Schools experience difficulty retaining special educators to serve students with emotional or behavioral disorders (EBD) in self-contained settings, as they have higher rates of burnout and attrition than other educators. Administrators could prevent these outcomes by improving working conditions, but research provides limited insights into which conditions are most important for these special educators. Using structural equation modeling to analyze data from a national survey, we found that special educators’ perceptions of adequacy of planning time, workload manageability, stress, and emotional exhaustion mediated relationships between other working conditions and intent to stay. Specifically, special educators who reported that they (a) spent more time planning outside school (b) supervised more paraprofessionals, (c) had limited access to curricular resources, and (d) served more heterogeneous instructional groups were more likely to report having insufficient planning time, unmanageable workloads, stress, emotional exhaustion, and intent to leave. Results imply that administrators should target planning time, curricular resources, and instructional grouping.

Students with emotional disturbance (ED) depend upon special education teachers (SETs) to use evidence-based practices (EBPs) to promote their well-being. SETs, in turn, depend upon school leaders to provide working conditions that support learning and implementation of academic and social EBPs. We conducted an integrative narrative review of research examining working conditions SETs experience serving students with ED in self-contained schools and classes, to better understand whether SETs in these settings experience conditions necessary to effectively implement academic and social EBPs. Our findings suggest that conditions necessary for learning and implementing EBPs are seldom present in these settings. In addition, the extant research on SETs’ working conditions in these settings is largely disconnected from research investigating teachers’ use of EBPs.

Special education teachers (SETs) who teach students with emotional or behavioral disorders (EBD) in self-contained settings are often less qualified, more stressed and burned out, and more likely to leave teaching than other SETs, resulting in a less effective workforce teaching students with significant behavioral and academic needs. Working conditions are a lever by which outcomes can be improved for SETs in these settings, yet the extant research on SETs’ working conditions in self-contained settings is scarce; no researchers have comprehensively examined these SETs’ working conditions using a national sample. To fill this crucial gap in the literature, we surveyed a national sample ( n = 171) of SETs serving students with EBD in self-contained classes. We describe findings in terms of the working conditions that SETs experienced—social (e.g., administrator support, paraprofessionals, professional development) and logistical (e.g., instructional grouping, instructional resources, planning time)—providing implications for research, policy, and practice.

Cultivating and retaining special educators competent to serve students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBDs) has proven persistently difficult. Improving educational systems’ capacity to meet this challenge will require better understanding of the roles special educators in these settings should be prepared for and supported to fulfill. The purpose of this qualitative investigation was to explore how four special educators in self-contained classes for students with EBD defined and experienced their roles. We found that teachers defined their primary roles as promoting students’ behavioral and academic growth; however, they also described experiencing dissonance between their ideal roles and their actual daily work. This dissonance was evident in two respects. First, extra responsibilities and emergent responsibilities occupied substantial energy. Second, social and material contexts often facilitated their behavioral role but less often supported their academic role. Findings have implications for improving the quality of the teacher workforce in self-contained settings for students with EBD.

Students with emotional/behavioral disorders (EBD) in self-contained settings depend on special educators to deliver high-quality instruction and behavior management, and special educators depend on administrators to create supportive working environments. Yet, to date, no studies have examined how working conditions relate to special educators’ provision of effective instructional or behavior management practices for students with EBD in self-contained settings. To fill this crucial gap, we conducted a national survey of 171 special educators serving students with EBD in self-contained settings. Using structural equation modeling, we found special educators who experienced more supportive working conditions (i.e., stronger logistical resources and lower demands) reported more manageable workloads, experienced less emotional exhaustion and stress, felt greater self-efficacy for instruction, and reported using evidence-supported instructional practices more often with their students. Results have implications for future research and practice.

Executive functioning (EF) is key to students’ school and lifelong success and reflects both genetic predisposition and sensitivity to negative and positive experiences. Yet there is less available literature investigating the relationship between typical experiences within school environments and student EF development. This is unfortunate, as school environments are potentially more malleable than home- or community-based factors. Thus, the purpose of this article is to present a systematic review of the literature from 2000 to 2017 to understand how school-, classroom-, and dyadic-level (teacher–student and peer–student) experiences relate to student EF development. Across 20 studies, we found that classroom emotional support and teacher–student conflict were the most consistent predictors of student EF development, with emerging support for school-level and peer-level variables. We discuss findings in relation to school-based inhibitors and facilitators of student EF and provide implications for education research and practice.

Despite school‐based services, adolescents with maladaptive behavior experience negative outcomes, highlighting the need for insight into factors that contribute to and escalate behavior problems during middle school—a high‐risk period. We examined how perceived school stress, stress regulation (engagement/disengagement coping, involuntary responses), and executive function of 79 middle schoolers with and without significant behavior problems were related to internalizing and externalizing behaviors. Results showed students with significant behavior problems (a) had lower executive function abilities and higher peer stress, (b) used less engagement coping, and (c) reported more maladaptive behaviors than typical peers. For all students, school‐based stress positively predicted behavior problems and use of stress regulation techniques, with group moderating effects. Involuntary responses to stress positively predicted maladaptive behaviors, whereas engagement/disengagement coping predicted internalizing behaviors only. As a mediator, engagement coping decreased the relationship between perceived stress and behavior problems. Based on these findings, we highlight important prevention and intervention areas.

Students with significant behavioral and social problems experience some of the poorest outcomes in school and beyond. It is imperative, therefore, that educational researchers and school-based professionals address the needs of students who exhibit maladaptive behavior to alter their poor outcome trajectory. Social problem-solving (SPS) instruction is a promising approach for improving social competence and changing problem behaviors. Despite documented outcomes for SPS instruction in school settings, Coleman, Wheeler, and Webber's review appears to be the most up-to-date compilation of the SPS literature. Thus, the purpose of this article is to present a more current review of the literature on SPS interventions in school settings. We examine and summarize studies investigating SPS interventions in K-12 settings from 1993 to 2015 and discuss findings and implications for educational research and practice.