Assessment Process Types

Authors hypothesized BTAM teams could structure assessment in four overarching ways

we hypothesized that BTAM teams could structure their processes and deliberations in four overarching ways when assessing the seriousness of a particular student’s behavior or the potential risk of harm they posed.

• Assessment Process Types
• Prior Research

cite page 58 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

Options capture the standardization of a team's process across cases

The options were meant to capture the degree of consistency or standardization that the BTAM team applied across cases—that is, whether these teams use a common structure and assessment process to consistently collect similar data across cases and a consistent method for deliberation across the set of cases referred to them.

• Assessment Process Types
• Key Terms

cite page 58 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

Table 8.1 presents four operational types and the percentage of principals choosing each

Table 8.1 presents the four operational types included in a survey question focused on the assessment process and the percentage of principals who indicated that the option best described the structure and processes of their BTAM teams.

• Assessment Process Types
• Survey Methodology

cite page 58 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

Types further down the table are more likely to produce consistent results and maintain performance

Drawing on the research literature on program implementation and quality improvement, operational types that are further down the table reflect modes of BTAM implementation that are more likely to produce consistent results case by case and maintain performance over time, thanks to their standardization (see, e.g., Bohanon, Caputo Love, and Morrissey, 2021).

• Assessment Process Types
• Implementation Fidelity

cite page 58 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

Teams are spread across the four operational types

As shown in Table 8.1, BTAM teams at schools across the country are spread across the four different operational types.

• Assessment Process Types
• Variability Of Approaches

cite page 58 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

Only 31 percent of teams use highly standardized approaches

Sample (N = 1394) · Teams answering how the team assesses seriousness during meetings

Only 31 percent of teams are using what we labeled as highly standardized approaches—that is, applying common structures and processes in meetings and both collecting consistent data and using a standardized process for threat assessment across referred cases.

• Assessment Process Types
• Standardization Gaps

cite page 58 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

79 percent of teams use a common meeting structure (sum of bottom three rows of Table 8.1)

Sample (N = 1394) · Teams answering how the team assesses seriousness during meetings

However, 79 percent of teams are using a common meeting structure (the sum of the bottom three rows in Table 8.1)

• Assessment Process Types
• Team Meetings

cite page 58 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

NTAC guidance emphasizes standardization across cases through clearly defined processes

NTAC guidance for effective BTAM implementation in K–12 schools emphasizes standardization across cases, through the establishment of “clearly defined processes and procedures to guide assessments” (NTAC, 2018, p. 7).

• Assessment Process Types
• NTAC Guidance

cite page 58 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

Unstructured BTAM: 21 percent of schools; common structure No, similar data No, standardized process

Sample (N = 1394) · Teams answering how the team assesses seriousness during meetings

Unstructured BTAM | No | No | No | 21

• Assessment Process Types
• Standardization Gaps

cite page 59 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

Individualized threat assessment: 28 percent of schools; common structure Yes, similar data No, stan

Sample (N = 1394) · Teams answering how the team assesses seriousness during meetings

Individualized threat assessment | Yes | No | No | 28

• Assessment Process Types
• Standardization Gaps

cite page 59 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

Threat assessment with standardized data: 20 percent of schools; common structure Yes, similar data

Sample (N = 1394) · Teams answering how the team assesses seriousness during meetings

Threat assessment with standardized data | Yes | Yes | No | 20

• Assessment Process Types
• Standardization Gaps

cite page 59 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

Highly standardized BTAM: 31 percent of schools; common structure Yes, similar data Yes, standardize

Sample (N = 1394) · Teams answering how the team assesses seriousness during meetings

Highly standardized BTAM | Yes | Yes | Yes | 31

• Assessment Process Types
• Standardization Gaps

cite page 59 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

Table 8.1 survey question on how team operates when assessing seriousness (n = 1,394)

NOTE: This table depicts response data from the following survey question: “Which of the following statements best describes how your BTAM team operates when it is assessing the seriousness of a particular student’s behavior or potential threat during a team meeting?” (n = 1,394).

• Assessment Process Types
• Survey Methodology

cite page 59 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

Large teams and teams also supported by district-level teams were more likely to use an entirely sta

Large teams (meaning teams with more roles represented) and teams in schools that were also supported by district-level BTAM teams were more likely to apply an entirely standardized process to the behavioral threat assessment process.

• Assessment Process Types
• District Level Team
• Team Size

cite page 59 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

Going down Table 8.1, teams and processes become more structured and consistent

Going down the table, teams and their processes become more structured and more consistent in how they operate—collect data, apply assessment practices, and respond to cases that may pose risk to their school.

• Assessment Process Types
• Standardization Gaps

cite page 59 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

Structure and consistency help ensure threats are not missed and students are treated fairly

Such structure and consistency are important in helping ensure that situations that might pose a threat are not missed and that students are treated fairly and appropriately through the BTAM process.

• Assessment Process Types
• Implementation Fidelity

cite page 59 Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?

Principals presented a mixed picture: some structured processes, most less formalized deliberations

Principals presented a mixed picture of how their BTAM teams approach these various elements, with some schools following structured processes but most relying on less formalized deliberations.

• Assessment Process Types
• Standardization Gaps

cite page 110 Ch 14: Discussion and Implications

A.38 All BTAM activiti…: 23.5 (all teams incl. other school-based), 20.8 (official BTAM teams only)

Sample (N = 1626 | 1394 by column) · Table A.38 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only

All BTAM activities from meeting structure to assessment processes differ across individual cases. | 23.5 | 20.8

• Assessment Process Types
• Standardization Gaps

cite page 130 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

A.38 BTAM meetings fol…: 28.1 (all teams incl. other school-based), 28.0 (official BTAM teams only)

Sample (N = 1626 | 1394 by column) · Table A.38 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only

BTAM meetings follow a common structure and process, though the data sought and deliberations vary significantly from case to case. | 28.1 | 28.0

• Assessment Process Types
• Standardization Gaps

cite page 130 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

A.38 BTAM meetings fol…: 20.4 (all teams incl. other school-based), 20.3 (official BTAM teams only)

Sample (N = 1626 | 1394 by column) · Table A.38 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only

BTAM meetings follow a common structure and process, and we collect similar data for each case considered by the team. | 20.4 | 20.3

• Assessment Process Types
• Standardization Gaps

cite page 130 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

A.38 BTAM meetings fol…: 28.0 (all teams incl. other school-based), 31.0 (official BTAM teams only)

Sample (N = 1626 | 1394 by column) · Table A.38 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only

BTAM meetings follow a common structure and process, we collect similar data for each case considered by the team, and we have standardized processes that guide the application of structured tools for conducting our assessment. | 28.0 | 31.0

• Assessment Process Types
• Standardization Gaps

cite page 130 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

A.38 N: all teams incl. other school-based: N=1,626; official BTAM teams only: N=1,394

N | 1,626 | 1,394

• Assessment Process Types
• Standardization Gaps

cite page 130 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

A.38 note: Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team (or an a

Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team (or an alternative team that performs BTAM-like functions) saw this question.

• Assessment Process Types

cite page 130 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

A.38 note: Columns may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.

Sample (no n: a percentage change, not a share of a sample) · a percentage that is not a share of a sample (e.g. a percentage-point change or a weighted estimate of the population)

Columns may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.

• Assessment Process Types

cite page 130 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies