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
NCIER®
Report page 59
Claims on this page
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
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
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
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).
The table includes only respondents whose school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
This table includes only those who said that their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team.
51 percent of teams collect common data across all cases (sum of the bottom two rows of Table 8.1)
Sample (N = 1394) · Teams answering how the team assesses seriousness during meetings
common data across all cases (the sum of the bottom two rows).
Why inferred The sentence crosses a page break: this quote is the page 59 part and the sentence begins on page 58 (claim p058-12). Full sentence (pages 58–59): “However, 79 percent of teams are using a common meeting structure (the sum of the bottom three rows in Table 8.1), and 51 percent are collecting common data across all cases (the sum of the bottom two rows).”
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.
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.
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.
Survey results suggest teams use a variety of information sources to assess risk
Our survey results suggest that BTAM teams use a variety of information sources to assess the risk of harm posed by students referred to the team.
Different BTAM models recommend different information, but virtually all recommend broad data collec
Different BTAM models recommend collecting and using different types of information, but virtually all recommend broad data collection and integrating information from many sources to build the best understanding of student behavior.
Principals were given a list of 14 potential data sources
We provided principals with a list of 14 potential data sources in our survey, ranging from interviews with students, school staff, and parents to reviewing discipline, academic, and other school records; law enforcement records; and social media accounts for referred students.
Principals were asked which sources their teams rely on and how often
We asked principals which sources their BTAM teams rely on to conduct behavioral threat assessments and how often they use these sources.
Principals' responses suggest teams use a variety of data sources to inform risk-level assessments
As shown in Figure 8.1, principals’ responses suggest that BTAM teams use a variety of data sources to inform their assessments of risk level.
Teams also use many of those sources frequently
Teams also use many of those sources frequently.
73 percent of principals said teams interview the referred student every time a student is referred
Sample (N = 1395) · Teams answering sources-of-information question
School BTAM teams rely first and foremost on interviews with the referred student to make decisions about potential risk of harm: 73 percent of principals indicated that their BTAM teams use this specific information source every time a student is referred to the BTAM process.
The list of 14 sources is based on guidance from NTAC and models such as CSTAG
This list is based on guidance provided by existing BTAM frameworks, such as guidance provided by NTAC and such named models as the Comprehensive School Threat Assessment Guidelines (CSTAG).
Top
Find the Perfect Training Class For You