NCIER®

Intervention Tailoring

43 claims on pp. 7–110 (fact 29, statement 2, conclusion 7, conjecture 4, definition 1).

Claims about Intervention Tailoring

Statement [V] p074-01

BTAM interventions and supports should be tailored to the student's specific needs

The interventions and supports assigned by BTAM teams in response to concerning behavior should be tailored to the specific needs of a student identified by a team as posing a risk of harm to self or others.

p. 74 · NCIER Claim Map
Report page 74 with the cited passage highlighted
Source page 74 · click to enlarge · all claims on this page
Conjecture [V] p081-04

BTAM team might be expected to recommend substance use treatment only if use is known or suspected

For example, we might expect a BTAM team to only recommend substance use treatment in cases in which they know or suspect that a student is using or abusing alcohol or drugs.

p. 81 · NCIER Claim Map
Report page 81 with the cited passage highlighted
Source page 81 · click to enlarge · all claims on this page
Fact [I] p082-24

Many top interventions were selected by large majorities of respondents

selected by large majorities of respondents (keeping in mind that principals could—and would be expected to—select multiple interventions that could be part of a holistic intervention plan in response to a particular incident).

p. 82 · NCIER Claim Map

Why inferred The sentence crosses a page break: this quote is the page 82 part and the sentence begins on page 81. Full sentence (pages 81–82): “Many were selected by large majorities of respondents (keeping in mind that principals could—and would be expected to—select multiple interventions that could be part of a holistic intervention plan in response to a particular incident).”

Report page 82 with the cited passage highlighted
Source page 82 · click to enlarge · all claims on this page
Conclusion [V] p083-06

Schools selected different interventions based on specific information in the scenario

Second, despite some commonalities in the most frequently chosen options, there is clear evidence that schools selected different intervention options based on the specific information presented in the scenario.

p. 83 · NCIER Claim Map
Report page 83 with the cited passage highlighted
Source page 83 · click to enlarge · all claims on this page
Fact [V] p083-07

Scenario C (altercation, suspected substance use): principals would assess or start treatment

For example, in Scenario C (physical altercation, suspected substance use), principals report that they would respond in part by assessing the need for or starting substance use treatment.

p. 83 · NCIER Claim Map
Report page 83 with the cited passage highlighted
Source page 83 · click to enlarge · all claims on this page
Fact [V] p083-08

Scenario E: principals would assess need for or start programming on trusted-adult relationships

In Scenario E (violence fixation, history of academic issues, withdrawal or depression, concerning home context), principals indicated they would assess the need for or start programming to help the student build relationships with trusted adults (for example, through regular check-ins or adult mentoring programs).

p. 83 · NCIER Claim Map
Report page 83 with the cited passage highlighted
Source page 83 · click to enlarge · all claims on this page
Conjecture [V] p084-10

Findings suggest widespread agreement on responses to lowest-level and most severe incidents

Altogether, these findings suggest that there is widespread agreement over how to respond to the lowest-level and most severe incidents and that schools are delineating in their responses to low-level versus severe incidents.

p. 84 · NCIER Claim Map
Report page 84 with the cited passage highlighted
Source page 84 · click to enlarge · all claims on this page
Conclusion [V] p086-12

Principals did not report using all 16 interventions for every incident (tailoring evidence)

The fact that principals did not report that their schools would respond to every incident with all 16 interventions provides further evidence that schools are tailoring their interventions to the specifics of indi-

p. 86 · NCIER Claim Map
Report page 86 with the cited passage highlighted
Source page 86 · click to enlarge · all claims on this page
Conclusion [V] p087-25

Schools are not blindly responding to all scenarios with all available tools

In other words, even though we know schools have many options available to them (see Figure 9.1), schools are not blindly responding to all scenarios by throwing all available tools at any particular case.

p. 87 · NCIER Claim Map
Report page 87 with the cited passage highlighted
Source page 87 · click to enlarge · all claims on this page
Fact [V] p109-05

Scenario responses reveal schools are not overly relying on any single intervention

Responses to scenario-based questions in particular reveal that schools are not overly relying on any single intervention to address student needs, which is appropriate for the types of complex cases often referred to BTAM teams.

p. 109 · NCIER Claim Map
Report page 109 with the cited passage highlighted
Source page 109 · click to enlarge · all claims on this page
Fact [V] p110-14

Most teams emphasize individualized interventions but differ in decisionmaking and tools

Although most teams emphasize individualized interventions tailored to student needs, there are wide differences in how teams structure their decisionmaking, draw on inventory resources, and use decision support tools.

p. 110 · NCIER Claim Map
Report page 110 with the cited passage highlighted
Source page 110 · click to enlarge · all claims on this page

Top

Find the Perfect Training Class For You