18 claims on pp. 58–131 (fact 13, statement 1, conjecture 2, definition 2).
The assessment process can be divided into two main stages: (1) gathering information to understand the nature and severity of the concerning behavior or threat and (2) making a judgment about the risk of harm the individual poses to themself or others.
Because the decisions made by BTAM teams can be high stakes for both the students involved and individuals concerned by student behavior and those potentially affected by any threats, questions may arise about whether decisions made by the team are correct and whether they appropriately and fairly balance student and school community safety needs.
Given the sensitivity of the data and decisionmaking involved in behavioral threat assessment, it can be difficult for the process to be transparent enough to satisfy everyone in all cases.
To probe these issues, we asked principals whether they thought it would be feasible for their BTAM team to transparently explain the outcome of their threat assessment process.
Sample (N = 1392) · Appendix A table base (respondents answering the table question; see note for tables)
Sixty percent of principals said they believe it would be feasible for their BTAM teams to justify their decisions about a specific case to concerned individuals outside the teams.
In other words, if asked, BTAM teams would be able to explain the rationale behind an assessment decision to a parent, guardian, or other concerned individual (i.e., why a student was determined to pose or not pose a threat).
Principals indicated that such explanations would be possible because their BTAM process captures detailed information about both the rationale and data behind an assessment.
Sample (N = 1392) · Appendix A table base (respondents answering the table question; see note for tables)
Another 32 percent of principals said they believe their BTAM team could potentially justify an outcome.
Principals were evenly split over why this might be difficult: Half of this group noted that explaining an outcome would be difficult because of how much their process differs from case to case (i.e., their team does not use a standardized process for assessment), and the other half felt it would be difficult because assessments are the result of verbal deliberations among BTAM team members (i.e., there is no documentation that could serve as the basis for explanation).
Sample (N = 1392) · Appendix A table base (respondents answering the table question; see note for tables)
The remaining 7 percent of principals said their BTAM team would not be able to explain the rationale behind the outcome of their threat assessment process of a student because their BTAM files and deliberations are closed.
Principals in schools with more standardized and well-documented BTAM processes—often schools with large BTAM teams (meaning teams with more roles represented) and those served by both school-level and district-level BTAM teams—were most likely to indicate that their teams would be able explain the rationale behind an assessment decision to concerned individuals (e.g., parents or other community members), highlighting a key advantage of consistency in assessment procedures.
Sample (N = 1623 | 1392 by column) · Table A.39 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
No, because our BTAM files and deliberations are closed. We cannot share any information with parents, guardians, or other third-parties. | 7.8 | 7.4
Sample (N = 1623 | 1392 by column) · Table A.39 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
Potentially, but it would be difficult because of how much our process differs from case to case. | 17.5 | 16.1
Sample (N = 1623 | 1392 by column) · Table A.39 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
Potentially, but could be difficult because assessments are the result of verbal deliberations among our BTAM team members. | 16.9 | 15.9
Sample (N = 1623 | 1392 by column) · Table A.39 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
Yes, because our BTAM process captures detailed information on both the rationale and data behind an assessment that would provide a basis for explanation. | 57.8 | 60.6
N | 1,623 | 1,392
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.
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.
Find the Perfect Training Class For You
