S.F. seeks to identify at-risk students
S.F. EDUCATION But some educators call it psychological evaluation
Updated 7:24 pm, Saturday, January 26, 2013
San Francisco schools are pushing a new nationally recognized program to identify and help at-risk students, one that ensures every child is evaluated using a standardized questionnaire about their behavior.
Teachers, however, have criticized the effort, which requires them to identify students who appeared sad, anxious, distressed or who were making up physical ailments.
The questionnaire seemed more like a psychological evaluation, one that parents knew nothing about and which teachers said they felt unqualified to complete.
"People rebelled against it," said teachers union President Dennis Kelly. "Our members quite rightfully got upset. Is this psychological testing or is it not?"
It's not, district officials said in a letter recently sent to teachers. The questionnaire is part of a program called Response to Intervention, which is training teachers in 25 of the district's 117 schools to identify and support troubled students. The nationally recognized program includes an evaluation of school and classroom rules, plus discipline policies, as well as a tally of the programs, staff and other resources to help students who have academic and/or behavior issues.
The program addresses not only academic issues but behavioral problems including defiance, anger or depression.
4 days of training
Eight teachers from each school are going through four days of training and will then become on-site trainers at their schools.
It's costing about $200,000 this year, primarily to pay for substitute teachers during training days.
The screening helps flag students who might need support - ideally addressing a child's problems before they affect grades or attendance.
Intervention could range from tutoring to mentoring or more specialized support to address family problems.
Too often, children with chronic behavior problems are sent to the principal's office or referred to special education. The Response to Intervention aims to address problems quickly and effectively with the most appropriate staff or programs - which could help reduce the number of students landing in special education, district officials said.
It is based on an underlying belief that "fairness is not every student getting the same thing, fairness is every student receiving the level of services they need to be successful," district officials said in an e-mailed explanation of the program.
As part of the training, each of the teachers in the 25 schools was asked to fill out a questionnaire for each student identifying the frequency of 14 at-risk behaviors: never, rarely, sometimes or frequently.
Half the questions are identified as external behaviors, including defiance, bullying, lying to get out of trouble, fighting or frequent anger.
Mental health issues
But the other seven questions felt like a judgment call on a child's mental health, teachers said, and many were uncomfortable making that call, especially for homeroom students they saw only for a few minutes each day.
The questions included identifying a student who appears anxious or fearful; is bullied by peers; prefers to spend time with adults; is withdrawn; seems sad or unhappy; or complains about being sick or hurt without reason.
"Several teachers who protested by not doing it got written up," said one middle school teacher who wished to remain anonymous because of job concerns. "I did it, but marked 'Never' for all the internal psychological factors."
District officials acknowledged that good communication about the screening and the intervention program had failed to reach all teachers.
It's a misperception that the district is asking teachers to be clinicians, said Deputy Superintendent Guadalupe Guerrero.
"Our teachers have been asking for a while now for us to put some focus in this area," he said. "This is new to a lot of teachers. This is a learning process for all of us."
The teachers union, the United Educators of San Francisco, questioned the legality of the screening, specifically whether teachers could be held liable and why parents weren't notified.
"The Education Code does not require the District to obtain advance written permission from parents every time a teacher is asked to share his or her observations about a pupil's behavior," Angela Miller, district deputy counsel, wrote in response to union concerns. State law "does not prohibit teachers from sharing their personal observations of student behavior."
District officials said parents would be contacted if a child was identified as needing special attention.
"If we don't have a clear concrete way of identifying students ... then you might be a teacher who has no other alternative but to refer a kid for (special education) evaluation," Guerrero said. "It's great for once to really be putting attention on this."
Response to intervention training
Teachers at 25 San Francisco schools were asked to evaluate each of their students based on the frequency of at-risk behaviors, from never to frequently.
1. Defiant or oppositional to adults
2. Fights or argues with peers
3. Bullies others
4. Gets angry easily
5. Lies to get out of trouble
6. Disrupts class activities
7. Has difficulty sitting still
1. Nervous or fearful
2. Bullied by peers
3. Spends time alone
4. Clings to adults
6. Seems sad or unhappy
7. Complains about being sick or hurt