strategies, rather than deep structure differentiation. ‘Surface’ level strategies included
cooperative learning groups and providing choice, rather than ‘deep structure differentia­
tion’, such as differentiating assignments according to students’ abilities. It is not clear
from the present study whether the strategies employed were ‘surface’ or ‘deep’ differ­
entiation strategies. However, their relatively low confidence level may be reflective of the
complexity of these strategies, especially those considered to be ‘deep’. It is critical to
focus on first-year teachers’ confidence as a construct, given the positive impact con­
fidence generally has on performance, and its potential to reduce negative attitudes
(Jong, Ruyter, and Wetzels 2006).
Beginning teachers in this study used intrusive correction strategies the least of all,
were the least confident in using these, and found them to be the least effective. It is
perhaps not surprising that beginning teachers are not employing strategies such as
referring students to external professionals or contacting a student’s parents as these are
tasks typically undertaken by administrators (in Australia at least) (Reupert 2020). Some
beginning teachers struggled to ask for help (Sanagavarapu & Abraham 2021). Hence in
this study, a possibility that might explain their self-reported lack of skills in using intrusive
correction strategies is that because a referral to school authorities might be seen as sign
of weakness, these teachers wanted to avoid being seen as incompetent or ‘struggling’.
Nonetheless, there is a need to manage highly disruptive student behaviour. Very aggres­
sive behaviour is exhibited by 5–10% of the children and for some children, aggressive
behaviour occurs on a daily basis (Kazdin 1998). Teachers found students presenting with
highly disruptive behaviour very stressful (Giallo and Little 2003), especially students with
emotional and behavioural disorders (Gilmour et al. 2022). Notwithstanding the need for
whole school approaches to classroom management, teachers need to be able to manage
these behaviours to ensure a safe environment for all.
The results from the newly qualified teachers in this study showed no significant
gender differences identified in terms of what strategies were employed, how confident
they were in employing these strategies nor how effective they found them to be. These
findings are similar to others in the field who examined gender in experienced teachers
(Y. K. Martin, Yin, and Mayall 2006; Oktan and Ç 2015). This could be due to the training
and professional experience that the newly qualified teachers receive when they were
 JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR TEACHING 13

pre-service teachers, as well as their initial support and experience as early career in-
service teachers as opposed to biological differences in gender teacher dispositions
(Ehrich, Woodcock, and West 2020). Furthermore, with the exception of the frequency
of differentiation, there were no significant differences when comparing teachers aged 25
and over with those younger than 25, which differed from other studies by Amadi and
Allagoa (2017), and Dinçer and Akgün (2015) who found that older teachers had more
effective classroom management strategies. Furthermore, N. Martin and Shoho (2000)
found that older teachers tended to be more controlling in their classroom management
(similar to parenting style). It needs to be noted that in the current study, however, that
there was a small percentage of teachers over 35 which may have skewed results.
Participants identified which strategies were the most effective (prevention, curriculum
differentiation, and positive rewards) but in terms of frequency, equally delivered low-level
correction strategies. Accordingly, this study provided an indication of the professional
development and mentoring needs of beginning teachers with specific applicability for
education systems in NSW, Australia but also potentially other educational systems, espe­
cially in light of claims that early career teachers in diverse countries such as Australia
(Woodcock and Reupert 2013), China, Israel (Lewis et al. 2005) and Jordan (Al-Zu’bi 2013)
lack adequate knowledge of appropriate classroom management strategies. As pointed out
by Dicke et al. (2015) the task for all early career teachers is to bridge what they have learnt
at university into a practice context, with many finding this transition stressful. The current
study highlights potential directions for how to support teachers at this phase of their
career in regard to classroom management. Accordingly, future professional programs and
supports might emphasise the importance of proactive preventative-based strategies, in
acknowledgement that preventing is better than intervening, and that classroom manage­
ment, curriculum, and instruction are intimately intertwined. Likewise, the relative place of
preventative versus corrective management strategies may need to be explicitly addressed
in future professional development programmes. How teachers might differentiate the
curriculum to respond to the learning needs of students is another area that warrants
further professional development, given the participants’ relatively lower confidence levels
in this domain. Results also suggested that professional development in intrusive correction
skills is important but could be positioned in a way that emphasises the need for preven­
tion. Professional development might employ various pedagogical techniques, such as
guided practice, role plays, case studies or vignettes, journaling, blogging and school-
based mentors (Stoughton 2007). Such professional development, regardless of how it is
delivered, needs to consider classroom management in a complex manner, where the
connections between beliefs, confidence and skills are considered across the domains of
prevention, correction, and differentiation, and positioned within the cultural context of the
school and community (Ehrich, Woodcock, and West 2020).
There are several limitations and context issues in this research that needs to be noted.
Teachers’ experiences may have varied depending on the preparation programmes they
were previously enrolled in and the workplace in which they practiced. The results relied
on self-report and observations of classroom practice are needed to further triangulate
the data presented. The low number of male teachers in the sample may have affected
the gender-related analyses. Further research is required to track beginning teachers from
teacher education programs throughout their first five years of teaching to ascertain what
14 S. WOODCOCK AND A. REUPERT

they are learning and when. This will help to inform what they need to know during the
transition period into the workforce.
Overall, this study indicated that newly qualified teachers in NSW, Australia
frequently use rewards, preventative strategies, differentiated strategies, as well
as low-level corrective approaches. The participants in this study were most con­
fident using rewards and preventative strategies. Furthermore, low-level correction
strategies were not perceived to be as effective as other strategies, such as,
rewards, prevention, and differentiation approaches. It is important to support
early career teachers through their first few years of teaching and continue profes­
sional development around areas of differentiation in order to prevent teacher
stress, anxiety and burnout if teachers are going to continue beyond the first five
years of teaching.

Note
1. When analysing age comparisons age was split into newly qualified teachers under 25 years
of age and those 25 and older. This is due to only 5% of participants being in the above 35
category.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID
Stuart Woodcock http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2035-8638
Andrea Reupert http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1447-7769

References
Akdağ, Z., and C. Haserb. 2017. “Beginning Early Childhood Education teachers’ Struggle with
Inclusion in Turkey.” Asia Pacific Journal of Education 37 (2): 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/
02188791.2016.1273197 .
Al-Zu’bi, Z. 2013. “Classroom Management Problems Among Teacher Students Training at
Hashemite University.” European Journal of Business and Social Sciences 2 (3): 140–149.
Amadi, E., and I. Allagoa. 2017. “Teachers’ Demographic Variables as Determinants of Effective
Classroom Management in Secondary Schools in Rivers State.” International Journal of
Innovative Social Sciences & Humanities Research 5 (4): 67–71.
Arnup, J., and T. Bowles. 2016. “Should I Stay or Should I Go? Resilience as a Protective Factor for
teachers’ Intention to Leave the Teaching Profession.” Australian Journal of Teacher Education
60 (3): 229–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944116667620.
Atici, M. 2007. “A Small‐Scale Study on Student teachers’ Perceptions of Classroom Management
and Methods for Dealing with Misbehaviour.” Emotional and Behavioral Difficulties 12 (1): 15–27.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13632750601135881.
Australian Bureau of Statitics. (2017). National, State and Territory Population. https://www.abs.gov.
au/statistics/people/population/national-state-and-territory-population/latest-release. Accessed
on 07/21/2022.
 JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR TEACHING 15

Bayraktar, H. V., and M. C. Dogan. 2017. “Investigation of Primary School teachers’ Perception of
Discipline Types They Use for Classroom Management.” Higher Education Studies 7 (1): 30–45.
https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v7n1p30.
Boe, E., S. Shin, and L. Cook. 2007. “Does Teacher Preparation Matter for Beginning Teachers in Either
Special or General Education?” The Journal of Special Education 41 (3): 158–170. https://doi.org/
10.1177/00224669070410030201.
Caldarella, P., R. A. A. Larsen, L. Williams, and H. P. Wills. 2023. “Effects of Middle School teachers’
Praise-To-Reprimand Ratios on students’ Classroom Behavior.” Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions 25 (1): 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007211035185.
Cameron, J., W. D. Pierce, K. M. Banko, and A. Gear. 2005. “Achievement-Based Rewards and Intrinsic
Motivation: A Test of Cognitive Mediators.” Journal of Educational Psychology 97 (4): 641–655.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.4.641.
Casey, M. K., and R. K. Gable, 2012. “Perceived Efficacy of Beginning Teachers to Differentiate
Instruction”. Proceedings of the 44th annual meeting of the New England Educational Research
Association, Paper, Portsmouth, 7, 1–34.
Darling-Hammond, L., R. C. Wei, A. Andree, N. Richardson, and S. Orphanos 2009. “Professional
learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States
and abroad.” Palo Alto, CA: School Redesign Network at Stanford University. https://www.lear
ningforward.org/docs/default-source/pdf/nsdcstudy2009.pdf
De Jong, A. De Ruyter, K. and M. Wetzels. 2006. “Linking Employee Confidence to Performance:
A Study of Self-Managing Service Teams.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 34:
576–587. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070306287126.
Dicke, T., J. Elling, A. Schmek, and D. Leutner. 2015. “Reducing Reality Shock: The Effects of
Classroom Management Skills Training on Beginning Teachers.” Teaching & Teacher Education
48: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.01.013.
Dincer, C., and E. Akgun. 2015. “Developing a Classroom Management Skills Inventory for Preschool
Teachers and the Correlation of Preschool teachers’ Classroom Management Skills with Different
Variables.” Education and Science 40 (177): 187–201. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2015.2346.
Ehrich, J., S. Woodcock, and C. West. 2020. “The Effect of Gender on Teaching Dispositions: A Rasch
Measurement Approach.” International Journal of Educational Research 99: 101510. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.101510.
Emmer, E. T., and E. J. Sabornie, Eds. 2015. Handbook of Classroom Management. 2nd ed. New York:
Routledge.
Evertson, C. M., and C. S. Weinstein, Eds. 2006. Handbook of Classroom Management: Research,
Practice, and Contemporary issues. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Freeman, J., B. Simonsen, D. E. Briere, and A. S. MacSuga-Gage. 2014. “Pre-Service Teacher Training in
Classroom Management: A Review of State Accreditation Policy and Teacher Preparation
Programs.” Teacher Education and Special Education 37: 106–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0888406413507002 .
Giallo, R., and E. Little. 2003. “Classroom Behaviour Problems: The Relationship Between
Preparedness, Classroom Experiences and Self-Efficacy in Graduate and Student Teachers.”
Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology 3: 21–34.
Gilmour, A. F., L. E. Sandilos, W. V. Pilny, S. Schwartz, and J. H. Wehby. 2022. “Teaching Students with
Emotional/Behavioral Disorders: Teachers’ Burnout Profiles and Classroom Management.” Journal
of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders 30 (1): 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/10634266211020258.
Girardet, C. 2018. “Why Do Some Teachers Change and Others don’t? A Review of Studies About
Factors Influencing In‐Service and Pre‐Service teachers’ Change in Classroom Management.”
Review of Education 6 (1): 3–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3104.
Gokalp, G., and I. Can. 2022. “Evolution of Pre-Service teachers’ Perceptions About Classroom
Management and Student Misbehavior in an Inquiry-Based Classroom Management Course.”
Action in Teacher Education 44 (1): 70–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2021.1939194 .
Hair, J., B. Babin, R. Anderson, and W. Black. 2018. Multivariate Data Analysis. 8th ed. London: Cengage.
Hanus, M. D., and J. Fox. 2018. “Assessing the Effects of Gamification in the Classroom:
A Longitudinal Study on Intrinsic Motivation, Social Comparison, Satisfaction, Effort, and
16 S. WOODCOCK AND A. REUPERT

Academic Performance.” Computers & Education 80: 152–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.

2014.08.019.
Kazdin, A. 1998. “Psychosocial Treatments for Conduct Disorder in Children.” In A Guide to
Treatments That Work, P. E. Nathan, & J. M. Gorman, 65–89. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kee, A. 2012. “Feelings of Preparedness Among Alternatively Certified Teachers: What is the Role of
Program Features?” Journal of Teacher Education 63 (1): 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0022487111421933 .
Kwok, A. 2017. “Relationships Between Instructional Quality and Classroom Management for
Beginning Urban Teachers.” Educational Researcher 46: 355–365. https://doi.org/10.3102/
0013189X17726727 .
Lepper, M., H. Corpus, and S. Iyengar. 2005. “Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivational Orientations in the
Classrooms: Age Differences and Academic Correlates.” Journal of Educational Psychology 97 (2):
184–196. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.184.
Lewis, R., S. Romi, X. Qui, and Y. J. Katz. 2005. “Teachers’ Classroom Discipline and Student
Misbehaviour in Australia, China and Israel.” Teaching & Teacher Education 21 (6): 729–741.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.05.008 .
Marquez, B., C. Vincent, J. Marquez, and J. Pennefather. 2016. “Opportunities and Challenges in
Training Elementary School Teachers in Classroom Management: Initial Results from Classroom
Management in Action, an Online Professional Development Program.” Journal of Technology &
Teacher Education 24 (1): 87–109.
Martin, N. K., and A. R. Shoho 2000. “Teacher Experience, Training, & Age: The Influence of Teacher
Characteristics on Classroom Management Style”. Paper Presented at the Annual Conference
Southwest Educational Research Association, Dallas, TX.
Martin, N. K., Z. Yin, and B. Baldwin 1998. “Classroom Management Training, Class Size and Graduate
Study: Do These Variables Impact teachers’ Beliefs Regarding Classroom Management Style?” Paper
presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
Martin, N. K., Z. Yin, and H. Mayall 2006. “Classroom Management Training, Teaching Experience and
Gender: Do These Variables Impact teachers’ Attitudes and Beliefs Toward Classroom Management Style?”
Paper Presented at the Annual Conference Southwest Educational Research Association, Austin, TX.
Marzano, R. J., J. S. Marzano, and D. J. Pickering. 2003. Classroom Management That Works: Research-
Based Strategies for Every Teacher. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Mayer, D. 2014. “Forty Years of Teacher Education in Australia: 1974–2014.” Journal of Education for
Teaching 40 (5): 461–473. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2014.956536.
McCormack, A. 1997. “Classroom Management Problems, Strategies and Influences in Physical
Education.” European Physical Education Review 3 (2): 102–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1356336X9700300202 .
Miles, R., and S. Knipe. 2018. “”I Sorta Felt Like I Was Out in the Middle of the ocean”: Novice teachers’
Transition to the Classroom.” Australian Journal of Teacher Education 43 (6): 105–121. https://doi.
org/10.14221/ajte.2018v43n6.7.
NSW Department for Education and Training. 2023. Compulsory school attendance. https://educa
tion.nsw.gov.au/student-wellbeing/attendance-behaviour-and-engagement/school-attendance
NSW GOV. 2015. Gender analysis of school teachers. http://www.dec.nsw.gov.au/documents/
15060385/15385042/gender-analysis-school-teacher.pdf
NSW GOV. 2017. Population. https://www.nsw.gov.au/about-new-south-wales
Oktan, D., and Kıvanç Ç. 2015. “The Impact of teachers’ Gender Differences on Classroom
Management.” International Online Journal of Education and Teaching 2 (4): 239–247.
Oliver, R., and D. Reschly. 2010. “Special Education Teacher Preparation in Classroom Management:
Implications for Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders.” Behavior Disorders 35 (3):
188–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874291003500301.
O’Neill, S. C., and J. Stephenson. 2011. “Classroom Behaviour Management Preparation in
Undergraduate Primary Teacher Education in Australia: A Web-Based Investigation.” Australian
Journal of Teacher Education 36 (10): Article 3. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2011v36n10.3.
 JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR TEACHING 17

Podolsky, A., T. Kini, J. Bishop, and L. Darling-Hammond. 2016. Solving the Teacher Shortage: How to
Attract and Retain Excellent educators. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.
Rambe, A. S., and K. S. Harahap. 2023. “Superior Classroom Management Strategies to Improve
Learning Quality.” Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Konseling (JPDK) 5 (1): 629–635. https://doi.org/10.
31004/jpdk.v5i1.10999.
Reupert, A. 2020. Mental Health and Academic Learning in Schools: Approaches for Facilitating the
Wellbeing of Children and Young People. London: Taylor & Francis.
Reupert, A., and S. Woodcock. 2010. “Success and Near Misses: Pre-Service teachers’ Use,
Confidence, and Success in Various Classroom Management Strategies.” Teaching & Teacher
Education 26 (6): 1261–1268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.03.003 .
Reupert, A., and S. Woodcock. 2015. “Does a Year Make a Difference? The Classroom Management
Practices of Primary Student Teachers Before and After a One-Year Teacher Education
Programme.” Emotional & Behavioural Difficulties 20 (3): 265–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/
13632752.2014.949986.
Richmond, C. 2007. Teach More, Manage Less: A Minimalist Approach to Behaviour management.
Australia: Scholastic Press.
Rothstein, R. 2000. “Toward a Composite Index of School Performance.” The Elementary School
Journal 100 (5): 409–441. https://doi.org/10.1086/499649.
Sanagavarapu, P., and J. Abraham. 2021. “Validating the Relationship Between Beginning students’
Transitional Challenges, Well-Being, Help-Seeking, and Their Adjustments in an Australian
University.” Journal of Further and Higher Education 45 (5): 616–628. https://doi.org/10.1080/
0309877X.2020.1804537 .
Shank, M. K., and L. Santiague. 2022. “Classroom Management Needs of Novice Teachers.” The
Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues & Ideas 95 (1): 26–34. https://doi.org/10.
1080/00098655.2021.2010636 .
Stoughton, E. H. 2007. ““How Will I Get Them to behave?”: Pre Service Teachers Reflect on Classroom
Management.” Teaching & Teacher Education 23 (7): 1024–1037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.
2006.05.001.
Tomlinson, C. 1999. “The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the Needs of All learners”.
Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
VanTassel-Baska, J., and T. Stambaugh. 2005. “Challenges and Possibilities for Serving Gifted
Learners in the Regular Classroom.” Theory into Practice 44 (3): 211–217. https://doi.org/10.
1207/s15430421tip4403_5 .
Woodcock, S., and A. Reupert. 2012. “A Cross-Sectional Study of Student teachers’ Behaviour
Management Strategies Throughout Their Training Years.” The Australian Educational
Researcher 39: 159–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-012-0056-x.
Woodcock, S., and A. Reupert. 2013. ““Does Training Matter? Comparing the Behaviour
Management Strategies of Pre-Service Teachers in a Four-Year Program and Those in a One-
Year Program.” Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 41 (1): 84–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1359866X.2012.753991.
Woodcock, S., and A. Reupert. 2017. “A Tale from Three Countries: The Classroom Management
Practices of Pre-Service Teachers from Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom.” Teacher
Development 21 (5): 655–667. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2017.1308431 .
Zakaria, N., A. Reupert, and U. Sharma. 2013. “Malaysian Primary Pre-Service teachers’ Perceptions of
students’ Disruptive Behaviour.” Asia Pacific Education Review 14 (3): 371–380. https://doi.org/10.
3102/0013189X031007028.