Classroom Management in K–12 Classroom Music: A Review of the Literature

Abstract

Classroom management is reported to be among the greatest difficulties for beginning music educators. The purpose of this literature review was to examine extant research studies on the topic of classroom management in K–12 classroom music. Research topics included the components of classroom management, preservice and inservice teacher beliefs and perceptions regarding classroom management, and approaches to classroom management. Findings indicated no clear agreement on the components of classroom management among researchers. Nevertheless, classroom management is an area of concern for both preservice and inservice teachers, and educators have expressed a desire for more preparation in this area. In addition, results of international studies indicated that preservice teachers from diverse cultures may have had differing expectations for various aspects of classroom management. I found little empirical research on specific strategies for classroom management in the music classroom. Implications for practice and recommendations for further research are included.

Keywords

behavior management classroom management classroom music music education music teachers teaching methods

Experienced music educators attest that skilled classroom management is a prerequisite for high-level student achievement (Gordon, 2002; Lohmeyer, 2017; Rohwer & Henry, 2004). However, classroom management is reported to be among the greatest difficulties for beginning educators (Caldarella et al., 2017; Hedden, 2015; Roulston et al., 2005). There is also reason to believe that there are certain challenges that are unique to the management of the K–12 music classroom that require specialized training and resources (Hedden, 2015; Potter, 2021). For example, Potter (2021) cited large class sizes, unique instructional strategies, and the need for constant collaborative learning as factors contributing to the difficulty of classroom management in the music classroom. Gordon (2002) noted the additional challenge of the public nature of learning outcomes, which are often expressed in performances and competitions.

The purpose of this literature review was to synthesize extant research on classroom management in the K–12 music classroom. Areas of concern that emerged for researchers included: (a) the components of classroom management, (b) preservice and inservice music educators’ perceptions regarding the experience of classroom management, and (c) approaches to classroom management. Findings indicated no clear agreement on the components of classroom management among researchers. Nevertheless, classroom management was an area of concern for both preservice and inservice teachers, and educators have expressed a desire for more preparation in this area. In addition, results of international studies indicated that preservice teachers from diverse cultures may have had differing expectations for various aspects of classroom management. Some researchers inquired about the strategies and classroom management styles that were being used by practicing music educators (Cremata, 2017; Macleod, 2010; Russell, 2000; Talşik, 2015). Others assessed the potential benefits of specific strategies for classroom management such as the use of technology (Murillo, 2017; Savage, 2007), teacher music-making (Pellegrino, 2015), and class-wide function related intervention teams (Caldarella et al., 2017). This review includes studies from the United States and Europe and concludes with implications for practice and recommendations for further research.

Method

I sought to complete a review of extant research articles in the field of music education in which the topic of classroom management was a primary focus using two relevant academic databases. The search terms I used were “classroom management” and “behavior management” in the EBSCO Music Index and “music education classroom management” in Google Scholar. Additional studies were discovered in article references and through the suggestion of a reviewer during the revision process. Articles that did not contain primary source empirical studies or did not appear to feature classroom management as a primary topic based on titles and excerpts on the search results page were excluded. I continued to collect articles until it appeared saturation had been reached. Most articles were summarized with the aid of a template developed by Chandler (2021) with a particular emphasis on content related to classroom management. This template allowed for organized collection and storage of various aspects of each study such as purpose, participants, methods, and findings. A preliminary set of common themes emerged throughout the summarizing process. Articles were sorted into digital folders according to a preliminary set of themes and subsequently refined into a final set of four themes.

Components of Classroom Management

Researchers have used the term classroom management in a variety of ways with a spectrum of definitions from broad to narrow (Brand, 1982; Caldarella et al., 2017; Gordon, 2002; Hedden, 2015; Juchniewicz, 2010; Macleod, 2010; Millican, 2009; Potter, 2021; Talşik, 2015). The following summary does not include every article in this study; however, these may serve as examples of definitions across that spectrum. Among broader definitions, Brand (1982) defined classroom management as anything that addresses a behavior that is deemed unacceptable to the party creating classroom expectations. Millican (2009) emphasized skill categories such as organization and lesson planning, establishing classroom procedures and systems, consistent enforcement of expectations, and building relationships with students. Caldarella et al. (2017) asserted three main concerns for classroom management, “(a) maximized allocation of time for instruction, (b) arrangement of instructional activities to promote students’ engagement and achievement, and (c) proactive behavior management strategies” (p. 23).

Other researchers preferred narrower definitions. For example, Juchniewicz (2010) defined classroom management as “discipline, student on- and off-task behavior, group involvement, etc.” (p. 284). Similarly, Potter (2021) included behavior management, teaching social skills, attention to lesson pacing and student learning, and enforcing consequences, whereas Gee (2022) mentioned “behavior management aligned with instructional goals and classroom activities” (p. 56). Talşik (2015) described classroom management as both addressing negative behaviors and “monitoring events before negative behaviours occur” (p. 554). Those who used the term in the narrowest sense appeared to equate it with behavior management or classroom discipline (Hedden, 2015; Macleod, 2010). Many researchers did not offer a clear definition of the term.

Preservice Music Teacher Beliefs and Perceptions

Researchers have investigated the beliefs and perceptions of preservice music educators regarding classroom management (Bergee, 2002; Brand, 1977, 1982; Burton et al., 2012; Gee, 2022; Hedden, 2015; Hourigan & Scheib, 2009; C. M. Johnson et al., 2002; Juchniewicz, 2014; Kelly, 2000; Legette & McCord, 2014; K. Madsen & Cassidy, 2005; C. Madsen & Kaiser, 1999; McDowell, 2007; Prichard, 2017; Regier, 2021). Classroom management was a topic of interest for preservice music teachers. C. Madsen and Kaiser (1999) found that music education majors in the southeastern United States identified classroom management and discipline as a fear prior to student teaching at nearly twice the rate of other fears. Likewise, Regier (2021) and McDowell (2007) found that classroom management was of significant concern to music students in the Midwest throughout their fieldwork, pre-student teaching, and student teaching placements. In addition, a case study of six instrumental music student teachers conducted by Hourigan and Scheib (2009) found that many participants believed classroom management to be crucial for their success, and several reported being surprised by the need for behavior management skills during their student teaching experience. Finally, in a study of undergraduate and graduate music students, K. Madsen and Cassidy (2005) found that postpracticum preservice teachers commented more frequently on classroom management than preservice educators with no teaching experience or educators with full-time music teaching experience.

Two researchers focused their attention on the effects of student teaching on classroom management beliefs and abilities. Brand (1982) assessed nearly 50 music student teachers and determined that the student teaching experience did not have a significant effect on the participants’ classroom management beliefs. In addition, the participants’ classroom management beliefs did not grow significantly closer to their cooperating teacher’s beliefs. However, Juchniewicz (2014) found that preservice music teachers believed that student teaching did significantly affect their classroom management abilities. Discipline and classroom management were the most frequently listed skills participants believed they had developed or improved on during their student teaching experience.

Several researchers addressed the classroom management self-efficacy (CMSE) of preservice music educators. Regier (2021) found that undergraduate music student teachers indicated that their self-efficacy was most affected by gaining familiarity with their teaching environment over time. Hedden (2015) assessed the development of junior, senior, and graduate music education majors’ confidence in behavior management over the course of a one-semester general music methods course. After participating in the course, participants’ average level of confidence, number of tactics, and number of anticipated behavioral issues increased. Likewise, in a study of primarily freshman and sophomore students (Prichard, 2017), participants indicated that observation, mentoring, and peer teaching influenced their classroom management efficacy beliefs. In a study involving 60 undergraduate music majors at a large midwestern university, Bergee (2002) found CMSE was increased through both mediated (video-based) experiences and direct experience in classrooms. This finding is consonant with Brand (1977) who found that preservice educators at the University of Miami were more effective regarding classroom discipline after participating in video-based simulated training experiences than did students who were trained through lecture and discussion. Prichard (2017) found that music education majors generally held higher music teaching efficacy beliefs than classroom management efficacy beliefs.

Researchers have examined the classroom management concerns of students in the United States and Europe. Burton et al. (2012) included classroom management as one area of concern in an immersive course involving students in the United States and Sweden. Participants discovered differences between cultural expectations regarding teacher-student hierarchy as expressed in classroom management related issues, including expectations for student behavior and how one should address a teacher respectfully. C. M. Johnson et al. (2002) presented a video of four American public school band teachers at rehearsal to university students in Italy and in the United States to examine differences between American and Italian students’ evaluations of the band directors. The researchers found that the American participants commented more on classroom management than did the Italian participants. In addition, both the American and Italian participants commented more on classroom management when watching a less-skilled band director and more on teacher feedback and verbal delivery when watching a more skilled band director. These findings may strengthen those of Burton et al. (2012) indicating varying expectations for classroom management between cultures, however, alternative explanations are possible.

Other researchers have examined the expectations and desires of preservice music teachers for preparation in classroom management, as well as the stages of the teaching experience in which undergraduates were most concerned about classroom management. Legette and McCord (2014) explored preservice music educators’ perceptions of the rewards and challenges they expected to find in their daily work, as well as how their teacher education program might prepare them for their career. Most participants indicated that they would like their university to “do more” (p. 168) to prepare them for classroom management. In addition, most participants indicated that they expected classroom management to be somewhat difficult, whereas some expected it to be very difficult. Kelly’s (2000) findings indicated that undergraduate students were more concerned about encountering discipline problems in the classroom during their internship experience than during their initial inservice teaching.

In a unique study designed to evaluate the contribution of social intelligence to effective music teaching (Juchniewicz, 2010), preservice and inservice teachers rated video recordings of 12 K–12 public school music teachers representing band, chorus, orchestra, and general music according to teacher effectiveness. The most frequently reported reason for rating a teacher as ineffective was poor classroom management.

Inservice Music Teacher Beliefs and Perceptions

Researchers have also devoted attention to the perceptions of inservice music teachers (Barnes, 2010; Blair, 2008; Brinkman & Mallett, 2000; Brophy, 2002; Bush, 2007; Chaffin, 2009; Conway, 2003; DeLorenzo, 1992; Edgar, 2012; Gordon, 2002; Juchniewicz, 2010; King, 1933; Legette, 2013; Miksza et al., 2010; Millican, 2009; Potter, 2021; Roulston et al., 2005; Schmidt, 1989; Teachout, 1997). Research findings have indicated that classroom management is problematic for beginning music teachers (Barnes, 2010; Blair, 2008; Conway, 2003; DeLorenzo, 1992). However, by asking both preservice and inservice music teachers to rank several skills by their importance for contributing to a successful first 3 years of teaching, Teachout (1997) found that experienced teachers believed classroom management to be more important than preservice teachers. Therefore, classroom management was an area of concern for educators across experience levels. In a survey of music educators in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, DeLorenzo (1992) found that classroom management skills were among the top five perceived problem categories for beginning music educators. In another study of novice music teachers in Michigan, Conway (2003) found that some beginning educators perceived classroom management, among other professional responsibilities, to be so pressing that they neglected to address curricular issues in discussion with mentors. Accordingly, in a survey of over 200 music teachers, Brophy (2002) found that classroom management was among the most highly recommended courses for undergraduates by inservice music teachers.

Millican (2009) found that K–12 Texas band and orchestra directors regarded classroom management-related concerns as among the most important aspects of general pedagogical knowledge. In a similar study in Colorado, Miksza et al. (2010) found that classroom management was ranked among the most important teaching skills by K–12 band directors and was reported as one of their greatest struggles. Gordon (2002) found that teachers from Iowa schools indicated “discipline, monitoring of students, poorly defined discipline policies and rejected authority” as moderate sources of stress (Gordon, 2002, p. 160), with males and urban teachers experiencing significantly greater stress regarding classroom discipline than females and non-urban teachers. In addition, a case study of three novice elementary general music teachers in the Midwest (Blair, 2008) indicated difficulties with classroom management as a key issue affecting music teacher self-efficacy. The participating educators found sources for professional support in establishing a community of practice involving mentorship and interaction with peers experiencing similar challenges.

King (1933) investigated the course offerings of nearly 70 institutions of higher learning and reported that classroom management was a topic usually included in music teacher training programs for intermediate grades but was included less for elementary and secondary grades. Much more recently, Schmidt (1989) conducted a survey of over 100 music teacher training institutions and suggested that, in many programs, classroom management was a core part of music teacher preparation. Despite this assertion, other researchers have reported that educators were dissatisfied with their classroom management training. Legette (2013) and Roulston et al. (2005) found data indicating that early-career Georgia music teachers regarded classroom management as somewhat or very difficult, and that the participants would like teacher preparation programs to better prepare students with instruction in classroom management techniques. In a survey of over 300 elementary general music teachers across the United States (Gee, 2022), most participants reported that their teacher preparation program did not offer a classroom management course. As in other studies, the participants reported that they believed their preparation for classroom management was insufficient. The most reported sources for satisfactory development in this area were mentorship and fieldwork or a dedicated course in classroom management. Although many educators believed that their teacher preparation program needed more training in classroom management, Roulston et al. (2005) found that some believed themselves to be well prepared. In addition, the results of one study involving over 100 band, strings, choral, and general music educators (Bush, 2007) indicated a disparity between the professional development interests of practicing music teachers depending on musical discipline. Only general music educators chose classroom management among their top five topics of interest for professional development workshops they would like to attend, while teachers in other disciplines (band, strings, choir) preferred topics such as new repertoire and technology.

Chaffin (2009) inquired about what factors middle and high school band teachers in a school district on the east coast of the United States believed to influence the development of effective rehearsal techniques. Results showed that observation of and discussion with experienced in-house colleagues, reflection and planning, and moving from a reactive to a preventive approach were sources for improvement in classroom management. Although Chaffin focused on the development of classroom management skills, Potter (2021) assessed the factors that contribute to CMSE. Survey results from nearly 300 novice and experienced elementary general music teachers across the six National Association for Music Education (NAfME) regions of the United States indicated that teaching experience had a significant impact on participants’ CMSE, whereas school context (i.e., urban, suburban, or rural) did not.

Some researchers have focused on the perceptions of students and administrators regarding classroom management. In a unique study involving music students ranging from middle school to undergraduates, K. Madsen (2003) found that younger students (middle and high school) ranked educators higher than undergraduate students even when the teacher’s academic instruction was inaccurate if the teacher appeared to be skilled in classroom management. Edgar (2012) investigated the expectations of school principals for music teachers. Interviews with experienced principals of three instrumental music teachers in three separate state high schools showed that even though the participating principals had some expectations for musical ability, they were more concerned with “interpersonal and general teaching skills” including classroom management (Edgar, 2012, p. 142). This finding aligned with the research of Brinkman and Mallett (2000) who found that recently graduated music educators across the United States reported that questions about classroom management were among the most frequently asked by hiring principals.

Approaches to Classroom Management

Researchers have examined approaches to classroom management in music settings (Caldarella et al., 2017; Cremata, 2017; Macleod, 2010; Murillo, 2017; Pellegrino, 2015; Russell, 2000; Savage, 2007; Talşik, 2015). Several investigations have included reports on the classroom management strategies and styles used by inservice music educators. For example, Russell (2000) observed and discussed the classroom management methods of a first-grade music teacher near Montréal, Canada. He found that the teacher used two overarching strategies for classroom management: (a) the “principle of disturbance” (p. 202) in which the teacher changes activities at an appropriate time when students have demonstrated understanding but have not yet tired of the activity and (b) the concept of the zone of proximal development. These strategies guided decisions about lesson structure, content, and pacing, thus assisting in holding students’ attention. Macleod (2010) compared the instructional strategies used by experienced band teachers and orchestra teachers when teaching an unfamiliar musical excerpt to fifth and sixth graders. There was no significant difference in the amount of class time spent on classroom management between the two groups.

Cremata (2017) examined the classroom management styles of educators in popular music programs who identified with the teaching style of a facilitator. Although each of these educators prioritized student autonomy and empowerment, Cremata found that teachers exercised varying degrees of classroom control as they deemed appropriate to their students’ needs at a given moment in the lesson. Educators reported choosing to intervene in classroom activities when they perceived a need to help resolve challenges and direct learning opportunities. Some students in this study reported a greater sense of engagement when educators exercised low control. Talşik (2015) inquired about the classroom management styles of over 150 music teachers in Turkish primary, secondary, and high schools and compared the participants’ preferences for four management styles called authoritarian, authoritative, laissez-faire, and indifferent (Center for Adolescent Studies, 1996). Overall, participants’ least preferred style was authoritarian. However, classroom management style preferences varied based on experience level, grade level taught, and gender. Findings indicated that educators with less experience preferred an authoritative style, whereas those with more experience preferred laissez-faire and indifferent classroom management styles. In addition, female and primary school music teachers preferred the authoritarian style more than secondary or high school teachers. Secondary school music teachers preferred the authoritative style, and high school teachers preferred laissez-faire and indifferent styles.

Researchers have assessed the potential benefits of specific strategies for classroom management. Pellegrino (2015) found that four student teachers with dual placements in both elementary general music and secondary band believed that teacher music-making in the classroom positively impacted student excitement and engagement, therefore serving as a classroom management strategy. Caldarella et al. (2017) investigated the effectiveness of Class-Wide Function Related Intervention Teams (CW-FIT) in a sixth-grade general music class in a Title I-designated elementary school in Utah. They measured student on-task behavior and teacher praise and reprimand rates during observation sessions, including periods of removal and reintroduction of the intervention, and found that CW-FIT resulted in significant improvement in time on task and an increased ratio of teacher praise to reprimand.

Two researchers addressed the use of technology in the music classroom. In a study involving 18 schools in England, Savage (2007) found that most teachers believed that the use of new technologies in music education resulted in a need for new approaches to classroom management, whereas only about a third of the participants believed that new technologies resulted in easier classroom management. In contrast, Murillo (2017) examined teachers’ perspectives regarding the use of a digital curriculum through an online survey of Texas elementary music educators who subscribed to digital music curricula and found that survey results indicated that most participants reported “observable improvements in the classroom” (Murillo, 2017, p. 24) in student behavior and classroom management.

Although there is scant empirical research about specific strategies for classroom management in music education, practitioner articles on the topic abound and are sometimes cited by researchers as sources of insight concerning experienced music educators and the types of strategies they recommend to peers (e.g., Hedden, 2015; Roulston et al., 2005). Examples of such contributions to the field may be found in many journals such as those published by the NAfME.

Implications for Practice and Suggestions for Further Research

The purpose of this literature review was to synthesize extant research on classroom management in the K–12 music classroom. Areas of concern for researchers included: the components of classroom management, preservice and inservice music educators’ perceptions regarding the experience of classroom management, and approaches to classroom management. The findings of the studies revealed several insights for practicing educators. For example, the findings of this current literature review agreed with prior research (Gee, 2022) that there is no universal definition of classroom management. Researchers used the term classroom management in a variety of ways with a spectrum of definitions from broad to narrow. This current review of literature contributes a summary of some of the ways in which music education researchers have used the term classroom management. Educators might consider such definitions of the term as a starting point for forming their own understanding of the components of classroom management.

Nevertheless, classroom management is an area of concern for both preservice and inservice teachers. Research findings have indicated that educators have expressed a desire for more preparation in this area. Such a consensus of student and teacher voices might serve as an invitation for university administrators and faculty members to reconsider their program offerings in classroom management. Because studies have shown that preservice teachers gain competence and confidence throughout both their education and professional experience (Hedden, 2015; Juchniewicz, 2014; Potter, 2021); this current review of literature also serves as an affirmation to mentor teachers for the importance of their role in passing on expertise in classroom management to novice teachers. In addition, because the results of international studies indicated that preservice teachers from diverse cultures may approach classroom management differently (Burton et al., 2012; C. M. Johnson et al., 2002), teacher educators and mentor teachers should be sensitive to the varying cultural expectations of their student teachers. Although the topic of culturally responsive pedagogy in music education is by no means new (e.g., Lind & McKoy, 2016), the findings of this current literature review indicate that empirical research is beginning to confirm the importance of cultural awareness in music teacher preparation relating specifically to classroom management. Despite the subject’s importance to educators, there was little research investigating the effectiveness of specific classroom management strategies in the context of K–12 music education.

Given the variety of definitions for classroom management found in extant literature, researchers and educators might carefully and explicitly define the term classroom management to ensure the understanding of their audience. The field of music education may benefit from future studies designed to investigate researchers and educators’ perceptions of the components of classroom management, such as how practicing educators choose from among the varying conceptions of classroom management, and how culture might intersect with educators’ and students’ expectations for classroom management. According to current literature, research conducted in general education classrooms (e.g., Caldarella et al., 2017), observation, mentorship, peer teaching experiences (Prichard, 2017), and general teaching experience accumulated over time (Juchniewicz, 2014; Regier, 2021) may serve as sources of insight when developing one’s understanding of the components of classroom management. In addition, some researchers chose to cite articles from practitioner journals as sources of insight about the concerns of experienced music educators and the types of strategies they recommend to peers (e.g., Hedden, 2015; Roulston et al., 2005). Practicing educators should consider consulting such sources in addition to empirical research. Because definitions of the term classroom management vary so widely, researchers might expect new conceptions of classroom management to develop at a pace consistent with the rapid societal changes of the 21st century. For example, how might the multicultural nature of today’s classrooms necessitate the challenging of narrow conceptions of a well-managed classroom as teachers seek to serve their students in a culturally responsive manner?

There is a need for more empirical research on the effectiveness of specific classroom management strategies in the context of music education. Researchers have identified unique challenges for our field such as large class sizes, varying instructional strategies, the need for constant collaborative learning, and the public nature of learning outcomes often expressed in performances and competitions. As Russell (2000) wrote, “a management strategy is, or should be, derived from the characteristics of the subject matter and from the types of tasks that students are expected to carry out” (p. 220). Therefore, educators will benefit from research-based best practices specifically tested in their subject area. Researchers in the future may also consider the distinctives of classroom management in the contexts of vocal, instrumental, and general music, as well as examining the differences between classroom management in primary and secondary music education, and the influence of public performance on classroom management.

Most of the researchers who assessed specific strategies for classroom management in music education did so at the elementary (K–6) level. Due to their rare nature, the results of these studies are of great value and should be carefully considered by practitioners. However, further research will be needed to assess the use of such strategies at the secondary level. Each learning environment will likely have some unique needs for the specifics of day-to-day classroom management; however, it is notable that the ways in which educators’ confidence in classroom management developed were consistent in differing educational contexts. For example, Potter (2021) found that regardless of the economic status of a given school, it was a teaching experience that significantly impacted one’s confidence in classroom management. Similarly, the consensus of research undertaken with participants across 40 National Association of Schools of Music accredited institutions was that experience and mentorship helped to develop confidence in classroom management (Prichard, 2017). Therefore, educators would be wise to actively seek out such mentorship from their earliest years in education. In addition, beginning educators can reasonably expect that their own confidence in classroom management will grow with experience. It should be noted that, although an educator’s actual skill in classroom management will likely improve with mentorship and experience, most researchers addressed only growth in CMSE or confidence, rather than objective skill.

The specific strategies for classroom management studied by Pellegrino (2015), Caldarella et al. (2017), and Murillo (2017) yielded promising results such as greater time on task and improvements in student behavior, however, more research is needed to assess the potential drawbacks to these approaches. Although observation and reporting on practicing music educators’ approaches to classroom management is valuable (Pellegrino, 2015; Russell, 2000), this type of research represents the successful application of such strategies by only a small number of educators; therefore, it cannot be generalized without further research. In addition, Caldarella et al. (2017) wrote that many teachers struggle to consistently implement positive behavioral supports (PBS) in the classroom. What might be the obstacles preventing the consistent application of such an approach? In addition, do PBS-based approaches such as CW-FIT run the risk of undermining the intrinsically motivating nature of music?

Regarding the use of digital curricula (Murillo, 2017), does the use of such curricula as a classroom management tool ensure equal opportunities for active musical participation as in traditional curricula? Or can the use of digital curricula encourage learning primarily through reception rather than participation? Educators might consider such questions when implementing the above strategies. In addition, the articles in this current literature review focused on traditional in-person classroom education. Given the ongoing global influence of the COVID-19 pandemic, additional research will be needed regarding classroom management in an online classroom environment.

There are some limitations of this current review of literature. First, it is possible that the use of alternative search terms or analysis methods may have yielded additional relevant articles. Second, my summary of researchers’ definitions of the term classroom management did not include every article cited in this literature review, but rather featured examples of definitions across the spectrum from broad to narrow. The field of music education would benefit from a more exhaustive study of researchers’ varying conceptions of classroom management. Third, by focusing exclusively on research articles, the wealth of information about classroom management practices in practitioner journals was not presented. Future studies about the classroom management practices and educators’ beliefs featured in these journals, including a comparison of emphases with articles published in research journals, would be of great benefit. Finally, there were additional articles available that likely bear importance for this area of study but did not appear to feature classroom management as a primary topic. For example, a comprehensive review of articles regarding teacher preparation in music education would likely result in additional insights about the role of classroom management during that process, or a review of literature on teaching students with disabilities may yield insights on the particulars of classroom management in that field. Although there is much potential for future research on this topic, it is clear that music educators recognize the importance of classroom management.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Jacob Langstaff

References

Barnes

(2010). Teaching music: The first year. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 185, 63–76. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41110366

Bergee

M. J.

(2002). Direct and mediated experiences: Effects on classroom management self-efficacy. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 12(1), 33–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/10570837020120010301

Blair

D. B.

(2008). Mentoring novice teachers: Developing communities of practice. Research Studies in Music Education, 30(2), 97–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/1321103X08097502

Brand

(1977). Effectiveness of simulation techniques in teaching behavior management. Journal of Research in Music Education, 25(2), 131–138. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345192

Brand

(1982). Effects of student teaching on the classroom management beliefs. International Journal of Music Education, 39(3), 340–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761421990787

Brinkman

Mallett

(2000). Questions asked in job interviews of music teachers. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 10(1), 16–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/105708370001000104

Brophy

T. S.

(2002). Teacher reflections on undergraduate music education. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 12(1), 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/10570837020120010501

Burton

S. L.

Westvall

Karlsson

(2012). Stepping aside from myself: Intercultural perspectives on music teacher education. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 23(1), 92–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083712471198

Bush

J. E.

(2007). Importance of various professional development opportunities and workshop topics as determined by in-service music teachers. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 16(2), 10–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/10570837070160020103

10.

Caldarella

Williams

Jolstead

K. A.

Wills

H. P.

(2017). Managing student behavior in an elementary school music classroom: A study of class-wide function related intervention teams. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 35(3), 23–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/8755123315626229

11.

Center for Adolescent Studies. (1996). What is your classroom management profile? Teacher Talk, 1(2). http://www.indiana.edu/%7Ecafs/tt/v1i2/what.html

12.

Chaffin

C. R.

(2009). Perceptions of instrumental teachers regarding the development of effective rehearsal techniques. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 181, 21–36. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40319225

13.

Chandler

(2021). Review of literature template [Unpublished manuscript]. Music Department, Austin Peay State University.

14.

Conway

C. M.

(2003). An examination of district-sponsored beginning music teacher mentor practices. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51(1), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345645

15.

Cremata

(2017). Facilitation in popular music education. Journal of Popular Music Education, 1(1), 63–81. https://doi.org/10.1386/jpme.1.1.63_1

16.

DeLorenzo

L. C.

(1992). The perceived problems of beginning music teachers. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 113, 9–25. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40318508

17.

Edgar

(2012). Communication of expectations between principals and entry-year instrumental music teachers: Implications for music teacher assessment. Arts Education Policy Review, 113, 136–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2012.719426

18.

Gee

J. P.

(2022). Elementary general music teachers’ preparation in classroom management. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 31(2), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/10570837211062183

19.

Gordon

D. G.

(2002). Discipline in the music classroom: One component contributing to teacher stress. Music Education Research, 4(1), 157–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613800220119831

20.

Hedden

D. G.

(2015). Music education preservice teachers’ confidence in resolving behavior problems. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 34(1), 33–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/8755123314548040

21.

Hourigan

R. M.

Scheib

J. W.

(2009). Inside and outside the undergraduate music education curriculum: Student teacher perceptions of the value of skills, abilities, and understandings. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 18(2), 48–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083708327871

22.

Johnson

C. M.

Price

H. E.

Tafuri

(2002). Teaching evaluations and comments by preservice music educators from Italy and the U.S.A. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 153/154, 30–35. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40319137

23.

Juchniewicz

(2010). The influence of social intelligence on effective music teaching. Journal of Research in Music Education, 58(3), 276–293. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429410378368

24.

Juchniewicz

(2014). An examination of social intelligence development in preservice music teachers. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 23(2), 21–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083713475628

25.

Kelly

S. N.

(2000). Preservice music education fears of the internship and initial inservice teaching experience. Contributions to Music Education, 27(2), 41–50. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24127017

26.

King

C. B.

(1933). College courses in music education. Music Supervisors Journal, 20(2), 25–26, 28, 64. https://doi.org/10.2307/3384503

27.

Legette

R. M.

(2013). Perceptions of early-career school music teachers regarding their preservice preparation. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 32(1), 12–17. https://doi-org.ezproxy.lib.apsu.edu/10.1177/8755123313502342

28.

Legette

R. M.

McCord

D. H.

(2014). Pre-service music teachers’ perceptions of teaching and teacher training. Contributions to Music Education, 40, 163–176. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24711077

29.

Lind

V. R.

McKoy

C. L.

(2016). Culturally responsive teaching in music education: From understanding to application. Routledge.

30.

Lohmeyer

A. Z.

(2017). Managing and correcting defiant behavior through music. General Music Today, 31(1), 34–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1048371317699936

31.

Macleod

(2010). A comparison of instructional strategies used by experienced band and orchestra teachers when teaching a first-year class an unfamiliar music excerpt. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 185, 49–61. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41110365

32.

Madsen

Kaiser

(1999). Pre-internship fears of student teaching. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 17(2), 27–32.

33.

Madsen

(2003). The effect of accuracy of instruction, teacher delivery, and student attentiveness on musicians’ evaluation of teacher effectiveness. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51(1), 38–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345647

34.

Madsen

Cassidy

(2005). The effect of focus of attention and teaching experience on perceptions of teaching effectiveness and student learning. Journal of Research in Music Education, 53(3), 222–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/002242940505300304

35.

McDowell

(2007). Are they ready to student teach? Reflections from 10 music education majors concerning their three semesters of field experience. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 16(2), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/10570837070160020106

36.

Miksza

Roeder

Biggs

(2010). Surveying Colorado band directors’ opinions of skills and characteristics important to successful music teaching. Journal of Research in Music Education, 57(4), 364–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429409351655

37.

Millican

J. S.

(2009). Band and orchestra teachers’ rankings of general pedagogical knowledge and skill. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 19(1), 68–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083709344045

38.

Murillo

R. E.

(2017). The 21st century elementary music classroom and the digital music curriculum: A synergism of technology and traditional pedagogy. Texas Music Education Research, 14–27. https://www.tmea.org/wp-content/uploads/Research/TexasMusicEducationResearch_2017.pdf

39.

Pellegrino

(2015). Becoming music-making music teachers: Connecting music making, identity, wellbeing, and teaching for four student teachers. Research Studies in Music Education, 37(2), 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/1321103X15589336

40.

Potter

J. L.

(2021). Novice and experienced elementary general music teachers’ classroom management self-efficacy. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 30(2), 65–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083720980465

41.

Prichard

(2017). A mixed-methods investigation of preservice music teaching efficacy beliefs and commitment to music teaching. Journal of Research in Music Education, 65(2), 237–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429417710387

42.

Regier

B. D.

(2021). Preservice music teachers’ self-efficacy and concerns before and during student teaching. International Journal of Music Education, 39(3), 340–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761421990787

43.

Rohwer

Henry

(2004). University teachers’ perceptions of requisite skills and characteristics of effective music teachers. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 13(2), 38–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/10570837040130020104

44.

Roulston

Legette

Womack

S. T.

(2005). Beginning music teachers’ perceptions of the transition from university to teaching in schools. Music Education Research, 7(1), 59–82.

45.

Russell

(2000). Contexts of music classroom management. Arts and Learning Research Journal, 16(1), 195–225. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED446006.pdf#page=198

46.

Savage

(2007). Reconstructing music education through ICT. Research in Education, 78(1), 65–77. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.7227/RIE.78.6?casa_token=5YRYagbI3SAAAAAA:ZkIZLvLJ5oZCEXxeqXgQblJOveUKISNHDd36mbE8aUgBeE0eoAqnfb7sksBpN_5sdM78OnPV2dWv

47.

Schmidt

C. P.

(1989). An investigation of undergraduate music education curriculum content. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 99, 42–56. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40318324

48.

Talşik

(2015). Investigating the classroom management profiles of in-service music teachers in Turkey. Journal of Education and Psychology, 6(1), 554–557.

49.

Teachout

(1997). Preservice and experienced teachers’ opinions of skills and behaviors important to successful music teaching. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45(1), 41–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345464