Introduction
The pre-referral team comprises a team of experts who come together to discuss the behavioral or learning difficulties of the students in the schools and develop interventions. The team comprises the principal who leads the team, a referring teacher, an educational teacher, a psychologist, a counselor, a clerk and may include additional members of the staff. The pre-referral team follows guidelines on how to address the learning or behavioral problems of the students and decide whether the students need special education or intervention in the regular classroom.
Comparison and Contrast
A successful pre-referral team dialogue depends on the leadership direction from the principal. The principal is the leader of the team and must ensure that the meeting is scheduled as expected and the key members of the team are informed in advance so that the necessary documentations are prepared in time. In the first dialogue, the principal failed to show responsibility as the leader of the pre-referral team. The other team members waited impatiently for the principal who not only arrived late to the meeting but was also unprepared to chair the meeting. The clerk has contributed to his unpreparedness by typing the list of the students to be discussed very late into the meeting. In the second dialogue, the principal is quite punctual and ready to chair the meeting in time having all the necessary documents. The principal has taken his responsibility to ensure that the meeting is well organized and all members are prepared and ready to start the meeting on time.
In the first dialogue, the referring teacher seems to know nothing about the background information of the student he has referred to the pre-referral team. The teacher has no specific reason as to why a kid has been referred because he uses unprofessional language to describe the problem he perceives the student has without clearly explaining the problem to the pre-referral team. The referring teacher has neither confirmed the student’s record nor consulted the parents concerning the problem of the student. Moreover, the teacher has not formulated his classroom interventions to determine whether the problem is beyond his capacity to tackle. At the end of the discussion, there was no tangible intervention that was made as the principal agrees with the intervention that “when he screws up, sits his little buns outside on the porch!” (The University of Phoenix). This is not a serious intervention to be deliberated by the pre-referral team.
In the second dialogue, the referring teacher has done his part pretty well because he understands the real problem of the student. The referring teacher did study the background information of the student by analyzing the records, consulting the parents, making keen observations of the student’s behavior in terms of socialization. Furthermore, the teacher has tried his interventions by privately communicating with students and encouraging the student to improve their self-esteem. The pre-referral team recommended concrete interventions that were recorded by the clerk and with a stipulated 30 days period of review (The University of Phoenix). The second dialogue shows the professional and procedural way of identifying and helping the student with the learning and behavioral difficulties.
Personal Reflection
The referral of the students with problems requires teachers to be very responsible and willing to help the students. The first dialogue represents a case scenario where the teachers demonstrate irresponsibility. The teachers did not want to follow the laid down procedures by analyzing proper records of the students, consulting with the parents, and carrying out their interventions before the referral.
The negligence of the procedures will negatively impact the performances of the students with the problem as some students may be referred to the pre-referral team yet the teachers could formulate their interventions that will solve the problem. If the referral team again fails to formulate the correct interventions for the student, there would be no significant changes in the performance of the student; hence, the team will falsely refer the student to the special education evaluation. The second dialogue portrays the correct procedure of helping the students and this will go a long way into the improvement of the educational performances of the students.
Conclusion
When a teacher discovers that a certain student has changed behavior and has difficulties learning in the regular classes, the teacher should carry out preliminary background studies of the student by analyzing class records and talking with the parents. Based on the background information, the teacher can formulate the interventions to address the issues of the student. If the teacher’s interventions fail, the teacher should refer the case to the pre-referral team who will discuss the case and give in-depth interventions within a specific period. If their interventions fail, the pre-referral team in conjunction with the parents refers the student to the special education evaluation, where the fate of the student is decided whether to continue with regular classes or provided with the special education needs.
References
The University of Phoenix. (N.d.) Pre-Referral Team Dialogue #1
The University of Phoenix. (N.d.). Pre-Referral Team Dialogue #2