Fig 5.4 Total: once 36, twice+ 12, as-needed 23, at start 16, none 13
Sample (N = 1376) · Teams answering community support / challenges / processes / training questions
Total | 36 | 12 | 23 | 16 | 13
NCIER®
Report page 48
Claims on this page
Fig 5.4 School level: once 31, twice+ 10, as-needed 22, at start 21, none 16
Sample (n = undeterminable of 1376) · Teams answering community support / challenges / processes / training questions
School level | 31 | 10 | 22 | 21 | 16
Fig 5.4 District level: once 27, twice+ 12, as-needed 34, at start 9, none 18
Sample (n = undeterminable of 1376) · Teams answering community support / challenges / processes / training questions
District level | 27 | 12 | 34 | 9 | 18
Fig 5.4 Both: once 41, twice+ 14, as-needed 21, at start 16, none 9
Sample (n = undeterminable of 1376) · Teams answering community support / challenges / processes / training questions
Both | 41 | 14 | 21 | 16 | 9
Fig 5.4 survey item: how often BTAM team members receive training (n = 1,376)
This figure depicts response data from the following survey question: “How often do the members of your BTAM team receive training and/or professional development related to BTAM?” (n = 1,376).
Fig 5.4 includes only schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team
Includes only those who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team.
Fig 5.4 note: bars may not sum to totals because of rounding
Bars may not sum to totals because of rounding.
16 percent train members only at the beginning of tenure on the team
Sample (N = 1376) · Teams answering the BTAM training-frequency question (Figure 5.4)
16 percent train members only at the beginning of one’s tenure on the team.
About one in six schools (13 percent) provide no training
Sample (N = 1376) · Teams answering community support / challenges / processes / training questions
About one in six schools (13 percent) do not provide any training.
Training frequency is related to team level
The frequency at which schools provide training to their BTAM members is related to team level, as shown in Figure 5.4.
Annual training: 55 percent both-level teams, 39 percent district-only, 41 percent school-only
Sample (n = undeterminable of 1376) · Teams answering community support / challenges / processes / training questions
That is, 55 percent of schools served by both types of teams train annually, compared with 39 percent of schools with district-only teams and 41 percent with school-only teams.
Authors hypothesize the difference might reflect resources in districts with multi-level teams
We hypothesize that this difference might reflect the level of resources available in districts that maintain teams at multiple levels.
NTAC recommends BTAM teams meet on a regular basis to operate as a cohesive unit
NTAC recommends that BTAM teams meet “on a regular basis” to provide time for the team to work together and learn their individual responsibilities so they are able to operate more readily as one cohesive unit (NTAC, 2018).
BTAM teams should meet at minimum whenever cases require; regular meetings offer further benefits
At the minimum, BTAM teams should meet whenever cases require assessment and intervention, but—even in the absence of new cases—regular meetings can provide teams opportunities for training, monitoring of ongoing interventions, and review of past cases to learn and improve over time.
Survey did not ask about format, conductor, length, topics, or yearly variation of trainings
Our survey did not ask questions about—and we therefore cannot report on—the format of these trainings, who conducts them, how long they are, what topics they cover, or whether they vary from year to year.
Schools with both school- and district-level BTAM teams especially likely to receive annual training
Schools where the principals reported that they had both a school- and district-level BTAM team are especially likely to receive annual training.
Top
Find the Perfect Training Class For You