behavior support evaluation final · 2012-11-02 · demic and behavioral goals determined by the...

RESEARCHReport on an Educational Program

SPECIAL EDUCATION’SBEHAVIOR SUPPORT PROGRAM:

2004–2005

Houston Independent School District

D e p a r t m e n t of R e s e a r c h a n d A c c o u n t a b i l i t y

Abelardo Saavedra SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS

Kathryn SánchezASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT

DEPARTMENT OF RESEARCH AND ACCOUNTABILITY

HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICTBoard of Education

Natasha M. Kamrani

Kevin H. Hoffman

Dianne Johnson

Lawrence Marshall

Diana Dávila, PRESIDENT

Manuel Rodríguez, Jr., FIRST VICE PRESIDENT

Harvin C. Moore, SECOND VICE PRESIDENT

Arthur M. Gaines, Jr., SECRETARY

Greg Meyers, ASSISTANT SECRETARY

Deborah L. Muñiz RESEARCH SPECIALISTS

Chris Huzinec RESEARCH MANAGER

SPECIAL EDUCATION’S BEHAVIOR SUPPORT PROGRAM : 2004–2005

1HISD RESEARCH AND ACCOUNTABILITY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

SPECIAL EDUCATION’S BEHAVIOR SUPPORT PROGRAM:

2004–2005

Program Description

The Houston Independent School District’s (HISD)

Office of Special Education Services provides a Be-

havior Support Program to students with disabilities in

Behavior Support Classes (BSC). The purpose of BSC

is to provide a self-contained class in which students

with behavior disorders can work individually on aca-

demic and behavioral goals determined by the Admis-

sion Referral Dismissal (ARD) Committee in their

Individualized Education Program (IEP). Students

referred to BSC must manifest behavior problems that

are of such magnitude that less restrictive instructional

options cannot accommodate that student’s special

behavioral needs. A special education teacher trained

to work with behavioral/emotional problems and an

instructional aide are assigned to each BSC. This

program is highly structured with supervision through-

out the instructional day. The BSC is a time-limited

service that prepares the students for a less restrictive

environment prior to transitioning or exiting from the

program. The goals of the Behavior Support Program

are:

• To provide time-limited services that will allow

students to function in the least restrictive educa-

tional environment.

• To provide on-going support services to assist

students who are transitioning to a less restrictive

setting or exiting behavior services.

• To increase the student’s coping and social skills.

• To offer on-going consultation services on behav-

ior management techniques for parents and pro-

fessional staff.

• To provide an instructional program which will allow

the students to progress academically.

As indicated in the goals, the Behavior Support

Program emphasizes appropriate social and interac-

tive skills. The social skills curriculum that is inte-

grated into the daily curriculum is Skillstreaming.

Skillstreaming has four main components, which in-

clude modeling, role-playing, performance feedback,

and transfer/generalization training. The curriculum

contains 60 skill lessons and includes five skill groups

which are Classroom Survival Skills, Friendship-Mak-

ing Skills, Dealing with Feelings, Alternatives to Ag-

gression, and Dealing with Stress. Social skills should

be taught in a structured lesson at least two times per

week. The social skills curriculum is designed to help

students return to a less restrictive environment, such

as general education or resource.

Behavior management is also a focus of the

Behavior Support Program. The Office of Special

Education Services has implemented the DailyReview

as the core behavior management system. The

DailyReview was created by Psychological Software

Solutions, Inc. The purpose of the DailyReview was to

provide web-based resources for behavior support

teachers and district office support staff. The

DailyReview assists campus and district office staff in

developing research based psychological solutions for

disruptive student behavior and certain types of aca-

demic problems.

The DailyReview allows teachers to develop and

implement positive behavior interventions, typically

referred to as a Daily Report Card. The Daily Report

Card is a classroom intervention for students who are

disruptive, challenging to manage, and/or experiencing

academic problems. The interventions are positive

and work to increase parental involvement and encour-

age student responsibility. The goals of the DailyReview

are to:

• develop a system that facilitates consistent and

daily communication between parents and teach-

ers;

• reduce the manifestations of disruptive behaviors

SPECIAL EDUCATION’S BEHAVIOR SUPPORT PROGRAM: 2004–2005

2 HISD RESEARCH AND ACCOUNTABILITY

in the classroom;

• increase student academic performance and pro-

ductivity; and

• encourage students to engage in pro-social behav-

iors.

The following research questions were addressed:

1. What were the perceptions of Behavior Support

teachers regarding the Behavior Support Class?


teachers regarding the implementation of the

Skillstreaming curriculum?



DailyReview program?

4. What was the academic performance of students

in BSC on the Texas Assessment of Knowledge

and Skills (TAKS)?


in BSC on the State Developed Alternative As-

sessment II (SDAA II)?

Findings

• The majority of Behavior Support teachers at 67%

indicated that they had between “6–10” students

enrolled in their classroom. About 23% had between

“1–5” students, while 9% had “11–15” students.

• Behavior Support teachers were asked, “How many

paraprofessionals assist you with your class?”

About 91% stated they had “one” paraprofessional,

4% “two,” 1% “three,” and 3% “none.”

• Behavior Support teachers believe

paraprofessionals who assist them need training in

the following areas: “behavior strategies,” “classroom

management,” “DailyReview,” “computer,”

“instructional strategies,” “Crisis Prevention

Institute training,” and “special education laws.”

• Behavior Support teachers were asked, “Have you

had students return to the resource/general

education classroom this school year?” Of the 118

Behavior Support teachers who answered this

question, 55% stated “yes,” and 45% stated “no.”

• Behavior Support teachers were asked, “What

criteria do you use to move students into general

education?” Teachers provided 124 comments

that were grouped into 12 categories. The two

categories with the most comments were

“DailyReview/level management system” with 36

comments and “reduction of inappropriate

behaviors” with 30 comments.

• Teachers were asked, “Has your career as a

Behavioral Support teacher been rewarding?” Fifty-

eight percent stated “yes,” 29% stated “somewhat,”

and 8% stated “no.” Five percent of the teachers

did not respond to the question.

• Teachers were also asked, “What is the ultimate

goal of the Behavior Support teacher regarding

behavior service students?” Most of the teachers

believed that the ultimate goal of the Behavior

Support teacher was to exit students from Behavior

Support classrooms and transition them back into

general education.

• Teachers were asked, “Do you have Skillstreaming

materials?” About 73% of the Behavior Support

teachers stated “yes,” while 27% stated “no.”

• Behavior Support teachers were then asked if they

had attended Skillstreaming training.

Approximately, 70% of the teachers stated “yes,”

while 30% stated “no.”

• Behavior Support teachers were asked how often

they implement the Skillstreaming curriculum and

7% indicated “daily,” 26% “3 times a week,” 17% “2

times a week,” 25% “once a week,” and 25%

“never.”

• Behavior Support teachers were asked was “Do

your students benefit from the Skillstreaming

curriculum?” The majority of teachers at 55%

stated “yes” compared to 45% who stated “no.”

• The majority of Behavior Support teachers at 57%

attended training on the DailyReview during the

2004–05 school year. Another 25% of the Behavior

Support teachers indicated they attended training

during the 2003–04 school year, 6% during the

2002–03 school year, and 2% during the 2001–02

school year. About 10% of the Behavior Support

teachers have not attended training.

• Also, 48% of the Behavior Support teachers



indicated that they need additional training on the

DailyReview Program, 52% indicated they did not.

• The majority of the teachers at 65% indicated that

they have utilized the DailyReview program in their

classroom to implement the Level Management

Point System.

• Teachers who indicated that they have

implemented the DailyReview program were asked,

“To what degree have you implemented the

DailyReview program in your classroom?”

Approximately, 5% of the teachers indicated that

“implementation is only in the planning stages,”

39% of teachers indicated “limited implementation

has started,” and 56% indicated “full implementation”

of the program has begun in their classroom.

• Teachers were asked if they have experienced any

challenges in implementing the DailyReview. A

total of 49 teachers described challenges they

faced in implementing the DailyReview program.

The challenges were categorized as “time,”

“technical problems,” “software limitations/

problems,” and “student buy in.”

• Teachers who have implemented the DailyReview

program were asked, “Since implementing the

DailyReview program, have students’ disruptive

behaviors decreased?” Approximately, 15% of the

teachers indicated “yes,” while 35% indicated

“somewhat.” However, 50% of the teachers

indicated “no.”

• Teachers were asked to indicate how many

computers they had in their classroom.

Approximately, 35% stated “one,” 32% “two,” 16%

“three,” and 7% “four or more.” However, 8% of the

Behavior Support teachers did not have a computer

in their class. The overwhelming majority of teachers

at 94% stated they have access to the Internet in

their classroom, while 6% did not.

• The percent of students in BSC who met the

minimum standard on the TAKS reading subtest

ranged from 0% in grade 10 to 61% in grade 6, while

all HISD students with disabilities had a range from

28% in grade 10 to 73% in grade 3. The highest

percent of students in BSC who earned the

commended status was 11% in grade 6 compared

to 25% in grade 3 for all students with disabilities.

• The percent of BSC students who met the minimum

standard TAKS mathematics subtest ranged from

2% in grade 8 to 57% in grade 3, while all HISD

students with disabilities had a range from 17% in

grade 10 to 57% in grades 3 and 4. The highest

percent of students in BSC who earned the

commended status was 5% in grade 6 compared

to 17% in grade 4 for all students with disabilities.

• The majority of students in BSC met their ARD

expectation on the reading subtest of the SDAA II.

The percentage of students in BSC who met their

ARD expectation ranged from 94% at instructional

level K to 68% at instructional level 3 compared to

94% at instructional levels K and 1 to 79% at

instructional level 3 among all students with

disabilities in the district.

• The majority of BSC students met their ARD

expectation on the mathematics subtest of the

SDAA II. The percentage of BSC students who

met their ARD expectation ranged from 97% at

instructional level 2 to 73% at instructional level 4

compared to 97% at instructional level 1 to 68% at

instructional level 7 among all students with


• The majority of students in BSC met their ARD

expectation on the writing subtest of the SDAA II.

The percentage of students in BSC who met their

ARD expectation ranged from 93% at instructional

level 6/7 to 60% at instructional level 2 compared

to 86% at instructional level K/1 to 45% at

instructional level 8/9 of all students with disabilities

in the district.

Recommendations

1. An accurate number of the students who have

exited the Behavior Support program was not

available. An efficient system for tracking the

number of students who exit the Behavior Support

program needs to be developed by the Office of

Special Education Services.

2. Almost a third of Behavior Support teachers indi-

cated that they have not attended Skillstreaming

training and do not have the curriculum. The

program coordinator may want to offer Behavior

Support teachers the opportunity to attend training

during the upcoming school year.



3. Behavior Support teachers need support in fully

implementing the Skillstreaming curriculum cor-

rectly. Nearly half of the teachers did not believe

the Skillstreaming curriculum benefited their stu-

dents. The project coordinator may want to con-

sider offering all Behavior Support teachers and

paraprofessionals the opportunity to attend profes-

sional development regarding the social skills

curriculum. Additional professional development

in this area may increase teacher confidence in

implementing the curriculum.

4. Behavior Support teachers need support in imple-

menting the DailyReview program. Almost half of

the teachers indicated they need additional training

using the DailyReview. The project coordinator

may want to consider offering all Behavior Support

teachers and paraprofessionals the opportunity to

attend follow-up training regarding the DailyReview

program. Also, the program coordinator may want

to set aside time during the training to discuss with

Behavior Support teachers the barriers that are

keeping them from fully implementing the program.

Behavior Support teachers may also find it benefi-

cial to hear from colleagues who are fully imple-

menting the DailyReview program and are experi-

encing success with their students.

5. An analysis of the TAKS data revealed that stu-

dents in BSC did not perform as well as all students

with disabilities. The subject areas in which stu-

dents in BSC need the most academic support was

in math and science. Teachers also indicated a

need for professional development regarding in-

structional strategies. The program coordinator

may want to provide professional development

regarding instructional strategies in the core sub-

ject areas. The program coordinator may need to

conduct a needs assessment to ensure that the

Behavior Support teachers have the necessary

materials needed to allow students to progress

academically. In addition, the program coordinator

may need to consider how the NCLB requirement

that all teachers must by “highly qualified” by the

end of the 2005–06 school year will effect the

academic instruction Behavior Support teachers

can provide.

6. Continued monitoring of the Behavior Support

Program will provide additional information about

the effectiveness of the services. Specifically, an

examination of the perceptions held by students in

BSC will yield valuable information.



Introduction

Program Description

The Houston Independent School District’s (HISD)

Office of Special Education Services provides a Be-

havior Support Program to students with disabilities in

Behavior Support Classes (BSC). The purpose of BSC

is to provide a self-contained class in which students

with behavior disorders can work individually on aca-

demic and behavioral goals determined by the Admis-

sion Referral Dismissal (ARD) Committee in their

Individualized Education Program (IEP). Students

referred to BSC must manifest behavior problems that

are of such magnitude that less restrictive instructional

options cannot accommodate that student’s special

behavioral needs. A Special Education teacher trained

to work with behavioral/emotional problems and an

instructional aide are assigned to each BSC. This

program is highly structured with supervision through-

out the instructional day. The BSC is a time-limited

service that prepares the students for a less restrictive

environment prior to transitioning or exiting from the

SPECIAL EDUCATION’S BEHAVIOR SUPPORT PROGRAM:

2004–2005

Purpose: To evaluate the implementation of the Behavior Support Program.

Population: A total of 170 Behavior Support teachers in HISD elementary, middle, and

high schools.

Methods: Information regarding the Behavior Support Program was collected through

interviews with Special Education personnel. Surveys were collected from Behavior

Support teachers. Qualitative and quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive

statistics.

Findings: The evaluation of the Behavior Support Program, which was based on survey

responses, suggested that many teachers are not fully implementing two of the key

program components: Skillstreaming, the social skills curriculum; and DailyReview,

the behavior management system. An analysis of the performance of students in the

Behavior Support Program on the SDAA II revealed that the majority met ARD

expectations.

Conclusions: Recommendations were made to ensure that the number of students who

exit Behavior Support Classes can be determined and that additional training for

Behavior Support teachers regarding Skillstreaming curriculum, the DailyReview

program, and instructional strategies be provided. Also, it was recommended that

student’s perceptions regarding the Behavior Support Class be gathered.

program. The goals of the Behavior Support Program

are:

• To provide time-limited services that will allow

students to function in the least restrictive educa-

tional environment.

• To provide on-going support services to assist


setting or exiting behavior services.

• To increase the student’s coping and social skills.

• To offer on-going consultation services on behav-

ior management techniques for parents and pro-

fessional staff.

• To provide an instructional program which allows

the students to progress academically.

As indicated in the goals, the Behavior Support

Program emphasizes appropriate social and interac-

tive skills. The social skills curriculum that is inte-

grated into the daily curriculum is Skillstreaming.

Skillstreaming has four main components, which in-

clude modeling, role-play, performance feedback, and

transfer/generalization training. The curriculum con-

tains 60 skill lessons and includes five skill groups:



Classroom Survival Skills, Friendship-Making Skills,

Dealing with Feelings, Alternatives to Aggression, and

Dealing with Stress. Social skills should be taught in

a structured lesson at least two times per week. The

social skills curriculum is designed to help students

return to a less restrictive environment, such as gen-

eral education or resource.

Behavior management is also a focus of the

Behavior Support Program. The Office of Special

Education Services has implemented the DailyReview

as the core behavior management system. The

DailyReview was created by Psychological Software

Solutions, Inc. The DailyReview provides web-based

resources for behavior support teachers and district

office support staff. The DailyReview assists campus

and district office staff in developing research based

psychological solutions for disruptive student behavior

and certain types of academic problems.


implement positive behavior interventions, typically

referred to as a Daily Report Card. The Daily Report

Card is a classroom intervention for students who are

disruptive, challenging to manage, and/or experiencing

academic problems. The interventions are positive

and work to increase parental involvement and encour-

age student responsibility. The goals of the DailyReview

are to:

• Develop a system that facilitates consistent and

daily communication between parents and teach-

ers;

• reduce the manifestations of disruptive behaviors

in the classroom;

• increase student academic performance and pro-

ductivity; and

• encourage students to engage in pro-social behav-

iors.

Program Personnel

The Behavior Support Program is under the direc-

tion of the manager of Program and Instructional

Support. Within this program, a coordinator was as-

signed to facilitate and support the Behavior Support

Program. There were 170 Behavior Support teachers

during the 2004–05 school year.

Program Participants

There were a total of 132 schools with one or more

BSC students. A list of the schools that had BSC

students during the 2004–05 school year can be found

in Appendix A.

Table 1 details the demographic characteristics of

students in BSC. The demographic characteristics of

these students were retrieved from the School Admin-

istrative Student Information (SASI) database as of

July 17, 2005. During the 2004–05 school year, there

were 1,496 students with disabilities with the instruc-

tional location BSC. The overwhelming majority of the

students in BSC were male at 84.3%. The percentage

of female students in BSC increased from 13.9%

during the 2003–04 school year to 15.7% during the

2004–05 school year. Also, close to 63% of these

students were African American followed by 27% who

were Hispanic during 2003–04 and 2004–05 school

years. White students accounted for about 10% of the

students in BSC across both years of data. The most

frequently reported primary disability for BSC students

in 2004–05 was emotional disturbance at 61.4% fol-

lowed by 18.2% identified with a learning disability. It

should be noted that the primary disability of two

students at these schools was not identified in the

SASI database. Table 2 details the number and per-

cent of students in BSC by grade level. The highest

percent of students in BSC are in grades 6–9.

Purpose of the Evaluation Report

The purpose of this report was to evaluate the

implementation of the Behavior Support Program. The

following research questions were addressed:








DailyReview program?


in BSC on the Texas Assessment of Knowledge

and Skills (TAKS)?


in BSC on the State Developed Alternative As-

sessment II (SDAA II)?

Review of Literature

Federal and State Mandates

Positive behavioral support (PBS) was first man-

dated in the 1997 Individuals with Disabilities Educa-

tion Act (IDEA). The 2004 Individuals with Disabilities

Education Act (IDEA) regulations indicate that “in the

case of a child whose behavior impedes the child’s

learning or that of others, consider the use of positive



��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��!"��

��

��#$��&�'�*��

��#��

��+��<=��$ � ��

��>�&��&��+��#�@��

��G��Q�+��@��' � � ��

��U��$��&� ��

��&��Q&��

��V�"��"�*��

��V��"&��$��*��

��X��"�*��

��Y��#��=��*�Z#�' � ��

��[��#��*��

�� !� ��"� ��#$ ��"�

�&��\��Y"��'�$��@��'�]��&��$��$��&��]&��#$��

Table 1: Demographic Information of Students in Behavior Support Classes: 2003–04 and 2004–05

School Years

• Identify and enhance knowledge about, and prac-

tical demonstration of, school-wide PBS prac-

tices, systems and outcomes along the three-

tiered continuum (primary, secondary, tertiary);

and

• develop, conduct and evaluate technical assis-

tance and dissemination efforts that allow evi-

dence-based practices to be implemented on a

large scale with high durability and effectiveness.

The Texas Behavior Support Initiative (TBSI) was

established in 2001 in response to Senate Bill 1196 and

was designed to build capacity in Texas schools for the

provision of positive behavioral support (PBS) to all

students. The goal of PBS is to educate all students,

especially students with challenging behaviors, by

adopting a sustained, positive, preventative instruc-

tional approach to schoolwide discipline and behavior

management. This approach focuses on teaching and

encouraging positive schoolwide behavioral expecta-

tions and increasing school capacity to support sus-

tained use of empirically validated practices.

Positive Behavior Support

According to Trunball et al. (2002) “Positive behav-

ior support (PBS) is a broad range of systemic and

individualized strategies for achieving important social

��

��%�&��

>��'�_"��$"&&$ � ��

` � ��

��

� ��

� ��

� � ��

� ��

��

� � ��

� � ��

��

� � ��

� ��

� ��

�� #$ ��"�

Table 2: Students in Behavior Support by Grade Level

behavioral interventions and supports, and other strat-

egies, to address that behavior.” The Office of Special

Education Program at the U.S. Department of Educa-

tion established the National Technical Assistance

Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Sup-

ports (PBIS) to give schools capacity-building informa-

tion and technical assistance for identifying, adapting,

and sustaining effective school-wide disciplinary prac-

tices. The overall goals of the PBIS are to:



and learning outcomes while preventing problem be-

havior.” The components that make up PBS are

universal, group, and individual support. Universal

support is described as proactive in that every student

gets effective PBS without identification or referral for

specific problem behavior (Trunball et al., 2002). For

example, expected behaviors are taught and proactive

discipline policies and procedures are in place. Univer-

sal support works for about 75%–80% of students.

Group support recognizes that some students’ problem

behavior is not sufficiently addressed through univer-

sal support. Examples of group support include inten-

sive social skills teaching, self-management programs

and increased academic support. About 15%–25% of

students need group support. Individual support is the

core intervention that is typically provided to students

who engage in chronic challenging behavior. For

example, individual behavior support plans are created

and parent training and collaboration is set up. Be-

tween 5%–10% of students need individual support.

Many of the students that need individual support

are identified with emotional or behavioral disorders.

The outlook for these students is unpromising if they do

not receive the support they need. Students who

receive special education services with emotional or

behavioral disorders (EBD) experience impaired social

relationships, academic underachievement, high drop-

out rates, and more disciplinary actions than their

peers. Life after high school for these students may

also be discouraging because they are more likely to

experience unemployment than their general and spe-

cial education peers and 73 percent are arrested within

five years of leaving school (Anderson and Madigan,

n.d.; Lane, Wehbyand Barton-Arwood, 2005). There-

fore, it is crucial that these students receive positive

behavior supports that will meet their social and aca-

demic needs. Lane, Wehby and Barton-Arwood (2005)

found that social skills interventions conducted with

students identified with EBD have been mostly effec-

tive. These researchers referred to Gresham’s re-

search that reported that social skills interventions with

students identified with EBD yielded a 64% improve-

ment relative to comparison groups (Lane, Wehby, and

Barton-Arwood, 2005). Consequently, with much of the

focus on the social and behavioral deficits of students

identified with EBD, the academic instruction they

receive may be overlooked. According to Lane,

Gresham, and O’Shaughnessy:

In practice, most EBD preparation programs place

a strong emphasis on preparing future teachers to

be competent in the areas of classroom manage-

ment, anger management, social skills training,

and conflict resolution. While competence in these

areas is vital to providing a sound educational

experience for students with EBD, socio-behav-

ioral matters are just one component of the broader

curricular responsibilities. In addition, public law

mandates that all learners be exposed to the core

curriculum (2002).

In addition, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of

2001 requires all students, including those who receive

special education services, to participate in testing

programs to measure Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).

Also, in this era of high-stakes testing, meeting gradu-

ation requirements may be more difficult for students

with EBD (Lane, Wehby, and Barton-Arwood, 2005).

Cartledge explains that “The importance of challenging

curricula, effective teaching, and robust learning can-

not be over emphasized for these students” (2001).

According to Cartlede (2001), students with EBD who

were in classrooms with teachers trained in direct

instruction procedures experienced significant aca-

demic and social gains. Cartledge explains “These

lessons, characterized by high rates of oral and written

student responses, are so tightly structured that stu-

dents are constantly engaged in academic responding

with limited opportunities to act otherwise” (2001).

Osher and Hanely (2001) conducted a study to

identify, observe, and describe initiatives (programs

and policies) that exemplify the National Agenda for

Achieving Better Results for Children and Youth with

Serious Emotional Disturbance. Osher and Hanely

identified eight characteristics of successful self-con-

tained programs:

• A desire and capacity to prepare students and

environments of reintegration and to reintegrate

students as soon as was clinically and education-

ally appropriate;

• a commitment to high academic expectations;

• strategies aimed at enabling students to acquire

the social and academic skills necessary to suc-

ceed when they return to mainstream settings;

• staff who appreciated and were committed to the

students;

• high staff to student ratios;

• an array of supports, services, and collaborative

linkages with other agencies;

• strategies to empower students and families; and

• training and support to enable staff to meet the

demands of the challenging environments in which

they work.



Methods

Participants

There were a total of 170 Behavior Support teach-

ers in HISD for the 2004–05 school year, and a total of

a 122 participated in this evaluation. This accounted

for a 72% response rate. The teaching experience of

Behavior Support teachers included 34% teaching 4

years or less, 23% teaching 5–9 years, 15% 10–14

years, 15% 15–19 years, and 14% teaching 20 or more

years. The number of years employed as a Behavior

Support teacher included 58% employed 4 years or

less, 21% employed 5–9 years, 10% employed 10–14

years, 6% employed 15–19 years, and 3% employed

20 or more years. In addition, 94% of the Behavior

Support teachers received their certification in special

education, while 6% have not.

Instruments

The instrument used to survey Behavior Support

teachers consisted of a demographic section regarding

experience and certification areas (see Appendix B).

The next section included questions about paraprofes-

sionals and computer use. Behavior Support teachers

were also asked questions regarding the DailyReview

program and the Skillstreaming curriculum. Also, a

series of open-ended questions were included to deter-

mine the effectiveness of the Behavior Support pro-

gram.

Data Collection

Information regarding the Behavior Support pro-

gram was collected through interviews with the BSC

coordinator and the manager of Program and Instruc-

tional Support. The Behavior Support Class Teacher

survey along with a Scantron was mailed to teachers.

Behavior Support teachers were asked to return the

completed survey and Scantron in the envelope pro-

vided.

Data Analysis

Descriptive statistics such as frequencies and

percentages were used to summarize survey data. A

coding scheme was developed for each of the open-

ended questions. Responses were then coded accord-

ing to the emergent categories.

Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS)

data were analyzed for students in BSC in grades 3–11

who were administered the TAKS in the spring of 2005.

All students with disabilities are required to take the

TAKS test with two exceptions: 1) students required to

take the TAAS test to meet their graduation require-

ment; and 2) those who are exempt from TAKS and are

tested on an alternate instrument as dictated by their

IEP, specifically those students receiving instruction

off-grade level. Results were examined for grades 3–11

from the English TAKS for reading and mathematics;

writing grades 4 and 7; science grades 5, 10, and 11;

and social studies grades 8, 10, and 11. Grades 3 and

5 reading tests had three separate administrations in

2005 due to the state’s Student Success Initiative:

February 23, April 20 (students not previously passed);

and, June 29 (students not previously passed). Grade

5 mathematics also had three administrations: April 5,

May 17, and June 28. The TAKS reading and math

results for grades three and five reported in this

evaluation reflect the first administration. The perfor-

mance of students in BSC was compared to distictwide

results for students with disabilities. Results are

reported as percent “met standard” and “commended

performance.” The “commended performance” is

passing at a higher standard.

State Developed Alternative Assessment II (SDAA

II) was analyzed for students in BSC. Results for

students enrolled in grades 3–10 from the SDAA II for

reading and mathematics; and writing grades 4, 7, and

10 were examined in this evaluation. This inquiry was

completed for all students in BSC who were adminis-

tered these tests in the spring of 2005. The perfor-

mance of students in BSC was compared to distictwide

results for students with disabilities. Results are re-

ported as the percent of students who met ARD

expectations and the percent of students at each

achievement level.

What were the perceptions of Behavior Support


The majority of Behavior Support teachers, 67%,

indicated that they had between “6–10” students en-

rolled in their classroom. About 23% had between “1–

5” students, while 9% had “11–15” students. Behavior

Support teachers were asked, “How many paraprofes-

sionals assist you with your class?” About 91% stated

they had “one” paraprofessional, 4% “two,” 1% “three,”

and 3% “none.” Behavior Support Teachers were also

asked, “How much time do paraprofessionals spend

assisting you in the classroom during the day?” Of the

97 teachers who responded to this question, 87 stated

“all day,” and 3 stated “half of the day.” Seven teachers

indicated “other,” some of these responses included:

“as needed,” “whenever a paraprofessional is avail-



able,” and “not enough.” Behavior Support teachers

believe paraprofessionals who assist them need train-

ing in the following areas: “behavior strategies,” “class-

room management,” “DailyReview,” “computer,” “in-

structional strategies,” “Crisis Prevention Institute train-

ing,” and “special education laws.”

As stated previously, a goal of the Behavior

Support Program was to provide a time-limited service

that prepares the students for a less restrictive environ-

ment (LRE) prior to transitioning or exiting from the

program. At the time this evaluation was conducted

there was not a system in place to track the number of

students who exit BSC. Therefore, Behavior Support

teachers were asked, “Have you had students return to

the resource/general education classroom this school

year?” Of the 118 Behavior Support teachers who

answered this question, 55% stated “yes,” and 45%

stated “no.” Teachers who responded “yes” were asked

to indicate how many of their students have returned

either full or part-time to resource or general education

classrooms. A total of 40 students returned to a

resource classroom full-time and 48 students part-

time. A lesser amount of students returned to a general

education classroom with 15 students returning full-

time and 27 part-time. It should be noted that many

teachers who indicated they had students return to

resource or general education classrooms did not

provide the number of students. Behavior Support

teachers were asked, “What criteria do you use to move

students into general education?” Teachers provided

124 comments that were grouped into 12 categories.

The two categories with the most comments were

“DailyReview/level management system” with 36 com-

ments and “reduction of inappropriate behaviors” with

30 comments. Thirteen of the comments were catego-

rized as “academic performance.” The other catego-

ries were “observation/evaluations” with seven com-

ments, “work ethic” and “BIP/IEP” with six comments

each, “abilities” with five comments, “social skills,”

“attendance,” and “trials outside of BSC” with three

comments each. There were also 10 comments that

could not be categorized. Some of which included:

• “personally developed system;”

• “ARD committee made the decision;” and

• “information from my colleagues.”

Also, Behavior Support teachers were asked to

explain how they plan for moving BSC students into the

resource/general education classroom. Teachers pro-

vided 80 comments that were grouped into seven

categories. The first category included 36 comments

categorized as “work with receiving teacher.” Some of

the responses were as follows:

• “I offer full support to the resource/general educa-

tion teacher in order that the child may have the

opportunity to be successful in their LRE.”

• “I talk to teachers constantly about students mov-

ing.”

• “Collaborate with teachers with whom the student

is going to be placed.”

The second category included 13 comments cat-

egorized as “gradually transition students to resource/

general education class.” For instance, a Behavior

Support teacher explained, “I add on one class at a time

once the student has been on Level 4 for four weeks.

Plan with the general education teacher for the student’s

transition, if successful in one class, add on another

every two weeks.” The third category included 12

comments categorized as “monitor behavior.” The

fourth category included five comments categorized as

“identify teachers.” As one teacher stated, “I take a

census of those teachers who are willing to work with

my students and then have them sit in on a trial basis.”

The fifth category included three comments catego-

rized as “have ARD meeting.” The sixth category

included three comments categorized as “monitor aca-

demic performance.” The seventh category included

eight comments that could not be categorized. Some

of the comments included:

• “work closely with parents;”

• “I talk to teachers constantly about students mov-

ing. It needs to become more frequent to motivate

students. Administration reluctant to move stu-

dents due to past behaviors;” and

• “focus students.”

Behavior Support teachers were asked to rate their

effectiveness regarding classroom management, in-

structional strategies, and social skills instruction on

the following scale: “very effective,” “effective,” “some-

what effective,” and “not effective.” Table 3 details the

percentages of effectiveness for each of the activities.

The majority of Behavior Support teachers, 56% stated

that they were “very effective” with regards to class-

room management, while 37% stated “effective.” Only

7% of the teachers thought they were “somewhat

effective.” Thirty-six percent of teachers indicated

they were “very effective” with regards to instructional

strategies, while 59% thought they were “effective.”

Five percent of the teachers stated they were “some-

what effective,” and .8% “not effective.” About 33% of

the teachers indicated they were “very effective” with



'��((��&� �((��&�

)��*��((��&�

��((��&�

_��&&��Q��

*��#��&��X��Q��

X&��X}��*��#��&� ��

Table 3: Percent of Behavior Support Teachers’ Effectiveness Regarding Aspects of the Behavior Support Program

regards to social skills instruction, while 53% indicated

“effective.” The percentage of teachers who thought

they were “somewhat effective” was close to 13%, and

close to 2% of the teachers indicated “not effective.”

Behavior Support teachers were asked to list the

type of professional development they need in order to

be effective in the classroom. Teachers provided 76

comments that were grouped into seven categories of

professional development. The first category included

24 comments categorized as “instructional strategies.”

Some of the comments were as follows:

• “Professional development in instructional strate-

gies that general education teachers have the

opportunity to attend. BSC should have the latest

training on new strategies and trends in education.”

• “Instructional training in math, science, and social

studies.”

• “Math strategies for low achieving students, read-

ing strategies.”

The second category included 10 comments cat-

egorized as “social skills/Skillstreaming curriculum.”

As one Behavior Support teacher explained, “I need to

receive the social skills training.” The third category

included 10 comments categorized as “behavior man-

agement.” The fourth category included nine com-

ments categorized as “need materials.” The fifth

category included five comments categorized as “teach-

ing students on different instructional levels.” The sixth

category included three comments categorized as

“time management.” The seventh category included 15

comments that could not be categorized. Some of the

comments were as follows:

• “More help in addressing remediation for students

that are off grade level in high school;”

• stress management;” and

• “on hands professional development which intro-

duce real life scenarios in the classroom.”

Teachers were asked, “Has your career as a

Behavioral Support teacher been rewarding?” Fifty-

eight percent stated “yes,” 29% stated “somewhat,”

and 8% stated “no.” Five percent of the teachers did not

respond to the question. A teacher who believes his/

her career has been rewarding explained, “I enjoy

working with the most challenged student because I

love to look into their eyes when they realize that ‘I

finally have someone on my side.’ I love to see these

children turn themselves around and learn how to

manage their own behavior. They feel good about

themselves and so do I. ‘Shoot for the moon & if you

fall, you’ll land among stars.’” Another teacher who

indicated their career is somewhat rewarding explained,

“My career as a behavioral service teacher has been

rewarding somewhat. The rewarding part is having

support from our [Special Education] office and having

a great paraprofessional. The area that has not been

rewarding is the stress of being self-contained with

tough students.” A teacher who believes their career

has not been rewarding explained, “Not enough re-

sources to get the job done. Not enough time to

complete paperwork on time. Not enough support from

other staff.”

Teachers were also asked, “What is the ultimate

goal of the Behavior Support teacher regarding behav-

ior service students?” Most of the teachers believed

that the ultimate goal of the Behavior Support teacher

was to exit students from Behavior Support class-

rooms and transition them back into general education.

Teachers explained that this ultimate goal was sup-

ported by other goals such as increasing appropriate

behavior and improving social and academic skills.




The perceptions of Behavior Support teachers

regarding the implementation of the Skillstreaming

curriculum were assessed through close-ended and

open-ended questions that were designed to elicit their

experiences. Teachers were asked, “Do you have

Skillstreaming materials?” About 73% of the Behavior

Support teachers stated “yes,” while 27% stated “no.”

Teachers who indicated they did not have Skillstreaming

materials were asked to specify what social skills

materials they are using with their students in BSC.

Two teachers indicated “none.” Three teachers indi-



cated they use Character Education materials. Two

teachers indicated that they use Ready-To-Use Social

Skills Lessons and Activities by Ruth Weltmann Begun

(1996). Several teachers indicated they use books,

cards, interactive games to teach social skills. Also,

one teacher commented, “I plan and use self-made

lessons according to student needs.” Another teacher

stated, “Group discussion on different issues or prob-

lems mishandled by students.”

Behavior Support teachers were then asked if they

had attended Skillstreaming training. Approximately,

70% of the teachers stated “yes,” while 30% stated

“no.” Teachers who responded that they have attended

Skillstreaming training were asked, “How confident are

you in using Skillstreaming curriculum?” About 29%

stated “very,” 42% “somewhat,” and 29% “not at all.”

Behavior Support teachers were asked how often they

implement the Skillstreaming curriculum and 7% indi-

cated “daily,” 26% “3 times a week,” 17% “2 times a

week,” 25% “once a week,” and 25% “never.” The last

question Behavior Support teachers were asked was

“Do your students benefit from the Skillstreaming

curriculum?” The majority of teachers at 55% stated

“yes” compared to 45% who stated “no.” Teachers

were asked to explain their response. The teachers

who believe their students benefit from Skillstreaming

curriculum responded with 36 comments which were

grouped into five categories. The first category in-

cluded nine comments categorized as “improving so-

cial skills.” Some of the responses were as follows:

• “They are building skills that were absent or never

taught to them before. It is filling the social gaps

that were missing from their social skills.”

• “They benefit by learning pro-social ways of re-

sponding to situations.”

• “There is a reduction in negative behaviors and

conflicts.”

The second category included eight comments

categorized as “enjoying role-play.” For instance a

teacher commented, “My students enjoy participating

in role-playing with their classmates.” The third cat-

egory also included eight comments categorized as

“problem solving.” A Behavior Support teacher ex-

plained, “Yes, because they are usually faced with the

problems that happen in the social skill material. When

that happens, they know how to try and solve them.”

The fourth category included three comments catego-

rized as “expressing yourself.” As one teacher stated,

“Talk out problems, have a voice in the classroom.”

The fifth category included eight comments that could

not be categorized. Some of these comments were as

follows:

• “They know the skills, but forget to use them at the

appropriate time.”

• “Somewhat, they may apply what they’ve learned

for a day.”

• “This curriculum targets the behaviors that are

exhibited in the BSC classroom. The examples or

situations are real so that the learner can relate.”

Behavior Support teachers who do not believe their

students benefit from Skillstreaming curriculum re-

sponded with 25 comments which were grouped into

three categories. The first category included eight

comments categorized as “don’t apply what they

learn.” Some of the responses were as follows:

• “The students go through the rituals of the role

playing and enjoy it. However, they never seem to

be able to apply what they’ve learned into actual

life.”

• “They learn the lesson, but do not apply it to their

daily lives.”

• “The students want to act silly and although they

seem to know the appropriate behaviors during a

Skillstreaming role play they do not choose the

appropriate behaviors in real situations.”

The second category included nine comments catego-

rized as “do not implement.” Some of the responses

were as follows:

• “I don’t fully understand the program.”

• “No, with the number of students I have, I have not

yet successfully implemented Skillstreaming.”

• “I don’t know what it is. I’ve never been trained or

told anything about it.”

The third category included eight comments that could

not be categorized. Some of the responses were as

follows:

• “Incident processing is more effective.”

• “They benefit more from modeling and redirection.”

• “They find it silly and hard to participate.”


teachers regarding the DailyReview program?

The majority of Behavior Support teachers at 57%

attended training on the DailyReview during the 2004–

05 school year. Another 25% of the Behavior Support

teachers indicated they attended training during the

2003–04 school year, 6% during the 2002–03 school

year, and 2% during the 2001–02 school year. About

10% of the Behavior Support teachers have not at-

tended training. Of the teachers who have attended



training, 41% believe the training prepared them to

implement the DailyReview program in their class-

room. Some of the comments from these teachers

were as follows:

• “It allowed me the opportunity to document behav-

iors on a daily basis and to see the results visually.”

• “I was so pleased with this program that I would like

to be a trainer. I like the data it provides and the

positive approach to managing behaviors.”

• “The training allowed me to be able to use the

program for my student. Also, I am able to change

behavior objectives when needed.”

About 46% of the teachers indicated that the

training “somewhat” prepared them. Some of their

comments were as follows:

• “I felt they should have explained the point system.

They only showed me how to use the software.”

• “It showed me how to use the program, but did little

to help us implement the program with our stu-

dents.”

• “It is somewhat difficult to list the exact wording

needed for behaviors (rules and positive behavior

strategies) for the child with autism.”

Approximately 14% of the teachers indicated that

the training did not prepare them to implement the

DailyReview program. Some of their comments were

as follows:

• “There were several teachers attending the work-

shop. Did not provide enough practice. I had to go

to another campus to get assistance.”

• “The book did not explain it clearly, print was too

small, too many people in sessions.”

• “All I learned was how to input the data. At that time

there was no manual on how to implement the

program.”

Also, 48% of the Behavior Support teachers indi-

cated that they need additional training on the

DailyReview Program, 52% indicated they did not.

Teachers who indicated they needed additional training

were asked to indicate what day of the week and time

of day would be a most convenient time for them to

attend training. Of the 36 teachers who provided a

response 17 indicated “any day.” The remaining

teachers specifically recommended days such Tues-

day, Wednesday, and Friday afternoons. It was appar-

ent that teachers preferred to attend training during the

week and not on the weekend as only three teachers

indicated Saturday would be a convenient day.

The majority of the teachers at 65% indicated that

they have utilized the DailyReview program in their

classroom to implement the Level Management Point

System. Teachers who indicated they have only

somewhat or have not utilized the DailyReview pro-

gram where asked to explain what system they were

using to monitor student level management/point sys-

tem. Of the 27 teachers who responded, nine teachers

indicated that they employ a personally developed

system. An additional nine teachers indicated they

were using a combination of the DailyReview and

Crane-Reynolds or personally developed system. Three

teachers indicated Crane-Reynolds, while six teach-

ers’ comments suggested that they tried using

DailyReview, but it did not work for their students or did

not know if they were using it correctly. Teachers who

indicated that they have implemented the DailyReview

program were asked, “To what degree have you imple-

mented the DailyReview program in your classroom?”

Approximately, 5% of the teachers indicated that

“implementation is only in the planning stages,” 39% of

teachers indicated “limited implementation has started,”

and 56% indicated “full implementation” of the program

has begun in their classroom. Teachers were asked if

they have experienced any challenges in implementing

the DailyReview. A total of 49 teachers described

challenges they faced in implementing the DailyReview

program. The challenges were categorized as “time,”

“technical problems,” “software limitations/problems,”

and “student buy in.” Teachers indicated that training,

a handbook on level management point system, and

technical support would most assist them in fully

implementing the DailyReview program. Also, 64% of

teachers indicated that paraprofessionals assist them

in maintaining the DailyReview program. Behavior

Support teachers were asked, “How often do your

students receive a Daily Report Card?” About 16% of

teachers indicated “daily” and 37% “weekly,” and 47%

“other.” Teachers were asked to explain other and the

following are some of their responses: use daily com-

munication book, every six weeks, sometimes, daily

before Christmas, seldom afterwards, home logs are

used, and never. Teachers were then asked, “Do

parents receive information about their child’s progress

regarding the DailyReview?” Approximately 29% of the

teachers stated “yes,” 43% “sometimes,” and 28%

“no.” Teachers who indicated “yes,” were asked to

explain if using the DailyReview has increased parental

involvement. A total of 22 teachers provided com-

ments. Ten of the teachers stated that using the

DailyReview has not increased parental involvement.

As one teacher explains, “No, they are interested in the



beginning, but their interest fades with time.” Six of the

teachers believe parental involvement has increased

since using the DailyReview. A teacher commented,

“My parents look forward to seeing the weekly report.

They also call or schedule a visit to the BSC class.” Six

of the comments could not be categorized. Table 4

details the percent of teachers who use DailyReview

documentation during parent conferences, ARD meet-

ings, and IEP meetings. A higher percentage of teach-

ers indicated they use DailyReview documentation

during ARD meetings followed by parent conferences.

Close to 40% of the teachers indicated they do not use

DailyReview documentation during IEP meetings.

Teachers were asked, “Has using the DailyReview

saved you time?” About 24% of the teachers stated

“yes,” 31% “somewhat,” and 45% indicated “no.” Teach-

ers who have implemented the DailyReview program

were asked, “Since implementing the DailyReview

program, have students’ disruptive behaviors de-

creased?” Approximately, 15% of the teachers indi-

cated “yes,” while 35% indicated “somewhat.” How-

ever, 50% of the teachers indicated “no.” Teachers

were also asked, “Has the DailyReview program as-

sisted students in returning to the resource/general

education classroom this school year?” The majority of

teachers at 62% stated “no,” while 38% stated “yes.”

The most important tool used for implementing the

DailyReview program is the computer. Therefore, teach-

ers were asked several questions regarding comput-

ers. Teachers were asked to indicate how many com-

puters they had in their classroom. Approximately,

35% stated “one,” 32% “two,” 16% “three,” and 7% “four

or more.” However, 8% of the Behavior Support

teachers did not have a computer in their class. The

overwhelming majority of teachers at 94% stated they

have access to the Internet in their classroom, while

6% did not. Teachers were also asked, “How confident

are you in using computers?” The majority of teachers

at 68% stated “very,” 31% “somewhat,” and 2% “not at

all.” Approximately 93% of teachers indicated they use

a computer “daily,” 6% “weekly,” and less than 1%

“never.” Teachers who indicated “weekly” or “never”

were asked to explain what barriers were keeping them

from using a computer. The barriers indicated by the

teachers were categorized as “don’t have a computer

in the classroom,” “have an outdated computer,” “ do

not have access to the Internet,” and “ not good with

computers.” Lastly, teachers were asked if they be-

lieve the DailyReview software is user-friendly. About

42% stated “yes,” 41% “somewhat,” and 17% “no.” A

teacher who stated the DailyReview software is user-

friendly commented, “It is simple and the tech support

responds instantly if there is a problem. The charts at

a glance give you an instant idea of how the students

are doing.” A teacher who responded the DailyReview

was somewhat user-friendly indicated that, “more user-

friendly supplementary materials would enhance effec-

tiveness.” A teacher who does not believe the

DailyReview is user-friendly stated that the, “program

is too slow and time consuming.”

What was the academic performance of students in

BSC on the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and

Skills (TAKS)?

The TAKS exam results for BSC students were

compared to districtwide results for students with

disabilities enrolled in grades 3–11. The percent of

students who met minimum standards and earned the

commended status are presented for reading, math-

ematics, writing, science, and social studies.

Table 5 presents the English 2005 TAKS results in

Reading and English Language Arts (ELA) for students

in BSC compared to all HISD students with disabilities.

A total of 103 students in BSC took the Reading/ELA

subtest on the English TAKS. The percent of students

in BSC who met the minimum standard ranged from 0%

in grade 10 to 61% in grade 6, while all HISD students

with disabilities had a range from 28% in grade 10 to

73% in grade 3. The highest percent of students in BSC

who earned the commended status was 11% in grade

6 compared to 25% in grade 3 for all students with

disabilities.


mathematics for BSC students compared to all HISD

students with disabilities. A total of 104 students in

BSC took the mathematics subtest on the English

TAKS. The percent of BSC students who met the

��-�-��.�&��*

��-��-��/; <�� )��

��_&��

�U+��Q� ��

*>��Q� � � ��

Table 4: Percent of Behavior Support Teachers who use DailyReview Documentation



��

��

%�&��

=��&��)��&��

)�-��>@��)�-��*��

��-��

��

��J��

)��

��

Q��

=�"��&��X��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

�&��\�Y"��$��$��"�Q��$��$��Q��#��"��$��&��

Table 5: English TAKS Results in Reading/ELA (Grades 3–11) for Students in Behavior Services and All

Students with Disabilities: Spring 2005

��

��

%�&��

=��&��)-ZZ��

)�-��>@��)�-��*��

��-��

��

��J��

)��

��

Q��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

�&��\��"�Q��$��"��#��"��$��&��

��]��"��#$��$�

Table 6: English TAKS Results in Mathematics (Grades 3–11) for Students in Behavior Services and All


minimum standard ranged from 2% in grade 8 to 57%

in grade 3, while all HISD students with disabilities had

a range from 17% in grade 10 to 57% in grades 3 and

4. The highest percent of students in BSC who earned

the commended status was 5% in grade 6 compared to

17% in grade 4 for all students with disabilities.


writing for students in BSC compared to all HISD

students with disabilities. A total of 22 students in BSC

took the writing subtest on the English TAKS. The

percent of students in BSC who met the minimum

standard in grade 4 was 83% compared to 77% of all



��

��

%�&��

�

=��&��)-ZZ��

)�-��>@��)�-��*��

��

�-��

��

��J��

)��

��

Q��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

Table 7: English TAKS Results in Writing (Grades 4 and 7) for Students in Behavior Support and All Students with

Disabilities: Spring 2005

��

��

%�&��

=��&��)-ZZ��

)�-��>@��)�-��*��

��-��

��

��J��

)��

��

Q��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

��]��"��#$��$�

Table 8: English TAKS Results in Science (Grades 5 and 10–11) for Students in Behavior Support and All Students

with Disabilities: Spring 2005

students with disabilities in the district. In grade 7, thepercent of BSC students who met the minimum stan-

dard was 40% compared to 67% of all HISD students

with disabilities. The percent of students in BSC who

earned the commended status was 17% in grade 4 and

10% in grade 7 compared to 10% and 5% of all students

with disabilities in the district.


science for BSC students compared to all HISD stu-

dents with disabilities. A total of 38 students in BSC

took the science subtest on the English TAKS. The

percent of BSC students who met the minimum stan-

dard in grade 5 was 21% compared to 24% of all

students with disabilities in the district. None of the

BSC students in grade 10 met the minimum standard,

while 16% of all students with disabilities in HISD did.

Also, none of the BSC students earned the com-

mended status.


social studies for BSC students compared to all HISD

students with disabilities. A total of 27 students in BSC

took the social studies subtest on the English TAKS.

The percent of BSC students who met the minimum

standard in grade 8 was 37% compared to 50% of all

HISD students with disabilities. In grade 10, the

percent of BSC students who met the minimum stan-

dard was 40% compared to 49% of all students with


What was the academic performance of students in

BSC on the State Developed Alternative Assess-

ment II (SDAA II)?

The SDAA II exam results for students in BSC

were compared to districtwide results for students with

� � ��

��

%�&��

=��&��)-ZZ��

)�-��>@��)�-��*��

��-��

��

��J��

)��

��

Q��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

��]��"��#$��$�

Table 9: English TAKS Results in Social Studies (Grades 8 and 10–11) for Students in Behavior Support and All




Table 10: Percent of Students in Behavior Support and All Students with Disabilities Who Met ARD

Expectations on the SDAA II in Reading: Spring 2005

��(�)�-��

@��&��%�&��

\��-��

%�&��

�

=��&��)-ZZ��

)�-��>@��)�-��*��

��

�

�

�-��

��

�

��J��

@.��

�]Z��

�

%�&��\�

�

%�&��\\�

�

%�&��\\\�

=�"��&��X#��&�� `�

��X�#$��]��"��+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

��]��"��#$��$��

instructional levels indicated that most students at

instructional levels 3–8 scored at a Level II, while

students at instructional levels K–2 scored at a Level

Language Arts (ELA) subtest on the SDAA II.

Table 11 presents the mathematics results on the

2005 SDAA II for BSC students compared to all HISD


BSC took the mathematics subtest on the SDAA II.

The majority of BSC students met their ARD expecta-

tion on the mathematics subtest of the SDAA II. The

percentage of BSC students who met their ARD expec-

tation ranged from 97% at instructional level 2 to 73%

at instructional level 4 compared to 97% at instructional

level 1 to 68% at instructional level 7 among all

students with disabilities in the district. The percent of

BSC students who met their ARD expectation was

higher at instructional levels 2, 6, and 7 than all

students with disabilities. As the instructional level

increased, the achievement level scored decreased for

students taking the mathematics subtest of the SDAA

II. The majority of BSC students at instructional levels

K, 1, and 2 scored at an achievement level III, while the

majority of BSC students at instructional levels 3, 4,

and 5 scored at achievement level II. BSC students at

instructional levels 6, 7, and 8 scored at achievement

level I.

III. There were no BSC students who took the Englishdisabilities enrolled in grades 3–8 and 10. The percent

of students who met ARD expectations and the percent

of students at each achievement level are presented

for reading, mathematics, and writing.

Table 10 presents the reading results on the 2005

SDAA II for BSC students compared to all HISD


BSC took the reading subtest on the SDAA II. The

majority of students in BSC met their ARD expectation

on the reading subtest of the SDAA II. The percentage

of students in BSC who met their ARD expectation

ranged from 94% at instructional level K to 68% at

instructional level 3 compared to 94% at instructional

levels K and 1 to 79% at instructional level 3 among all

students with disabilities in the district. The percent of

students in BSC who met their ARD expectation was

lower at all levels of instruction compared to all stu-

dents with disabilities with the exception of instruc-

tional level K. The highest number of BSC students

were tested at instructional levels 3 and 4. The percent

of BSC students at each achievement level for all



��(�)�-��

@��&��%�&��

\��-��

%�&��

�

=��&��)-ZZ��

)�-��>@��)�-��*��

��

�

�

�-��

��

�

��J��

@.��

�]Z��

�

%�&��\�

�

%�&��\\�

�

%�&��\\\�

=�"��&��X#��&�� K/1 ��X�#$��]��"��+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&�� 3/4 ��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&�� 6/7 ��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&�� 8/9 ��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

Table 12: Percent of Students in Behavior Services and All Students with Disabilities Who Met ARD

Expectations on the SDAA II in Writing: Spring 2005

��(�)�-��

@��&��%�&��

\��-��

%�&��

�

=��&��)-ZZ��

)�-��>@��)�-��*��

��

�

�

�-��

��

�

��J��

@.��

�]Z��

�

%�&��\�

�

%�&��\\�

�

%�&��\\\�

=�"��&��X#��&�� `�

��X�#$��]��"��+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

=�"��&��X#��&��

��X�#$��]��"�+��@��

Table 11: Percent of Students in Behavior Services and All Students with Disabilities Who Met ARD

Expectations on the SDAA II in Mathematics: Spring 2005

Table 12 presents the writing results on the 2005

SDAA II for students in BSC compared to all HISD

students with disabilities. A total of 222 BSC students

took the writing subtest on the SDAA II. The majority

of students in BSC met their ARD expectation on the

writing subtest of the SDAA II. The percentage of

students in BSC who met their ARD expectation

ranged from 93% at instructional level 6/7 to 60% at

instructional level 2 compared to 86% at instructional

level K/1 to 45% at instructional level 8/9 of all students

with disabilities in the district. The percent of students

in BSC who met their ARD expectation was higher at

instructional level 6/7 compared to all students with

disabilities. The percent of students in BSC at each



achievement level indicated that the majority of stu-

dents scored at an achievement Level I on the writing

subtest of the SDAA II with the exception of instruc-

tional level K/1.

Discussion

HISD’s Office of Special Education Services pro-

vided a Behavior Support program to students with

disabilities who have behavior disorders. The program

was guided by five goals. The first goal of the Behavior

Support Program was to offer time-limited services so

that students may function in the least restrictive

educational environment. Interviews with Special

Education personnel revealed that a system was not in

place to track the number of students who exited the

Behavior Support Program during the 2004–05 school

year. Therefore, Behavior Support teachers were

asked to indicate if they had students return to the

resource/general education classroom during the 2004–

05 school year. The majority of teachers at 55% stated

that they returned students to a less restrictive environ-

ment. According to teacher responses, a total of 130

students returned to the resource/general education

classroom either full or part-time. This number may not

be accurate since many teachers did not provide the

number of students that returned to a less restrictive

environment.

The criteria used to return students to general

education as indicated by Behavior Support teachers

included: DailyReview/level management system, re-

duction of inappropriate behaviors, academic perfor-

mance, observation/evaluations, work ethic, BIP/IEP,

abilities, social skills, attendance, and trials outside of

BSC. Most teachers indicated using a combination of

these criteria; however, there was no consistency.

There was a consensus among Behavior Support

teachers that exiting students from BSC and transitioning

them back into general education was their ultimate

goal.

The second goal of the Behavior Support Program

was to provide on-going support services to assist


setting or exiting behavior services. Behavior Support

teachers indicated that by “working with receiving

teacher” they assist students transitioning to the re-

source/general education classroom. Students are

supported through this collaboration between the Be-

havior Support teacher and the resource/general edu-

cation teacher.

The third goal of the Behavior Support Program

was to increase the student’s coping and social skills.

The office of Special Education requires Behavior

Support teachers to implement the Skillstreaming

curriculum in BSC. However, more than a quarter of the

teachers surveyed indicated that they did not have

Skillstreaming materials. A reason for this may be that

30% of the teachers have not attended Skillstreaming

training. The Skillstreaming curriculum should be taught

a minimum of two times a week. A quarter of the

Behavior Support teachers implement the Skillstreaming

curriculum “once a week” and another quarter indicated

they “never” implement the curriculum. Therefore, only

half of the Behavior Support teachers implemented the

curriculum at least twice a week or more. An explana-

tion for this may be that 42% of teachers stated that

they were “somewhat” confident in using the

Skillstreaming curriculum, while 29% were ”not at all”

confident. Another explanation for the limited imple-

mentation may be that 45% of Behavior Support

teachers do not believe their students benefit from the

Skillstreaming curriculum. This is of concern since the

literature states that social skills interventions are

effective and necessary with students who need be-

havior support.


implement positive behavior interventions as man-

dated by federal and state laws. The Office of Special

Education has executed the DailyReview as the core

behavior management system. About 65% of teachers

indicate they have utilized the DailyReview Program in

their classroom to implement the Level Management

Point System. These teachers were also asked to what

degree they have implemented the DailyReview Pro-

gram and 56% indicated full implementation of the

program has begun in their classroom. A possible

reason as to why not all Behavior Support teachers are

fully implementing the program may be that 48% of

them indicated they need additional training on the

DailyReview program. Training for the DailyReview

program began during the 2001–02 school year and has

continued through the 2004–05 school year. However,

10% of the Behavior Support teachers surveyed have

not attended training. Of the teachers who attended

training, 41% believe the training prepared them to

implement the DailyReview program, while 46% be-

lieved it “somewhat” prepared them, and 14% believe

it did not prepare them. Other reasons as to why not all

Behavior Support teachers are fully implementing the

DailyReview program may include the challenges they



faced in implementing the program. These challenges

included “time,” “technical problems,” “software limita-

tions/problems,” and “student buy in.” As indicated by

the Behavior Support teachers, training, technical

assistance, and a handbook on the Level management

Point System would most assist them in fully imple-

menting the DailyReview program. An important tool in

the implementation of the DailyReview program is a

computer. A small percentage of teachers at 8% did

not have a computer in their classroom and 6% did not

have Internet access in their classroom.

Half of the teachers reported that student’s disrup-

tive behaviors have not decreased since implementing

the DailyReview program. At the same time most of the

teachers are not distributing the Daily Report Card

“daily” to their students. The limited implementation of

the DailyReview may have led to some of the negative

perceptions about the effectiveness of the program.

Teachers who believe the training they received was

adequate and are fully implementing the program have

more positive perception about the program.

The fourth goal of the Behavior Support Program

was to offer on-going consultation services on behavior

management techniques for parents and professional

staff. In addition, a goal of the DailyReview program

was to develop a system that facilities consistent and

daily communication between parents and teachers.

About 29% of Behavior Support teachers reported

parents receive information about their child’s progress

regarding the DailyReview. DailyReview documenta-

tion was mostly used during ARD meetings followed by

Parent Conferences and IEP meetings. However, more

than a quarter of teachers are not using DailyReview

documentation during parent conferences or ARD meet-

ings. Almost 40% of teachers are not using DailyReview

documentation during IEP meetings. Additional ques-

tions were not solicited from Behavior Support teach-

ers regarding other forms in which they may provide on-

going consultation services on behavior management

techniques for parents and professional staff since the

DailyReview program was the behavior management

system in place.

The fifth goal of the Behavior Support Program was

to provide an instructional program that allows the

students to progress academically. As the literature

suggested, the academic instruction of students in

BSC may be overlooked with much of the focus being

on the social and behavioral needs of these students.

The overwhelming majority of Behavior Support teach-

ers believed they were “very effective” to “effective”

with regards to instructional strategies. Although

teachers believed they were effective with regards to

instructional strategies they still indicated that they

would like professional development in this area. Some

teachers specifically stated they would like profes-

sional development regarding teaching students who

are on different instructional levels.

The performance of students in BSC on the TAKS

and SDAA II was compared to students with disabilities

districtwide. Students in BSC did not perform as well as

all students with disabilities on the English TAKS. On

the TAKS reading subtest more than half of the

students in BSC met the standard for three grade

levels. On the TAKS math subtest, more than half of

students in BSC met the standard for one grade level.

Students in BSC outperformed all students with dis-

abilities in grade 4 on the writing subtest on the TAKS.

On the science and social studies subtests less than

half of students in BSC met the standard for the grades

tested. Students in BSC performed the lowest on the

math and science subtests compared to the reading

and writing subtest on the English TAKS. This was the

same for all students with disabilities. It is important to

recognize that there were students in BSC who earned

the commended status on the reading, math, and

writing subtests.

The majority of students in BSC met ARD expec-

tations on all subtests of the SDAA II. All students with

disabilities had a higher percent met ARD expectations

on the reading subtest than students in BSC with the

exception of instructional level K where the percent met

was the same. On the mathematics subtest, students

in BSC had a higher percent met standard for instruc-

tional levels 2, 6, and 7. On the writing subtest,

students in BSC had a higher percent met ARD

expectations for instructional level 6/7.

Conclusion

HISD’s Office of Special Education Services pro-

vides behavior support to students with disabilities.

The Behavior Support Program works to meet the

social and academic needs of students with behavior

disorders. The findings from this evaluation suggest

that many of the Behavior Support teachers are not

fully implementing the social skills curriculum nor the

DailyReview program. These teachers indicated that

they utilized other resources to meet the social and

behavioral needs of the students. The challenge is to

convince Behavior Support teachers that full imple-



mentation of the Skillstreaming curriculum and the

DailyReview program may assist students in

transitioning to a least restrictive environment in a

shorter amount of time.

Recommendations

1. An accurate number of the students who have

exited the Behavior Support program was not

available. An efficient system for tracking the

number of students who exit the Behavior Support

program needs to be developed by the Office of

Special Education Services.

2. Almost a third of Behavior Support teachers indi-

cated that they have not attended Skillstreaming

training and do not have the curriculum. The

program coordinator may want to offer Behavior

Support teachers the opportunity to attend training

during the upcoming school year.

3. Behavior Support teachers need support in fully

implementing the Skillstreaming curriculum cor-

rectly. Nearly half of the teachers did not believe

the Skillstreaming curriculum benefited their stu-

dents. The project coordinator may want to con-

sider offering all Behavior Support teachers and

paraprofessionals the opportunity to attend profes-

sional development regarding the social skills

curriculum. Additional professional development

in this area may increase teacher confidence in

implementing the curriculum.

4. Behavior Support teachers need support in imple-

menting the DailyReview program. Almost half of

the teachers indicated they need additional training

using the DailyReview. The project coordinator

may want to consider offering all Behavior Support

teachers and paraprofessionals the opportunity to

attend follow-up training regarding the DailyReview

program. Also, the program coordinator may want

to set aside time during the training to discuss with

Behavior Support teachers the barriers that are

keeping them from fully implementing the program.

Behavior Support teachers may also find it benefi-

cial to hear from colleagues who are fully imple-

menting the DailyReview program and are experi-

encing success with their students.

5. An analysis of the TAKS data revealed that stu-

dents in BSC did not perform as well as all students

with disabilities. The subject areas in which stu-

dents in BSC need the most academic support was

in math and science. Teachers also indicated a

need for professional development regarding in-

structional strategies. The program coordinator

may want to provide professional development

regarding instructional strategies in the core sub-

ject areas. The program coordinator may need to

conduct a needs assessment to ensure that the

Behavior Support teachers have the necessary

materials needed to allow students to progress

academically. In addition, the program coordinator

may need to consider how the NCLB requirement

that all teachers must by “highly qualified” by the

end of the 2005–06 school year will effect the

academic instruction Behavior Support teachers

can provide.

6. Continued monitoring of the Behavior Support

Program will provide additional information about

the effectiveness of the services. Specifically, an

examination of the perceptions held by students in

BSC will yield valuable information.

References

Anderson, M. G. & Madigan, J. (n.d.). Creating Culturally

Responsive Classroom Environments. Retrieved Oc-

tober 25,2005, from http://www.coedu.usf.edu/laser/

RTP/RTP_Culturally_Responsive.pdf

Cartledge, G. (2001). President’ s Commission on Excel-

lence in Special Education Assessment and Identifica-

tion Task Force: Minority Overidentification and

Misidentfication. National Association for the Educa-

tion of African American Children with Learning Dis-

abilities. Retrieved October 25, 2005, from http://

w w w . c h a r i t y a d v a n t a g e . c o m / a a c l d /

cartledgepresentation.asp

Lane, K. Gresham, F. & O’Shaughnessy, T. (2002). Serving

Students With or At-Risk for Emotional and Behavioral

Disorders: Future Challenges. Education and Treat-

ment of Children, 25, 507–521.

Lane, K., Wehby, J., & Barton-Arwood, S. (2005). Students

With and At Risk for Emotional and Behavioral Disor-

ders: Meeting Their Social and Academic Needs.

Preventing School Failure, 49, 6–9.

Osher, D. & Hanley, T. (2001). Implementing the SED

National Agenda: Promising Programs and Policies

for Children and Youth With Emotional and Behavioral

Problems. Education and Treatment of Children, 24,

374–403.

Texas Education Agency. (2001). Texas Behavior Support

Initiative. Austin, TX

Turnbull, A., et al. (2002). A Blueprint for Schoolwide

Positive Behavior Support: Implementation of Three



Components. Council for Exceptional Children, 68,

377–402.

U.S. Department of Education. (2004) Individuals with

Disabilities Education Act. Wahsington, DC: Office of

Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.

U.S. Department of Education. (2004). New No Child Left

Behind Flexibility: Highly Qualified Teachers

. Washington, D.C.



Appendix A

��)�� U�� =��$&] ^�/��)��

�� &$ =#�@��} �#��

��$��&� ��Q"��$��Q"�� _��&� =��

��}�] �&@@' _#�� _��_��_��

=��} `��& +��$' _"��

=�� "#� +&]��Q _G_

=�� U >$��&� +��

=&�"�� +�$� ��Q +�&��=��}

=&�� &�$�� >��Q��$��&��>��

=&]�� &��"�_�� &�� #��

=��$&] ��}�� $' ��

=�&]��Q �� Q&�'<G��&��X �&#��&�

=�#�� &� �&��

=#�@��} U&�� `��"��

=#��#� U#�} ��' G��

_&$]�� X��$��&� �&QQ ��$��&�

_&��#��'�X�� X��&QQ�� &��$ ��@'

_&��&�$ X"�$&]@�� }�&� U��Q��

_&&� X"�� &"��&� X��@&�&#Q"

_��& X"�� `�' X"��&]�

+&$�&� X�� G&�Q X��Q

+&Q�� X��"��>��V� ��"�� !��

+&#Q�� X��"��`��"�� U�'�&�$� !��"��Q�&�

+#�}�� X�� &��"�_�� !��@#�'

>��&� X#Q��&�� "��Q !��$��X

>��&$ Y"&��&� U�� !"��'

�&�� Y#�� U'�� !&��"��Q

�&�$��>X Y]�� X"��&]��X ��

�&�� !��' X��"��>��V��X _��Q��Z-��

��}�� !"�$@' X��&��$$�� >�

��&�� !��$�&��[��Q� Y"&�� XV�U

��QQ !&&$�&� !��"

��Q&�'<G��&��>X J��)�� !��=��

�� #�}� !��

��&��>X =��} !&&$�&��X



Appendix B

)Z��-��;

=��&��)-ZZ��Q��)-�&��

��

�-�Z��;��Y"��#��&��&��"��#��'��&�Q��"��'&#��&��Q��$��Q

=�"��&��X#��&��X��$��"��&��&��"��+��'�U��]��&Q��

\��-��;��Q��}�'&#��]��&��"��&��&]��Q

��&��"��X_��YUV��"��&��$�$��}�&��'�V�>��&��&�

��"��]��&#��&��"��&��$�$�]"��}�$�

��$&��&��]��'&#��&��"��#��'�&��X��&��&��"��'&#��]��

��&�'�&#��

��`��-��&��(��-��Z��"

� �&]��&�Q�"��'&#�@��"��Q�

@ = Q � �

�<�

'��

�<

'��

�<�

'��

�<

'��

��&��&��

'��

�� +�$�'&#��'&#��&��$#��&��

@ =

�� &

�� $��]"��"�&��"��$$��&��'&#��#��'

��$\

��"��}��"��'�

�� >�Q��"�G��Q#�Q��U��$��Q

�� "��

�� X��

�� X&��X�#$��

�� &�'

�� V�"��

�� V�"��

�� &]��'�'��"��'&#�]&�}�$��@�"��&��"��

@ = Q � �

�<�

'��

�<

'��

�<�

'��

�<

'��

��&��&��

'��



Appendix B continued

�� &]�$�$�'&#�$��$��&�@��&��@�"��&��"��

�� &]��'��#$��&��$��'&#��@�"��&��&&��

@ = Q � �

<� <� <� <�� &��&��

�� &]��'��&��&��'&#�]��"�'&#��

@ = Q �

�&�� V�� Y]& Y"��

�� *��'&#�"��&��&��"&]��#�"��$&��"�'��$��Q

'&#��"��&&��$#��Q��"��$�'��}�&��&��

��+�'

��&��"��+�'

��V�"��

��

@� !"��'��&��Q�$&�'&#�@��"��&��&��]"&��

'&#��$�

� �&]��'��&��#��$&�'&#�"��'&#��&&��

@ = Q � �

�&�� V�� Y]& Y"�� &��&��

�� +&�'&#�"��&��"��*��'&#��&&��

@ =

�� &

��-��]��Z�/�




�� &]��&��$��'&#��#��Q��&��#��

@ = Q

[��' X&��]"�� &��

� �&]�&��$&�'&#�#��&��#��

@ = Q �

+��' !��}�' �&��"�' ��

�� *��'&#��$��$��]��}�'��&��"�'�&��]"��@��}��Q�'&#

��&��#��Q�'&#��&��#��

�� +#��Q�]"��"��"&&��'��$�$�'&#��$��Q�&��"��+��'�U��]

��&Q��

@ = Q � �

�� &��$�$��Q

�%�@)��)j\��_

qz�)�\_��{��

� +�$��"��+��'�U��]��Q��'&#��&��"��&Q��'&#�

��&&��

@ = Q

�� X&��]"�� &

��'&#��&��




�� +&�'&#��$��$$��&��Q��Q��$��Q��"��+��'�U��]��&Q��

@ =

�� &

�� *��'��]"��$�'�&��"��]��}��$��&��$�'�]&#�$�@��&��&��

�&��'&#��&��$��Q��

��

�� '&#�#��$��"��+��'�U��]��&Q��'&#��&&��&��

�"��G��Q��&��X'��

@ = Q

�� X&��]"�� &�%�@)��)j\��_

qz�)�\_��{��

�� *��]��$��&��]"��&��&��]"��'��'&#�#��

�&��&��&��#$��Q��&��'��$�"&]�'&#

��$&�#��&��&��#$��$��Q��_��U�'�&�$��

��&��'�$��&��$��'��

�� Y&�]"��$�Q��"��'&#��$��"��+��'�U��]��&Q��'&#�

��&&��

@ = Q

*��&�

��&��'��"�

��Q��Q��

G��$

*��&�

"��$

�#��

*��&�

�� '&#��$��'��"��Q��Q��"��+��'

U��]��*��'��




�� !"��]&#�$��&��'&#��#��'��Q��"��+��'�U��]

��&Q��"��}��"��'�

��Y��Q

��Y��"��X#��&��

��$��&��X#��&��

��&�_&��#��

��$@&&}�&��Q��&��'��

��V�"��

�� *��'&#�"��&��&��$&��"�'��'&#��Q��"��+��'

U��]��&Q��

� = _

�� & �&��@��

� �&]�&��$&�'&#��#$��+��'�U��&��_��$�

� = _

+��' !��}�' V�"��

��

�� +&�'&#�@��"��+��'�U��]��&��]��#��<��$�'�

� = _

�� X&��]"�� &

��

�� #��Q��"��+��'�U��]��$�'&#��

� = _

�� X&��]"�� &

� +&��&��&��@&#��"��"��$��&Q��Q��$��Q��"�

+��'�U��]�

� = _

�� X&�� &




�� *��'��#��Q��"��+��'�U��]��&Q��"��$

��&��

�� +&�'&#�#��+��'�U��]�$&�#��&��$#��Q��&��

� = _

�� X&�� &

�� +&�'&#�#��+��'�U��]�$&�#��&��$#��Q��U+��Q��

� = _

�� X&�� &

�� +&�'&#�#��+��'�U��]�$&�#��&��$#��Q�*>��Q��

� = _

�� X&�� &

�� X��Q��"��+��'�U��]��&Q��"��#$��$��#��@�"��&��

$��$�

� = _

�� X&��]"�� &

�� "��+��'�U��]��&Q��$��#$��#��Q��&��"�

��&#��Q��$#��&��&&��"��"&&��'��

� =

�� &

�� '&#�"�$��#$��#��&��"��&#��Q��$#��&��&&��"��

��"&&��'��

� =

�� &

�� *��'��"&]��'��#$��'&#��&&��"��#��$��&��"�

��&#��Q��$#��&��&&�\��}��"��&��$�$�

�

.��-�� -��

�#�� #��

��<�� <��




�� !"��$&�'&#�#��&��&��#$��&��&�Q��$#��&��

@� �&]�$&�'&#��&��&��Q�=X_��#$��&��"��&#��Q��

�$#��&��&&��\�]&�}�]��"��"��"��

�� +&�'&#�"��X}��Q��

� =

�� &

�� *��&��]"��&��}��$&�'&#�#��

�� '&#��$�$�X}��Q��Q�

� =

�� &

�%�@)��)j\��_

qz�)�\_��{��

�� &]��&��$��'&#��#��Q��"��X}��Q��#��#�#��

@ = Q

[��' X&��]"�� &��

� � �&]�&��$&�'&#��"��X}��Q��#��#�#��

@ = Q � �

+��' ��]��} ��]��} V��]��} ��

�� +&�'&#��#$��@��&��"��X}��Q��#��#�#��

� =

�� &




��

�&]�]&#�$�'&#��'&#��@�"��&��#��&��"��Q��$��Q��"�

�&��&]��Q��\

'��

�((��&� �((��&�

)��*��

�((��&�

��

��((��&�

�� _��&&��Q�� = _ +

�� *��#��&��X��Q�� = _ +

�� X&��X}��*��#��&� � = _ +

�� !"��'��&��&��&��$��&��$&�'&#��$��&�$��&�@��

�"��&&��

�� '&#��=�"��&��X��Y��"��@��]��$��Q�

� = _

�� X&��]"�� &

��

�� !"��"��#��Q&��&��"��=�"��&��X#��&��Y��"��Q��$��Q�@�"��&�

��#$��

��`�<�-"

behavior support evaluation final · 2012-11-02 · demic and behavioral goals determined by the...

Documents