Teacher assistance team social validity: a perspective from general education teachers.

Teacher assistance team social validity: a perspective from general education teachers. Abstract General education teachers are the most frequent consumers ofTeacher Assistance Team (TAT TATabbr.Thematic Apperception TestTAT1. tube agglutination test.2. tetanus antitoxin.TAT) services; therefore, their satisfactionwith the purpose, process and outcome associated with this model ofprereferral intervention A procedure used in a lawsuit by which the court allows a third person who was not originally a party to the suit to become a party, by joining with either the plaintiff or the defendant. may influence its acceptability, use,implementation, and effectiveness (social validity). Seven empiricalstudies Empirical studies in social sciences are when the research ends are based on evidence and not just theory. This is done to comply with the scientific method that asserts the objective discovery of knowledge based on verifiable facts of evidence. assessing TAT social validity as reported by general educationteachers were analyzed an��a��lyze?tr.v. an��a��lyzed, an��a��lyz��ing, an��a��lyz��es1. To examine methodically by separating into parts and studying their interrelations.2. Chemistry To make a chemical analysis of.3. for this research review. Results indicated thatgenerally stated, teachers were slightly satisfied with the purposes ofTAT and the quality of interpersonal in��ter��per��son��al?adj.1. Of or relating to the interactions between individuals: interpersonal skills.2. assistance they received from teammembers. However respondents In the context of marketing research, a representative sample drawn from a larger population of people from whom information is collected and used to develop or confirm marketing strategy. were neutral to slightly dissatisfied dis��sat��is��fied?adj.Feeling or exhibiting a lack of contentment or satisfaction.dis��satis��fied withthe overall TAT process, intervention quality, and outcomes.Implications of these results on future TAT utilization and researchrecommendations also are presented. ********** Teacher Assistance Teams (TAT) are a form of prereferralintervention. School-based problem-solving teams help general educationteachers work more effectively with difficult-to-teach students in theirclassrooms prior to special education referral. Teams focus onconsultation and development of alternative instructional programs forgeneral educators versus direct student services (Cosden & Semmel,1992). The TAT process involves team members working together to identifyreferral problems, develop and implement interventions, and evaluate theimpact of interventions. Results are used to determine if the child canbe maintained in the general education classroom or if referral tospecial education is warranted (Chalfant Chalfant can refer to: PeopleHenry Chalfant, photographer Jefferson David Chalfant, painter Kevin Chalfant, singer/songwriter PlacesChalfant, Pennsylvania , Pysh, & Moultrie Moultrie(mōl`trē), city (1990 pop. 14,865), seat of Colquitt co., SW Ga., on the Ochlockonee River; inc. 1890. The town grew as a lumbering and naval stores center but is now a commercial produce center. , 1979).Thus, TATs serve a variety of purposes including (a) providing immediateassistance to general educators (Chalfant et al), (b) maintainingstudents with learning and behavioral behavioralpertaining to behavior.behavioral disorderssee vice.behavioral seizuresee psychomotor seizure. difficulties in general education(Graden, Casey Casey is an Irish surname, and may refer to Al Casey Al Casey (rockabilly) Albert Casey Albert Vincent Casey Anne Casey Ben Casey Bernie Casey Bill Casey Bob Casey, Jr., U.S. Senator (D-PA), son of late Pennsylvania Gov. Robert P. Casey. , & Christenson, 1985; Nelson, Smith, Taylor Taylor,city (1990 pop. 70,811), Wayne co., SE Mich., a suburb of Detroit adjacent to Dearborn; founded 1847 as a township, inc. as a city 1968. A small rural village until World War II, it developed significantly in the second half of the 20th cent. , Dodd,& Reavis, 1992), and (c) reducing the total number of specialeducation referrals while increasing the proportion of appropriatereferrals (Graden et al). Social validity is an important variable in assessing TATimplementation and effectiveness (Gresham Gresham(grĕsh`əm), city (2000 pop. 90,205), Multnomah co., NW Oregon, mainly residential suburb E of Portland, near the Columbia River; founded 1852, inc. 1905. , 1989; Noell & Gresham,1993; Shapiro Sha��pir��o? , Karl Jay 1913-2000.American poet and critic known for his early poems concerning World War II and his later works in free verse. , 1987). Social validity refers to evaluation of treatmentsby consumers. Evaluation involves examining social significance ofgoals, social appropriateness of procedures, and social importance oftreatment outcomes (Schwartz Schwartz is a Canadian spices brand. It is also a common surname and may refer to: Abe Schwartz (1881-1963), musician Alan Schwartz (fl. late 20th century), businessperson Allyson Schwartz (born 1948) Alvin Schwartz (born 1916), Canadian writer & Baer, 1991). Evaluation of socialvalidity components is important because participants' satisfactionwith the purpose, process, and product of a treatment may influence itsacceptability, use, compliance, and effectiveness (Elliot Elliot is a common last name, and may refer to any one of the various people bearing that name. See . It is also a first name, once rare, now becoming more common. As a first or last name, it can be spelled Elliot, Eliott, Eliot, or Elliott. , 1986). A cyclical cyclicalOf or relating to a variable, such as housing starts, car sales, or the price of a certain stock, that is subject to regular or irregular up-and-down movements. relationship potentially exists between treatmentacceptability, use, integrity, and effectiveness as illustrated by theTreatment Acceptability Model (Witt Witt? , Katerina Born 1965.German figure skater who won gold medals at the 1984 and 1988 Olympic games. She won world championships in 1985, 1987, and 1988. & Elliot, 1985). The modelconsists of three premises. First, treatment acceptability is the linkbetween treatment selection and use. Treatments perceived as acceptableby consumers are more likely to be implemented. For example, Spreat andWalsh Walsh has several meanings: MathematicsWalsh matrix, an orthogonal matrix with several useful properties Walsh transform, a linear transform based on the Walsh matrix PlacesWalsh, Colorado Walsh County, North Dakota (1994) found the strongest predictor of treatment acceptabilitywas respondents' own estimates of probable treatment success.Further, Reimers and Wacker Wacker may refer to: EMS Wacker http://i9.tinypic.com/4veeqvo.jpg http://i2.tinypic.com/5xrb2g0.jpg Wacker Drive Wacker process Sports VfB Admira Wacker M?dling Wacker Berlin Wacker Burghausen (1992) indicated behavioral interventionsrated as more acceptable were implemented more often than interventionsrated as less acceptable. Second, treatment integrity, the degree towhich an intervention is implemented as planned, is the link betweentreatment use and effectiveness. Interventions implemented with highintegrity are more likely to be effective than interventions in which acrucial element is missing or administered less frequently than planned.For instance, Reimers, Wacker, Cooper, and DeRaad (1989) reported asignificant correlation between treatment acceptability, compliance andeffectiveness over time. Third, consumer satisfaction is the linkbetween treatment effectiveness and repeated use. If a treatment isperceived as effective and meets or exceeds consumer expectations,consumers are more likely to judge it as acceptable. Positive consumerjudgement is likely to result in repeated treatment implementation.Specifically, Reimers and Wacker (1988) found effectiveness of atreatment was associated with acceptability following its use. Thus,evaluation of TAT social validity is crucial. Teachers'satisfaction with TAT purpose, process, and outcomes may influence themodels initial use, compliance, effectiveness, and continuedimplementation. Rational for the Review The purpose of article is to examine empirical research Noun 1. empirical research - an empirical search for knowledgeinquiry, research, enquiry - a search for knowledge; "their pottery deserves more research than it has received" assessingTAT social validity as reported by general education teachers involvedin TAT implementation. A review of general educators' perception ofTAT social validity is important for several reasons. First, this reviewfocuses exclusively on perceptions of the most frequent consumers ofTAT, general education teachers. General educators are involved in allaspects of the TAT process. They initiate the majority of studentreferrals to the team (Aksamit & Rankin, 1993; Bahr, Whitten,Dieker, Kocarek, & Manson Man��son, Sir Patrick 1844-1922.Scottish parasitologist. One of the founders (1899) of the London School of Tropical Medicine, he introduced (1877) the hypothesis that the mosquito is host to the malaria parasite. , 1999; Whitten & Dieker, 1995),consistently serve as team members (Bahr et al.), and are the mostlikely individuals to implement the intervention plan, monitor studentprogress, and evaluate intervention effectiveness (Whitten &Dieker). Given their extensive involvement, general educators'satisfaction with the purpose, process and outcome associated with TATimplementation may influence its acceptability, use, implementation, andeffectiveness (Elliot, 1986). Second, TAT implementation has increasedover the past three decades. Currently, 37 states either require orrecommend prereferral systems be established by local educationalagencies (Buck Buckafter murder of his master, leads wolf pack. [Am. Lit.: The Call of the Wild]See : DogsBuckclever and temerarious dog perseveres in the Klondike. [Am. Lit.: Call of the Wild]See : Resourcefulness , Polloway, & Smith-Thomas, 2003). TAT utilization mayfurther expand given the recent emphasis placed on Response toIntervention In education, Response To Intervention (commonly abbreviated RTI or RtI) is a method of academic intervention that is designed to provide early, effective assistance to children who are having difficulty learning as part of the process of diagnosing learning disabilities. in the identification of children with learningdisabilities (Fuchs Fuchs? , Klaus Emil Julius 1911-1988.German-born physicist who worked on the development of the atomic bomb in Britain and the United States and was imprisoned (1950-1959) for passing scientific secrets to the Soviet Union.Noun 1. , Mock <noinclude></noinclude>Wikipedia does not currently have an encyclopedia article for .You may like to search Wiktionary for "" instead.To begin an article here, feel free to [ edit this page], but please do not create a mere dictionary definition. , Morgan Morgan,American family of financiers and philanthropists.Junius Spencer Morgan, 1813–90, b. West Springfield, Mass., prospered at investment banking. , & Young, 2003). Thus, efforts toassess TAT implementation, effectiveness, and social validity areparamount due to the actual and potential expanded use of the model. Teacher Assistance Teams TAT history. Chalfant et al (1979) developed the TAT model inresponse to difficulties associated with the special education referralprocess. General education teachers often felt isolated when dealingwith difficult-to-teach children in their classrooms; no source forimmediate assistance existed. General educators increasingly referreddifficult-to-teach students to special education in hopes that thesechildren would be found eligible and removed from their classrooms(Chalfant & Pysh, 1989). Once referred, a high probability existedthat students would be placed in special education. For example,Algozzine, Christenson, and Ysseldyke (1982) found that 92% of studentsreferred were tested, and approximately 75% of students tested wereplaced in special education. In the 1980's the concept ofprereferral intervention was developed to more appropriately identifyand serve students. TAT goals. The TAT model was developed to remedy problems resultingfrom the special education referral system. Goals associated with TATimplementation included (a) reducing the total number of specialeducation referrals while increasing the proportion of appropriatereferrals (Graden et al., 1985), (b) maintaining students with learningand behavioral difficulties who are at risk of special educationreferral in general education (Graden et al.; Nelson, Smith, Taylor,Dodd, & Reavis, 1992), and (c) providing immediate assistance togeneral education teachers (Chalfant et al., 1979). These goals wereachieved by implementing procedures outlined within the TAT model. TAT process. TAT procedures involve school professionals workingtogether to develop, implement, and evaluate interventions for thereferred student in the general education setting (Nelson et al., 1992).A four-step procedure is employed: (a) referral/information collection,(b) initial meeting, (c) intervention implementation, and (d) follow-up follow-up,n the process of monitoring the progress of a patient after a period of active treatment.follow-upsubsequent.follow-up plan meeting (Chalfant et al., 1979). In the first step, referral/information collection, a request forassistance begins the prereferral process. Following the request, teammembers collect student information by interviewing teachers andparents, observing the student in the classroom, and reviewing thestudent's academic and health records. During step two an initialmeeting is held in which team members collaboratively define theproblem, establish measurable and observable intervention goals,brainstorm strategies, and develop a written intervention plan.Throughout step three the general education teacher implements theintervention and monitors student progress while team members providesupport and assistance. Step four consists of a follow-up meeting. Teammembers reconvene reconveneVerbto gather together again after an interval: we reconvene tomorrowVerb 1. reconvene - meet again; "The bill will be considered when the Legislature reconvenes next Fall" to evaluate intervention effectiveness and determineif (a) the intervention should continue, (b) alternative strategiesshould be employed, or (c) the student should be referred for additionalservices (i.e., special education) (Chalfant et al., 1989). The TAT process is implemented by and for its primary stakeholders StakeholdersAll parties that have an interest, financial or otherwise, in a firm-stockholders, creditors, bondholders, employees, customers, management, the community, and the government. ,general education teachers. General educators' satisfaction withthe purpose, process and outcome associated with TAT implementation mayinfluence its acceptability, use, implementation, and effectiveness(Elliot, 1986). As a result, the purpose of this paper is to reviewempirical research assessing TAT social validity as reported by generaleducation teachers involved in TAT implementation. Application of theTreatment Acceptability Model suggests that general educators'satisfaction with TAT purpose, process, and product may influence themodel's acceptability, use, compliance, and effectiveness (Elliot,1986). The primary focus of the review is general educators'perceptions of TAT purpose, process and outcomes; procedural fidelityand effectiveness are not directly addressed. Results associated withpurpose pertain to pertain toverb relate to, concern, refer to, regard, be part of, belong to, apply to, bear on, befit, be relevant to, be appropriate to, appertain to teachers' satisfaction with TAT goals of (a)reducing referrals to special education while increasing the proportionof appropriate referrals, (b) providing assistance to general educationteachers, and (c) maintaining students at risk of special educationreferral in general education. Process results describe teachers'perceptions of the (a) TAT process in general, (b) quality of assistanceprovided by team members, and (c) nature of interventions generated bythe team. Outcome results focus on teachers' ratings of studentperformance (a) in general education overall, and (b) pertaining per��tain?intr.v. per��tained, per��tain��ing, per��tains1. To have reference; relate: evidence that pertains to the accident.2. to thereferral problem in particular. Methodology This manuscript manuscript,a handwritten work as distinguished from printing. The oldest manuscripts, those found in Egyptian tombs, were written on papyrus; the earliest dates from c.3500 B.C. contains a complete evaluation of empiricalresearch assessing TAT social validity as reported by general educationteachers. Data reflecting social validity components of purpose,process, and outcome were collected. The results were examined andsynthesized syn��the��sized?adj.1. Relating to or being an instrument whose sound is modified or augmented by a synthesizer.2. Relating to or being compositions or a composition performed on synthesizers or synthesized instruments. to determine general educators' satisfaction withpurpose, process, and outcomes of TAT utilization. Selection Criteria The following criteria was used to select studies included in thisreview: (a) the TAT model (Chalfant et al., 1979) of prereferralintervention was employed as an independent variable; (b) adherence adherence/ad��her��ence/ (ad-her��ens) the act or condition of sticking to something.immune adherence tothe four step TAT process as outlined by Chalfant et al., (c) studieswere empirically based; (c) TAT social validity was a dependent variablewithin the study; (d) studies were based on a sample of generaleducation teachers; and (e) research was published after 1979, the yearthat the TAT model was introduced. Search Procedures The preliminary search for this review was done using the EducationResource Information Center (ERIC) and the Psychological Abstractsdatabases. Key words prereferral intervention, collaboration Working together on a project. See collaborative software. ,collaborative consultation, teamwork (product, software, tool) Teamwork - A SASD tool from Sterling Software, formerly CADRE Technologies, which supports the Shlaer/Mellor Object-Oriented method and the Yourdon-DeMarco, Hatley-Pirbhai, Constantine and Buhr notations. , teacher assistance teams, andinstructional support were used. The same descriptors were used tosearch Dissertation dis��ser��ta��tion?n.A lengthy, formal treatise, especially one written by a candidate for the doctoral degree at a university; a thesis.dissertationNoun1. Abstracts International, Table of Contents,Un-Cover, Books in Print, and Social Sciences Citation Index Social Sciences Citation Index ? (SSCI ? ) is an interdisciplinary citation index product of Thomson Scientific. It was developed by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) from the Science Citation Index. . Anarchival search of articles obtained through the preliminary searchyielded additional resources. Results Seven studies were located that assessed general educationteachers' perceptions of TAT social validity. All research studiesincluded in this investigation involved administration of surveys toassess TAT social validity. Collectively, all aspects of social validitywere addressed within the selected studies by presenting data regardingteachers' satisfaction with purpose, process, and outcomesassociated with TAT utilization. Investigators used various labels todescribe the teams: (a) Preassessment Teams (Harrington Harrington can refer to:Places in the United Kingdom: Harrington, Cumbria Harrington, Lincolnshire Harrington, Northamptonshire Places in the United States: Harrington, Delaware Harrington, Maine Harrington, Washington & Gibson,1986; Inman Inman is a surname, and may refer to: Arthur Crew Inman Bobby Ray Inman Clayton Inman Florence Elsie Inman Henry Inman Jerry Inman Joe Inman John Inman John Inman (golfer) P. & Tollefson, 1988), (b) Problem Solving problem solvingProcess involved in finding a solution to a problem. Many animals routinely solve problems of locomotion, food finding, and shelter through trial and error. Teams (Schram Schram may refer to any of the following people and places: Schram City, Illinois Persons: Dominic Schram - Benedict theologian and canonist Bitty Schram - American actress Jessy Schram - American actress Frederick Schram - American carcinologist & Semmel, 1984), (c) Student Support Teams (Hayek Hay��ek? , Friedrich August von 1899-1992.Austrian-born British economist. He shared a 1974 Nobel Prize for work on the theory of optimum allocation of resources.Noun 1. , 1986), (d) andTeacher Assistance Teams (Bahr et al., 1999; Carter, 1989; Kruger etal., 1995). Researchers provided descriptions of team proceduresindicating that all teams adhered to the four-step TAT process asoutlined by Chalfant et al. (1979). Therefore, the various labels weredeemed to be synonymous and Teacher Assistance Team (TAT) was used todescribe teams when presenting research results. In the following section, empirical results are presented accordingto according toprep.1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians.2. In keeping with: according to instructions.3. TAT social validity components of purpose, process, and outcomes.Within the purpose section results are presented pertaining toteachers' satisfaction with TAT goals of (a) reducing referrals tospecial education while increasing the proportion of appropriatereferrals, (b) providing assistance to general education teachers, and(c) maintaining students who are at risk of special education referralin general education. The process section consists of results pertainingto teachers' perceptions of TAT functioning regarding (a)satisfaction with TAT process in general, (b) quality of assistanceprovided by team members, and (c) nature of interventions generated bythe team. Outcome results focus on teachers' ratings of studentperformance (a) in general education overall, and (b) pertaining toreferral problem in particular. Table 1 contains results of the sevenstudies meeting selection criteria organized by TAT social validityaspects of purpose, process, and outcomes. Purpose of TAT Satisfaction with the purpose of TAT implementation was evaluatedspecifically in four of seven studies that met criteria for this review.Survey items assessing the purpose of TAT pertained to three goalsassociated with its implementation: (a) reducing referrals to specialeducation while increasing the proportion of appropriate referrals, (b)providing assistance to general education teachers, and (c) maintainingstudents with behavioral and academic difficulties who are at risk ofspecial education referral in the general education setting. Researchresults pertaining to the purpose of TAT are presented according tothese goals. Special education referrals. Bahr et al. (1999) conducted aseven-section survey assessing various aspects of TAT functioning amonggeneral education teachers who had referred students to TATs from 121 of242 schools in three states (n = 150). General educators characterized char��ac��ter��ize?tr.v. character��ized, character��iz��ing, character��iz��es1. To describe the qualities or peculiarities of: characterized the warden as ruthless.2. their teams' purpose by selecting one of four descriptions ofconcerns addressed by their teams. Descriptors included (a) concernsabout students in general education (i.e., an intervention assistanceteam); (b) concerns about students in general education with whom anintervention was attempted, found unsuccessful, and eligibility forspecial education was considered (i.e., a prereferral interventionteam); (c) initial special education referrals or referrals on studentsalready in special education (i.e., a special education team); or (d)other concerns. Fifty-four Adj. 1. fifty-four - being four more than fifty54, livcardinal - being or denoting a numerical quantity but not order; "cardinal numbers" percent of the surveyed educators (80 of 150)indicated their teams address prereferral concerns. Based on theseresults Bahr et al. concluded that over half of teachers identified thepurpose of TAT as prereferral intervention to prevent unnecessaryspecial education referrals rather than focusing on the specialeducation referral process. Hayek (1986) assessed general education teachers' attitudetoward TATs by administering a nine-item survey to educators from 100randomly selected schools with TATs (n = 1,251). Data was obtained from79 schools. Three survey items pertained to the purpose of TAT. Teachersresponded to these items using a 5-point Likert-like scale (1, stronglydisagree; 3, undecided; 5, strongly agree). Results indicated 43% (538of 1,251) of teachers agreed that TAT was a sound concept and metcritical needs of problem learners. Forty-six percent (575 of 1,251)agreed TAT was a good method to meet needs of students having problemsin school. In contrast, 50% (625 of 1,251) agreed TAT was part of thespecial education program and exists primarily for special educationreferral system. Given these outcomes Hayek concluded teachers perceivedTATs as the beginning of the special education referral process ratherthan a means of assisting students in general education prior to specialeducation referral. Assisting general education teachers. Kruger et al. (1995)evaluated general educators' satisfaction with the perceivedpurposes of TATs within 28 randomly sampled elementary schools. Resultfrom 27 schools were obtained (n = 121). Teachers rated their agreementwith four items pertaining to the purpose of TAT using a 6-pointLikert-like scale (1, strongly disagree; 6, strongly agree). Resultsindicated general educators agreed the purpose of TATs was to (a) assistgeneral education teachers (M = 5.19, SD = .96), (b) helpdifficult-to-teach children (M = 5.09, SD = .98), (c) meet specialeducation regulations (M = 4.35, SD = 1.49), and (d) prevent studentsfrom being referred to special education (M = 4.01, SD = 1.63). Based onthese findings Kruger et al. concluded that general educators perceivedTAT functions of helping them or their colleagues as more important thanmeeting special education regulations. Maintaining students in general education. Harrington and Gibson(1986) assessed referring teachers' satisfaction with prereferralteam purpose, process and outcomes. Forty-one of 150 randomly selectedteachers completed the 25-item survey using a 5-point Likert-like scale(1, strongly disagree; 3, undecided, 5, strongly agree). Two surveyitems specifically addressed the purpose of TAT. Harrington and Gibsonreported a majority of general educators agreed TAT more than just abureaucratic bu��reau��crat?n.1. An official of a bureaucracy.2. An official who is rigidly devoted to the details of administrative procedure.bu hurdle HURDLE, Eng. law. A species of sledge, used to draw traitors to execution. (M = 3.79, SD = 1.31), and TAT helped maintainchildren in general education (M = 3.30, SD = .98), although item meansindicated slight agreement and undecided ratings respectively. Regardingpurpose, Harrington and Gibson concluded "teacher perceived TAT asa means for maintaining students in the least restrictiveenvironment As part of the U.S. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the least restrictive environment is identified as one of the six principles that govern the education of students with disabilities. ," the general education classroom. Process In addition to contentedness con��tent��ed?adj.Satisfied with things as they are; content: a contented expression on the child's face.con��tent with its purpose, researchers assessedteachers' satisfaction with the TAT process. Investigators in fiveof seven studies reviewed here measured general educators'attitudes toward three aspects of TAT process: (a) satisfaction with TATprocess in general, (b) quality of assistance provided by team members,and (c) nature of interventions generated by the team. Research resultsare presented according to these aspects. Satisfaction with TAT process. Researchers within two studiesassessed general education teachers' satisfaction with TATprocedures. Inman and Tollefson (1988) administered an 18-item survey to300 teachers to determine their satisfaction with the TAT process. Twohundred nine usable USable is a special idea contest to transfer US American ideas into practice in Germany. USable is initiated by the German K?rber-Stiftung (foundation K?rber). It is doted with 150,000 Euro and awarded every two years. surveys were returned (94%). Five items pertained toTAT procedures. Teachers responded to each item using a 5-pointLikert-like scale (1, strongly disagree; 3. undecided, 5, stronglyagree). Results indicated general educators agreed the TAT process wasanother paper pushing procedure, lengthening lengthening (lengkˑ·the·ning),n the use of various massage or muscle energy techniques to relax and stretch muscle and connective tissue. an already lengthy referralprocedure (M = 3.64, SD = 0.92). Teachers also agreed the TAT processwas frustrating frus��trate?tr.v. frus��trat��ed, frus��trat��ing, frus��trates1. a. To prevent from accomplishing a purpose or fulfilling a desire; thwart: (M = 3.33, SD = 1.10), too time consuming (M = 3.66, SD= 1.05), and needed modification (M = 3.76, SD = .78). Teachers wereundecided if the TAT process was helpful (M = 2.99, SD = 0.90). Inman and Tollefson (1988) also conducted a 3 x 2 factorial factorialFor any whole number, the product of all the counting numbers up to and including itself. It is indicated with an exclamation point: 4! (read “four factorial”) is 1 × 2 × 3 × 4 = 24. designto examine the effect of teacher characteristics on attitudes towardTAT. A significant main effect was found for referral, F(1, 202) = 6.26,p < .01, variable. Teachers who made TAT referrals within the lasttwo academic years viewed the TAT process more negatively (M = 61.24, SD= 9.66) than teachers who made fewer referrals during that time period.(M = 57.33, SD = 10.01). Based on these findings, Inman and Tollefsonconcluded as referrals to TAT increased, teachers' satisfactionwith the process decreased. Hayek (1986) also administered a survey to assess general educationteachers' attitude toward the TAT process (n = 1,251). Four of ninesurvey items specifically addressed process concerns. Teachers respondedto these items using a 5-point Likert-like scale (1, strongly disagree;3, undecided; 5, strongly agree). Results of the four process itemsindicated 50% (625 of 1,251) of teachers agreed the time, effort, andplanning that is necessary in the TAT process was worth the benefits tothe student and the school. Sixty-seven percent (838 of 1,251) concurredthe time and paperwork required in the TAT process made teachershesitant hes��i��tant?adj.Inclined or tending to hesitate.hesi��tant��ly adv. to refer students to the team. Yet, 36% agreed teachers did nothave the time to single out a student and try TAT alternatives. Fiftypercent (625 of 1,251) agreed t if the TAT process was eliminated moreteachers would refer students for assistance. In light of these findingsHayek suggested the time and paper work involved negatively impactedteachers' attitudes toward TAT procedures. Overall, research related to TAT procedures indicated a slightmajority of teachers perceived the TAT process negatively. Elements suchas repeated participation in the process, and excessive time andpaperwork involved in procedures contributed to these educators'negative perceptions. Quality of assistance. Investigators in three additional studiesassessed general education teacher satisfaction with the quality ofassistance they received from TAT members. Carter (1989) assessed thesocial validity of the TAT process among general education teachers withexperience on a prereferral team. Nine of 10 teachers completedCarter's 6-item survey. Two items pertained to teacher satisfactionwith the quality of assistance they received. Teachers rated these itemson a six-point scale (1, strongly disgree; 6, strongly agree). Resultsindicated all respondents (n = 9) agreed team members understood theirconcerns, and offered new solutions for addressing the referral problem.Carter concluded teachers were satisfied with the interpersonal supportthey received from TAT members. Eight of 25 items included on the Harrington and Gibson (1986)survey assessed quality of assistance teachers received from the TAT.Teachers (n = 41) rated these items using a 5-point Likert-like scale(1, strongly disagree; 3, undecided, 5, strongly agree). Resultsindicated teachers agreed TAT members respected their opinion asteachers (M = 3.59, SD = 1.14), were sensitive to their feelings (M =3.66, SD = .96), understood the referring problem (M = 3.83, SD = 0.77),and helped them clarify the problem (M = 3.24, SD = 1.11). Teachersdisagreed TAT members were critical of their skills as teachers (M =2.12, SD = 0.98). Educators were unsure if TAT members were persistentin attempting to find a solution to the referral problem (M = 2.48, SD =1.12). Harrington and Gibson stated "there was somedisagreement" that team members assisted teachers in implementingthe intervention (M = 2.73, SD = 1.29), although the item mean indicatedan undecided ranking. Regarding their own behaviors, educators agreedthey made an effort to follow though with all recommendations teammembers suggested (M = 3.46, SD = 0.84). Yet, Harrington and Gibsonnoted that 15% (6 of 41) of teachers surveyed did not make an effort toimplement the interventions, and 27% (11 of 41) were unsure if theyimplemented the intervention. Based on these findings, Harrington andGibson inferred a majority of teachers were satisfied with theinterpersonal support they received from TAT members but were unsure ifthey provided adequate assistance in remediating the referral problem.Actual implementation of the intervention also is questionable. Schram and Semmel (1984) administered a 27-item survey to teachersin 20 schools reporting successful TATs. Results from 11 schools wereobtained (n = 108). The authors identified successful teams based onevidence of teacher satisfaction, desirable outcomes for students, andreduced special education referrals. In terms of quality of assistance,Schram and Semmel postulated pos��tu��late?tr.v. pos��tu��lat��ed, pos��tu��lat��ing, pos��tu��lates1. To make claim for; demand.2. To assume or assert the truth, reality, or necessity of, especially as a basis of an argument.3. members of effective TATs would encouragereferring teachers to participate fully in the TAT process; therefore,researchers include two survey items assessing teachers' level ofparticipation. Results indicated 72% (SD = 0.26) of teachers reportedthey were actively encouraged to participated in team discussions anddecisions, while 57% (SD = 0.36) indicated they were made to feel partof the team. Schram and Semmel concluded although teachers wereencouraged to be actively engaged in the TAT process, they tended not toperceive themselves as equal team members. In summary, research results regarding quality of assistanceprovided by TAT members were mixed. Over half of teachers were satisfiedwith the interpersonal support they received, but some educators wereless satisfied with remediation recommendations made by team members. Nature of interventions. Within three aforementioned a��fore��men��tioned?adj.Mentioned previously.n.The one or ones mentioned previously.aforementionedAdjectivementioned beforeAdj. 1. studies(Harrington & Gibson, 1986; Inman & Toffefson, 1988; Schram& Semmel, 1984) teachers' perceptions regarding the nature ofinterventions generated by TAT members were assessed. Five of 25 itemson the Harrington and Gibson (1986) survey pertained to teaminterventions. Teachers rated these items using a 5-point Likert-likescale (1, strongly disagree; 3, undecided; 5, strongly agree) (n = 41).Teachers slightly disagreed TAT's recommendations wereinappropriate (M = 2.48, SD = 1.12). Educators were undecided if TATmembers explored a sufficient variety of intervention options (M = 3.17,SD = 1.20), and provided teachers with new classroom intervention ideas(M = 2.96, SD = 1.25). Harrington and Gibson reported teachers"strongly agreed" team recommendations were clear (M = 3.59,SD = 1.00) although the mean item score indicated slight agreement.Overall, Harrington and Gibson concluded teachers had mixed reactionstoward interventions generated by the team. Three of 18 survey items on the Inman and Tollefson (1988) surveyassessed teachers' satisfaction with team intervention suggestions(n = 209). Responses to items on a 5-point Likert-like scale (1,strongly disagree; 3. undecided, 5, strongly agree) indicated teachersagreed TAT members suggested many interventions that were alreadyattempted (M = 3.64, SD = 0.92) and suggestions were techniqueseducators should do as good teachers (M = 4.22, SD = 0.68). Teacherswere undecided if prereferral team recommendations introduced them tonew methods of instructing students with learning or behavior problems(M = 2.63, SD = 1.00). Given these findings, Inman and Tollefsonconcluded teachers potentially "resented" interventionsuggestions that involved repeating activities already attempted, andviewed these suggestions as "discrediting" to their abilities. Six of 27 items on the Schram and Semmel (1984) survey assessedgeneral education teachers' reactions to team recommendations (n =108). Fifty-four percent (SD = 0.37) indicated TAT recommendations werepertinent PERTINENT, evidence. Those facts which tend to prove the allegations of the party offering them, are called pertinent; those which have no such tendency are called impertinent, 8 Toull. n. 22. By pertinent is also meant that which belongs. Willes, 319. to teacher concerns, and 53% (SD = 0.21) reported interventionsuggestions were practical and addressed the problem at hand.Fifty-three percent (SD = 0.22) noted recommendations were specific,individualized in��di��vid��u��al��ize?tr.v. in��di��vid��u��al��ized, in��di��vid��u��al��iz��ing, in��di��vid��u��al��iz��es1. To give individuality to.2. To consider or treat individually; particularize.3. , and not vague or ambiguous, while 60% (SD = 0.25)reported TAT suggestions resulted in some form of concrete assistance.Yet, 43% (SD = 0.20) indicated evaluations of intervention effectivenessdepended upon objective information or measurement, while 39% (SD =0.18) agreed follow-up meetings were not conducted. Schram and Semmelconcluded although results were mediocre me��di��o��cre?adj.Moderate to inferior in quality; ordinary. See Synonyms at average.[French m��diocre, from Latin mediocris : medius, middle; see medhyo- , a majority of teachersperceived TAT recommendations as being satisfactory and sound despite anabsence of objective effectiveness measures. Overall, research assessing the nature of TAT interventions did notprovide overwhelming evidence of quality. Although a small majority ofeducators indicated team intervention recommendations were practical andconcrete, some also described the suggestions as redundant. Team membersoften offered remedies that involved repeating strategies teachersalready attempted unsuccessfully with students. Educators were undecidedif the TAT process introduced them to new methods for instructingstudents with academic or behavior problems. Outcomes In addition to assessing general educators' satisfaction withthe purpose and process of TAT utilization, investigators in twoaforementioned studies (Harrison Harrison,town (1990 pop. 13,425), Hudson co., NE N.J., an industrial suburb on the Passaic River opposite Newark; inc. 1869. The town has several foundries. Its manufactures include plastics, paperboard, and metal products. & Gibson, 1984; Inman &Tollefson, 1988) examined teachers' perception of outcomesresulting from TAT implementation. Outcome results pertained toteachers' perceptions of student performance in relation to thereferral problem and within the general education classroom followingTAT intervention implementation. Student performance. Two items on the Inman and Tollefson (1988)survey assessed teacher satisfaction with student performance followingprereferral team intervention implementation. Respondents (n = 209)rated their agreement with these items using a 5-point Likert-like scale(1, strongly disagree; 3. undecided, 5, strongly agree). According toInman and Tollefson, teachers "tended to disagree" TATrecommendations were successful in remediating student problems ingeneral education (M = 2.59, SD = 0.97) although the item mean waswithin the neutral range. Results indicated educators were undecided ifTAT recommendations were successful in helping them correct the referralproblem (M = 2.73, SD = 0.97). Inman and Tollefson noted teachers withmore than 6 years of experience generally viewed prereferralinterventions as less successful. Investigators attributed this trend toveteran educators' belief that their teaching experience enabledthem to more accurately identify students in need of special educationprior to making a TAT referral. Two of 25 items on the Harrington and Gibson (1986) survey assessed41 teachers' perception of student performance on a 5-pointLikert-like scale (1, strongly disagree; 3, undecided, 5, stronglyagree). According to Harrington and Gibson, teachers "moderatedisagreed" TAT recommendations were unsuccessful (M = 2.85, SD =1.20). On a related but separate item, over 50% of teachers"agreed" TAT was unable to assist them with the referralproblem (M = 2.80, SD = 1.21). Yet, Harrington and Gibson reported meanscores on both items that were slightly within the neutral range. Giventhese results, Harrington and Gibson concluded teachers "did notagree TAT interventions were successful in correcting the referralproblem. Overall, results indicate teachers were neutral to slightlydissatisfied with TAT outcomes. Across numerous studies teachersinvolved in TAT were uncertain to slightly doubtful that TATimplementation resulted in successful remediation of the student'sreferral problem. Discussion The purpose of this paper was to review empirical researchassessing TAT social validity as reported by general education teachersinvolved in the prereferral team process. TAT social validity wasassessed through general educators' satisfaction ratings of thepurpose, process, and outcomes of TAT implementation. Results of sevenempirical studies were reviewed. Two overall patterns of findingsemerged. First, results, in general, indicate teachers' ratings ofTAT were mediocre. Most social validity ratings fell within the slightlyagree, neutral, or slight disagree range indicating teachers did notoverwhelmingly support or reject aspects concerning the purpose,process, and outcomes of TAT implementation. In light of the mediocrefindings, the second pattern emerges. Teachers generally were slightlysatisfied with the purposes of TAT and the quality of interpersonalassistance they received from team members, yet, they were neutral toslightly dissatisfied with the overall TAT process, interventionquality, and outcomes. Four themes were embedded Inserted into. See embedded system. within this overall pattern regardingteachers' perception of TAT social validity. These themes were (a)general education teachers' desire for direct support andassistance for themselves and their students; (b) educators'discontent with the time, resources, and redundancy involved in the TATprocess, (c) a potential lack of effectiveness, and (d) compromisedtreatment integrity when implementing TAT procedures and interventions.Each theme is discussed in the following section. Desire for Direct Teacher and Student Support An initial theme regarding team purpose and process was thatteachers desired direct support and assistance for their students whenutilizing TAT. This preference was exemplified by rating on survey itemsassessing TAT components that directly impacted teachers and theirstudents in activities such as providing assistance to general educationteachers, and helping maintain students who are at risk of specialeducation referral in general education. Educators also were pleasedwith aspects of interpersonal support they received from team members(i.e., empathy empathyAbility to imagine oneself in another's place and understand the other's feelings, desires, ideas, and actions. The empathic actor or singer is one who genuinely feels the part he or she is performing. , respect, nonjudgmental non��judg��men��tal?adj.Refraining from judgment, especially one based on personal ethical standards.Adj. 1. nonjudgmental attitudes). In contrast, teacherswere neutral to slightly dissatisfied with team purpose when TAT wasperceived as an extension of the special education referral process.Some educators perceived the lengthened length��en?tr. & intr.v. length��ened, length��en��ing, length��ensTo make or become longer.lengthen��er n. referral process as an obstacleto students gaining access to much needed special education services. Time, Resources, and Redundancy Despite supporting most TAT purposes and interpersonal assistanceprovided by team members, teachers were less satisfied with TAT processelements that they perceived as redundant, time consuming, andburdensome. For example, Inman & Tollefson (1988) indicatedexperienced teachers were more likely to perceive interventionrecommendations as redundant and ineffective ideas that required them torepeat strategies previously employed with students prior to referral.Hayek (1986) reported two thirds of teachers surveyed found the time andpaperwork involved in the TAT process made them hesitant to make areferral. Hayak also stated that half of teachers potentially perceivedthe TAT process as an extension to the special education referralprocess. Therefore, instead of yielding additional support and newinstructional strategies, teachers may potentially perceive the TATprocess as perpetuating the cycle of student failure by extending thespecial education referral process until team members inevitablyrecommended a multidisciplinary evaluation to determine eligibility forspecial education services. Potential Lack of Effectiveness Teachers surveyed across all studies assessing outcomes wereambiguous regarding effectiveness of TAT in remediating students'referral problems or improving their performance in general education.Given the perceived uncertain effectiveness of TAT implementation onstudent outcomes, criteria for successful implementation employed toassess TAT outcomes in social validity research are brought intoquestion. The possibility exists that researchers assessing TAT socialvalidity and teachers employing the process within school settingsutilized differing effectiveness standards. Investigators assessinggeneral education teacher TAT social validity defined successful TATimplementation in terms of improved student performance. Teachers mayhave perceived successful TAT implementation as acquisition of immediateassistance and resources via student access to special educationservices. Treatment Integrity. According to the Treatment Acceptability Model, a lack of treatmentintegrity may have contributed to teachers' ambiguous ratings ofTAT effectiveness. Although treatment integrity was not directlyassessed within TAT social validity studies included in this review,some evidence emerged indicating that several TAT components were eithernot implemented or employed less frequently than planned. These elementsincluded intervention implementation, student progress monitoring, andfollow-up evaluation. For example, Harrison and Gibson (1986) foundalmost half of teachers in their study did not implement interventionsnor did team members assist them in delivering interventions inclassroom settings. Schram and Semmel (1984) noted follow-up meetingswere rarely conducted. Most disconcerting dis��con��cert?tr.v. dis��con��cert��ed, dis��con��cert��ing, dis��con��certs1. To upset the self-possession of; ruffle. See Synonyms at embarrass.2. was data reported by Schramand Semmel suggesting an absence of progress monitoring. Nearly half ofteachers in this study indicated judgements of TAT interventioneffectiveness were not based upon objective information or measurementof student progress thus compromising the integrity of TAT intervention. Compromised treatment integrity potentially derailed intended TATpurposes and outcome. The purpose of TAT was to reduce special educationreferral rates while increasing the proportion of appropriate referrals,and to maintain students with learning and behavioral difficulties atrisk of special education referral in general education. Given the lackof teachers' implementation of quality components fundamental tothe TAT process (fidelity of implementation), it was impossible toascertain what, if any procedures and standards were utilized to deliverinterventions, monitor student progress, and make follow-up decisionswithin the studies reviewed. Furthermore, empirical determination of TAToutcomes was negated by a lack of objective data collection. In manycases, no objective means existed to ultimately justify interventioneffectiveness, team recommendations and appropriateness of specialeducation referrals. Recommendations for Improving TAT Implementation In order to promote treatment integrity and potentially improveteachers' acceptance of the TAT process and outcomes, teachers mustincorporate quality components into the TAT process. Recommendations forincluding quality components into TAT implementation are to (a) utilizean objective, data-based, formative evaluation Formative evaluation is a type of evaluation which has the purpose of improving programmes. It goes under other names such as developmental evaluation and implementation evaluation. tool into the TATprocess; (b) analyze student errors to more accurately definestudents' referral problem and instructional needs; and (c) developmore effective interventions by incorporate research-based practicesinto team recommendations. Consistent implementation of a reliable andvalid formative evaluation system is fundamental to successful TATimplementation because teachers and team members must have an objectivesource for determining student progress, intervention effectiveness, andthe need for additional student services process (Bahr et al., 1999;Flugum & Reschly, 1994; Nunn & McMahan, 2000). Error analysisinformation also can be used to more accurately defining students'referral problem, establishing measurable and observable goals, anddetermining content to incorporate into instructional interventions(Fuchs & Fuchs, 1990; Nunn & McMahan, 2000). Research-basedpractices must be incorporated into the team's recommendations toincrease the likelihood of intervention effectiveness. Researchersindicates employing a restricted range of empirically-based strategieswhen planning prereferral team interventions positively impacts studentachievement and reduces the number of special education referrals (e.g.,Fuchs, et al., 1990; Fuchs & Fuchs, 1996). Limitations of the Review Conclusions derived from this review must be interpreted withcaution for several reasons. First, overall findings are based on asmall number of studies. Seven research projects met criteria forinclusion in this review. Second, all investigators utilized surveys tocollect teacher self-report data. Self-reports are prone to escalatedratings or acquiescence Conduct recognizing the existence of a transaction and intended to permit the transaction to be carried into effect; a tacit agreement; consent inferred from silence. . (Gall, Borg & Gall, 1996). Third, theauthors of this review compiled evidence of TAT social validitycomponents through an analysis of survey items. Specific itemsaddressing the purpose, process, and outcome components of TAT socialvalidity were selected from this analysis. Despite these limitations, the TAT model addresses some sociallysignificant goals for general education teachers. As a result, futureresearch is needed to address areas of difficulty inherent to the TATprocess and effectiveness in order to increase its overall acceptabilityand sustain its utilization by general education teachers. Recommendations for Future Research Implications for future research involve incorporation of (a)formative evaluation, (b) error analysis, and (c) research-basedpractices into the TAT process. Investigations are required to assessthe acceptability of incorporating a reliable and valid formativeevaluation systems such as Curriculum-Based Measurement Curriculum-based measurement, or CBM, is an assessment method used in schools to monitor student progress by directly assessing basic academic skills in reading, spelling, writing, and mathematics. (i.e., Shinn,1998) into the TAT process. Research evaluating the impact of formativeevaluation utilization within TAT interventions on student achievement,special education referral rates, and maintenance of pupils in generaleducation is needed as well. The willingness of teachers and teammembers to utilize error analysis information when implementing TATintervention is in need of exploration. Studies assessing the impact ofproviding teachers and TAT members with error analysis information onintervention planning, implementation, and effectiveness also arenecessary. Interventions derived from research-based practices must bedeveloped and empirically validated val��i��date?tr.v. val��i��dat��ed, val��i��dat��ing, val��i��dates1. To declare or make legally valid.2. To mark with an indication of official sanction.3. as effective prior to employing themas TAT interventions. TAT participants' acceptance of utilizing arestricted range of interventions must be determined, and treatmentfidelity issues explored. Lastly, the impact of combined utilization offormative evaluation, error analysis, and research-based interventionsmust be assessed on several levels. Student outcomes such as referralproblem remediation, and overall classroom performance must beevaluated. Institutional outcomes such as overall special educationreferral rates, proportion of accurate referrals, and teacher'ssustained utilization of the TAT process must be assessed as well. References Aksamit, D. L., & Rankin, J. L. (1993). Problem-solving teamsas a prereferral process. Special Services in the Schools, 7(1), 1-25. Algozzine, B., Christenson, S., & Ysseldyke, J. (1982).Probabilities associated with the referral-to-placement process. TeacherEducation and Special Education, 5(3), 19-23. Bahr, M. W., Whitten, E., Dieker, L., Kocarek, C. E., & Manson,D. (1999). A comparison of school intervention teams: Implications foreducational and legal reform. Exceptional Children, 66(1), 67-83. Buck, G. H, Polloway, E. A., & Smith-Thomas, A. (2003).Prereferral Intervention Processes: A Survey of State Practices.Exceptional Children, 69(3), 349-360. Carter, J. F. (1989). Prereferral intervention systems: Anempirical link between regular and special education (Doctoraldissertation, University of Oregon The University of Oregon is a public university located in Eugene, Oregon. The university was founded in 1876, graduating its first class two years later. The University of Oregon is one of 60 members of the Association of American Universities. , 1989). Dissertation AbstractInternational, 50, 2858-2859. Chalfant, J., & Pysh, M. (1989). Teacher assistance teams: Fivedescriptive studies on 96 teams. Remedial REMEDIAL. That which affords a remedy; as, a remedial statute, or one which is made to supply some defects or abridge some superfluities of the common law. 1 131. Com. 86. The term remedial statute is also applied to those acts which give a new remedy. Esp. Pen. Act. 1. and Special Education, 10(6),49-58. Chalfant, J., Pysh, M., & Moultrie, R. (1979). Teacherassistance teams: A model for within-building problem solving. LearningDisabilities Quarterly, 2, 85-96. Cosden, M. A., & Semmel, M. I. (1992). Teacher assistanceteams: A conceptual and empirical review. Special Services in theSchools, 6, 5-25. Elliot, S. N. (1986). Children's ratings of the acceptabilityof classroom interventions for misbehavior: Findings and methodologicalconsiderations. Journal of School Psychology, 24, 23-35. Flugum, K. R., & Reschley, D. J. (1994). Prereferralintervention: Quality Indices and outcomes. Journal of SchoolPsychology, 32(1), 1-14. Fuchs, D. & Fuchs, L. S. (1996). Consultation as a Technologyand the Politics of School Reform: Reaction to the Issue. Remedial andSpecial Education. 17, 386-92. Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1990). Traditional academicassessment: An overview. In R. A. Gable gableTriangular section formed by a roof with two slopes, extending from the eaves to the ridge where the two slopes meet. It may be miniaturized over a dormer window or entranceway. & J. M. Hendrick (Eds.),Assessing students with special needs. New York New York, state, United StatesNew York,Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of : Longman. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L., & Bahr, M. (1990). Mainstream assistanceteams: A scientific basis for the art of consultation. ExceptionalChildren, 57, 128-139. Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L., & Young, C. L. (2003).Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implicationsfor the Learning Disability construct. Learning Disabilities Research& Practice, 18(3), 157-171. Gall, M., Borg, W., & Gall, J. (1996). Educational Research: Anintroduction (6th ed.). New York: Longman. Graden, J., Casey, A., & Christenson, S. (1985). Implementing aprereferral intervention system: Part I, the model. ExceptionalChildren, 51, 377-384. Gresham, F. (1989). Assessment of treatment integrity in schoolconsultation and prereferral intervention. School Psychology Review, 18,37-50. Harrington, R. G., & Gibson, E. (1986). Preassessmentprocedures for learning disabled children: Are they effective? Journalof Learning Disabilities, 19(9), 538-541. Hayek, R. A. (1986). Administrator and teacher attitudes towardstudent support teams. (Doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University HistoryGeorgia State University was founded in 1913 as the Georgia School of Technology's "School of Commerce." The school focused on what was called "the new science of business. ,1986). Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 731. Inman, L., & Tollefson, N. (1988). Elementary teachers'attitudes toward preassessment procedures. Psychology in the Schools,25, 331-337. Kruger, L. J., Struzziero, J., Watts Watts,residential section of south central Los Angeles. Named after C. H. Watts, a Pasadena realtor, the section became part of Los Angeles in 1926. Artist Simon Rodia's celebrated Watts Towers are there. , R., & Vacca, D. (1995).The relationship between organizational support and satisfaction withTeacher Assistance Teams. Remedial and Special Education, 4, 203-211. Nelson, J., Smith, D., Taylor, L., Dodd, J., & Reavis, K.(1992). Prereferral intervention: A review of the research. Educationand Treatment of Children, 14, 243-253. Noell, G. H., & Gresham, F. M. (1993). Functional outcomeanalysis: Do the benefits of consultation and prereferral interventionjustify the costs? School Psychology Quarterly, 8(3), 200-226. Nunn, G. D. & McMahan, K. R. (2000). "Ideal" problemsolving using a collaborative effort for special needs and at-riskstudents. Education, 121(2), 305-312. Reimers, T., & Wacker, D. (1988). Parents' ratings of theacceptability of behavioral treatment recommendations made in anoutpatient outpatient/out��pa��tient/ (-pa-shent) a patient who comes to the hospital, clinic, or dispensary for diagnosis and/or treatment but does not occupy a bed. out��pa��tientn. clinic: A preliminary analysis of the influence of treatmenteffectiveness. Behavioral Disorders, 14, 7-15. Reimers, T., Wacker, D., Cooper, L., & DeRaad, A. (1989).Acceptability of behavioral treatments for children: Analog and clinicalevaluations by parents. Unpublished manuscript. Reimers, T. M. & Wacker, D. P. (1992). Acceptability ofbehavioral treatments for children: Analog and naturalistic nat��u��ral��is��tic?adj.1. Imitating or producing the effect or appearance of nature.2. Of or in accordance with the doctrines of naturalism. evaluationsby parents.School Psychology Review, 21(4), 628-643. Schram, L., & Semmel, M. (1984). Problem solving teams inCalifornia California(kăl'ĭfôr`nyə), most populous state in the United States, located in the Far West; bordered by Oregon (N), Nevada and, across the Colorado River, Arizona (E), Mexico (S), and the Pacific Ocean (W). : Appropriate responses by school site staff to students whoare difficult to teach and manage (Report No. SP 025 887). Sacrament sacrament[Lat.,=something holy], an outward sign of something sacred. In Christianity, a sacrament is commonly defined as having been instituted by Jesus and consisting of a visible sign of invisible grace. ,CA: California State Department of Education. (ERIC documentReproduction Service No. ED 255 485). Schwartz, I. S. & Baer, D. M. (1991). Social ValidityAssessments: Is Current Practice State of the Art? Journal of AppliedBehavior Analysis The Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (JABA) was established in 1968 as a The Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis is a peer-reviewed, psychology journal, that publishes research about applications of the experimental analysis of behavior to problems of social importance. , 24(2), 89-204. Sharpiro, E. (1987). Intervention research methodology in schoolpsychology. School Psychology Review, 16(3), 290-305. Shinn, M. R. (1998). Advanced applications of curriculum-basedmeasurements New York: Guilford Press. Spreat, S. & Walsh, D. E. (1994). Impact of Treatment Efficacyand Professional Affiliation on Ratings of Treatment Acceptability.Mental Retardation mental retardation,below average level of intellectual functioning, usually defined by an IQ of below 70 to 75, combined with limitations in the skills necessary for daily living. , 32(3), 227-233. Whitten, E., & Dieker, L. (1995). Intervention assistanceteams: A broader vision. Preventing School Failure, 40(1), 41-45. Witt, J. C., & Elliot, S. N. (1985), Acceptability of classroomintervention strategies. In T. R. Kratochwill (Ed.), Advances in schoolpsychology (Vol. 4). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Anne Papalia-Berardi Millersville University of Pennsylvania HistoryMillersville University was established in 1855 as the Lancaster County Normal School, the first state normal school in Pennsylvania. It subsequently changed its name to the Millersville State Normal School in 1859 and Millersville later became a state teacher’s Tracey E. Hall CAST Correspondence to Anne Papalia-Berardi, Ph.D., Associate Professorof Special Education, Millersville University, P.O. Box 1002,Millersville, PA 17551-0302; e-mail:anne.papaliaberardi@millersville.edu.Table 1 Summary of Studies Assessing General Educators' Perceptions ofTeacher Assistance Team Social Validity Response Social validityAuthors n Rate component ResultsSchram 108 55% Process: Most teachers felt & Semmel Quality of encouraged to (1984) assistance participate in discussions and decisions and a slight majority felt like part of the team. Process: A slim majority Nature of indicated intervention recommendations were pertinent, practical, and addressed referral problem.Harrington 41 27% Purpose: Teachers agreed TAT was & Gibson Maintain more than just a (1986) students bureaucratic hurdle and in general undecided if TAT helped education maintain children in general education. Process: Teachers agreed members Qual;ity of understood and helped assistance clarify referral problem, respected their opinion, and were sensitive to their feelings. Teachers were unsure if members were persistent in attempting to find a solution, but disagreed they were critical of their skills as teachers. Process: Educators slightly Nature of disagreed team intervention recommendations were inappropriate, slightly agreed recommendations were clear, and unsure if members explored a sufficient variety of interventions and provided them with new ideas. Outcome: Teachers were unsure Student if TAT recommendations performance were unsuccessful and if members were unable to assist them with referral problems.Hayek 1,251 79% Purpose: Half of teacher viewed (1986) Reducing TATs as a component of referral rate the special education process. Process: Half of teachers Satisfaaction disagreed time, effort, with TAT and planning involved process in process was worth benefit to students and school; two thirds agreed time and paperwork made teachers hesitant to refer.Inman & 209 94% Process; Teachers were slightly Tollefson Satisfaction dissatisfied with time (1988) with TAT consuming and process frustrating procedures, and unsure if process was helpful. Process: Most teachers agreed Nature of team interventions interventions were redundant and involved techniques good teachers already implement. Most were unsure if recommendations provided new ideas. Outcome: Most teachers were Student unsure if performance interventions remediated referral problem or improving student performance in general education.Carter 9 90% Process: All teachers agreed (1989) Quality of team members assistance understood their concerns and offered new solutions for addressing referral problem.Kruger,, 288 96% Purpose: Teachers rated their Struzziero, Assisting agreement with four Watts & general purposes of TAT. Vacca education Teachers agreed (1995) teachers purposes of TATs was to (a) assist general education teachers, (b) help difficult- to-teach children, (c) meet special education regulations, and (d) prevent students from being referred to special education respectively. Authors concluded teachers perceived TAT functions of helping them or their colleagues as more important than meeting special education regulations.Bahr, 680 50% Purpose: Teachers characterized Whitten, Reducing teams' purposes by Dieker, referral rate selecting one of four Kocarek, descriptions: (a) & Manson students in general (1999) education (i.e., an intervention assistance team); (b) students in general education with whom an intervention was attempted, found unsuccessful, and eligibility for special education was considered (i.e., a prereferral intervention team); (c) initial special education referrals or referrals on students already in special education (i.e., a special education team); or (d) other concerns. Majority of teachers indicated teams addressed prereferral concerns to prevent unnecessary special education referrals.