Little is known about the feasibility and acceptability of interventions designed to address the needs of high school students with emotional and behavioral challenges and adopted by their teachers. In this study, 336 general and special education teachers rated classwide interventions (e.g., expectations, routines, positive student–teacher interactions [PSTI]) and individual student interventions (e.g., study skills, organizational skills) in terms of priority, feasibility, and acceptability before implementation. Teachers who implemented the interventions rated their acceptability post-implementation. Results indicated that acceptability ratings varied across interventions, and it appeared that teachers rated interventions that required the least amount of time to implement (e.g., PSTI) most acceptable and those that required the most time for implementation (e.g., study skills) least acceptable. Lack of time, perceived lack of effectiveness, and poor environmental fit were often cited as reasons for lack of feasibility. Regression analyses revealed that teacher characteristics (e.g., years of experience) and type of intervention (e.g., classwide vs. individualized) contributed to teacher ratings of intervention acceptability. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.