First-year primary teachers’ classroom management strategies: Perceptions of use, confidence, and effectiveness

ABSTRACT

As newly qualified teachers begin their teaching career, the first year can be a challenging one where they need to learn new skills and handle many stresses, including classroom management. Managing the class in order to teach is a challenging skill for newly qualified teachers. This study investigated 156 primary school teachers who are based in New South Wales, Australia, in their first year of teaching and their classroom management strategies. The results showed that newly qualified teachers frequently employ rewards, preventative strategies, differentiated strategies, and low-level corrective 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.

KEYWORDS:

• Classroom management
• prevention
• correction
• differentiation
• rewards

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 suggested it involves ‘the actions teachers take to create an environment that supports and facilitates both academic and social-emotional learning’. Effective classroom 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 complex 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 inadequate 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 beginning 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 strategies (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) 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 development 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 relationships 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 differences 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 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) classroom management strategies between male and female first-year in-service teachers?

5. Are there any differences in classroom management strategies (frequency, confidence, 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 management 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 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 effectiveness 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 competence, negotiating class rules and managing transition times. The curriculum differentiation 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 disruption 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 important, 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 rules without student input’; ‘changed the seating positions of targeted students’; ‘changed the whole class seating arrangements’; and, ‘employed teacher centred teaching’.

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)

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, η_p² = .003); differentiation (F(1, 156) = 0.001, p = .974, η_p² = .000); rewards (F(1, 156) = 3.824, p = .052, η_p² = .025); low-level correction (F(1, 156) = 0.001, p = .982, η_p² = .000); or intrusive correction strategies (F(1, 156) = 0.603, p = .439, η_p² = .004).

Table 2. Comparison between male and female newly qualified teachers’ behaviour management strategies.

Frequency/Confidence/Success	Subscale Variable	Gender	Mean	SD	P	ηp^2
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, η_p² = .002); differentiation (F(1, 156) = 0.778, p = .379, η_p² = .005); rewards (F(1, 156) = 2.619, p = .108, η_p² = .017); low-level correction (F(1, 156) = 0.213, p = .645, η_p² = .001); or intrusive correction strategies (F(1, 156) = 3.368, p = .068, η_p² = .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, η_p² = .001); differentiation (F(1, 156) = 0.299, p = .585, η_p² = .002); rewards (F(1, 156) = 2.989, p = .086, η_p² = .020); low-level correction (F(1, 156) = 0.035, p = .853, η_p² = .000); or intrusive correction strategies (F(1, 156) = 1.931, p = .167, η_p² = .013).

Age comparison of classroom management strategies

As outlined in Table 3, with the exception of differentiation, there were no significant 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, η_p² = .036); rewards (F(1, 156) = 1.118, p = .330, η_p² = .015); low-level correction (F(1, 156) = 1.587, p = .208, η_p² = .021); or intrusive correction strategies (F(1, 156) = 0.652, p = .523, η_p² = .009). There was a minor significant difference regarding differentiation (F(1, 156) = 3.321, p = .039, ηp2 = .044). Beginning teachers under the age of 25 used differentiated strategies less often than their older counterparts.

Table 3. Comparison of the age of newly qualified teachers’ behaviour management strategies.

Frequency/Confidence/Success	Subscale Variable	Age	Mean	SD	P	ηp^2
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

Moreover, there were no significant differences regarding confidence between participants 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, η_p² = .036); differentiation (F(1, 156) = 3.021, p = .052, η_p² = .040); rewards (F(1, 156) = 1.750, p = .177, η_p² = .024); low-level correction (F(1, 156) = 1.405, p = .249, η_p² = .019); or intrusive correction strategies (F(1, 156) = 1.480, p = .231, η_p² = .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, η_p² = .027); differentiation (F(1, 156) = 1.845, p = .162, η_p² = .025); rewards (F(1, 156) = 1.135, p = .324, η_p² = .015); low-level correction (F(1, 156) = 2.037, p = .134, η_p² = .027); or intrusive correction strategies (F(1, 156) = 1.150, p = .319, η_p² = .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 differences between each of these in regard to frequency use. However, intrusive correction 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 correction 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).

Table 4. Frequency use of behaviour management 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

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 correction 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 differentiation (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 acknowledged positive behaviour’ (M = 4.50), ‘used non-verbal body language’ (M = 4.21), ‘established 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

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), preventative 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).

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

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 regular routines), differentiating the curriculum and providing low-level correction strategies (e.g. saying the student’s name as a warning). They employed intrusive correction strategies comparatively less. It is somewhat concerning that they did not act to prevent classroom-based problem behavioural issues from occurring or differentiate the curriculum 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 differentiation, and positive rewards; they self-reported that all three strategies were more effective when addressing behavioural issues than other options. Although others have highlighted the classroom management issues faced by beginning teachers (e.g. Shank and 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 behaviour (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 employing 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 relationship 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 constraints 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, followed by preventative strategies, differentiation and low-level correction strategies. They were least confident in using intrusive correction strategies which is perhaps not surprising 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 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 differentiation’, such as differentiating assignments according to students’ abilities. It is not clear from the present study whether the strategies employed were ‘surface’ or ‘deep’ differentiation 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 confidence 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 aggressive 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 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, especially 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 management, 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 prevention. 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 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 confident 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 professional 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.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

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.