Studies show that at the beginning of class, the teachers should organize classroom rules and regulations are a good implication for managing the classroom effectively [3]. Moreover, students are able to recognize that the most effective teachers in terms of classroom management are those who, right from the beginning of the learning year, clearly set the boundaries of the student’s classroom behaviour and its respective consequences [4].

According to Qinglan et al. [5], teachers have a big role in creating good coping styles to create a positive and smooth classroom environment. Teachers can create such conditions inside the classrooms where students feel safe and learn to work together effectively. Teachers have the power to increase learning by minimizing disruptions through fostering attitudes of trust, tolerance, acceptance, and cooperation among students.

One of the most important activities of a teacher is increasing the provision of quality instruction and to decrease student misbehaviour, and distraction from schoolwork [6]. Theses creates effective classroom management and significant aspect of professional practice with broad implications for student learning and welfare [7].

Sun and Shek [8] study indicates that the achievements of educational goals and teachers’ professional growth were based on teachers’ ability to manage and organize the classroom and students behaviours. Furthermore, Gelpi [9] shows that the teachers should focus on preventing rather than reacting to behaviour procedures establishes a positive classroom environment in which the teacher focuses on students who behave appropriately.

Teachers’ coping styles are important to mediating the relationship between teacher concerns about student misbehaviour and their use of classroom management techniques [10]. Specifically, teachers who are more concerned about student misbehaviour use more aggressive classroom management, and teachers who perceive their classes to contain students who are more likely to misbehave more often use aggressive strategies such as punishment. Furthermore, teachers who use avoidant and passive coping strategies employ more coercion and aggressively control towards students, while teachers who use more socially oriented problem-solving coping strategies use more inclusive management techniques such as discussion, hinting and rewarding.

Copying strategies used by teachers are in turn grouped into coping styles, such as passive, avoidant coping, or social problem solving, which are characterized by a number of conceptually and empirically related strategies [6]. The present study also sought to examine Bahir Dar University teachers’ coping strategies and classroom management strategies toward student misbehaviour of them and it was guided by these research questions:

• Are there any statistically significant differences between male and female teachers regarding student misbehavior?
• Is there a significant relationship between teacher coping styles and classroom management techniques towards student misbehaviour?
• How the work experience, gender, and teacher coping styles predicts student’s misbehaviour?

The study mainly used correlational design because it intended to explore the relationship between teachers’ coping style and classroom management strategies against student misbehavior. The present study targeted teachers who are teaching in Bahir Dar University Peda campus, three colleges and faculties, and 20 departments by using a stratified random sampling method to select 304 teachers.

Data was collected by respecting the participants’ right to participation. The voluntary nature of their participation and the possibility of withdrawing at any time without reason was explained to the participants, after which informed consent for participation, and for having their anonymous responses published was obtained, ensuring confidentiality in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Independent t-test, Pearson correlation coefficient, and multiple regressions were used for data analysis to answer research questions.

As indicated in Table 1, participants were 57.9% of male and 42.1% of female teachers and they have a bachelor's degree (87.8%) and master’s degree (12.2). Most of the teachers have between 11-20 years’ work experience (56.2%) followed by above 20 years (25%).

The statistical analysis in Table 2 revealed that there was a statistically significant difference between male and female teachers in student-observed misbehaviour (Truancy (t = -2.05, df = 303, p<0.05), cheating (t = .51, df = 303, p<0.05), disobeying (t = -.77, df = 303, p<0.05), interrupting students and teachers (t = -1.23, df = 303, p<0.05) and aggression (t = -3.76, df = 303, p<0.05). This implies that students are reflecting truancy, disobeying, interrupting students and teachers, and aggression behaviour higher among female teachers than male teachers. On the other hand, male teachers were less in control student cheating behaviour than female teachers.

At least it is displayed in Table 3; statistical analysis shows that there was a statistically significant difference between male and female teachers in their passive avoidant coping and social problem-solving methods (t = -1.92, df = 303, p<0.05 and t = .63, df = 303, p<0.05) respectively.

Pearson product-moment correlation was computed in Table 4 below to see the relationship between teacher coping style and classroom management strategies. The results revealed that passive avoidant coping was negatively correlated with recognition and reward (r=-.23, p<.05), and discussion (r= -.46, p<.01). The outcome is that the teacher uses more passive avoidant coping that employs less punishment, recognition, and reward and discussion. Social problem solving was positively and significantly related to both recognition and reward (r= .26, p<.01), and discussion (r= .34, p<.01); and negatively correlated to hinting (r=-.28, p<.05) and aggression (r=-.18, p<.05). The findings indicated that teachers who use more social problem-solving coping strategies employ more recognition and reward and discussion towards students, and less use, hinting, and aggression. Teacher relaxation style was positively correlated with recognition and reward (r= .41, p<.01), hinting (r= .22, p<.05), and discussion (r= .21, p<.05). The result shows that teachers use more relaxation, employ more recognition and reward, hinting and discussion with students.

A multiple linear regression analysis was used to examine the relationship between student’s misbehavior and predictor variables (work experience, gender, and teacher coping styles). The results indicated in Table 5 stated that the predictors explained 29.3% of variance (R² = 0.293, Adjusted R² =0.259, F (3,300) = 2.77, P< 0.05). The analysis showed that sex and teachers coping styles were a significantly higher to predict student misbehavior ((β = .049, t (303) =0.053, P> 0.05) and (β = -0.29, t (303) = -3.12, P< 0.05)) respectively.