The strategies proposed by the TAT outline a fairly solid behavior intervention plan targeting the off-task difficulties exhibited by “Lamar”. Because Lamar’s education performance is negatively impacted by his inability to either a) process or b) attend to directions as given by his teacher, I have to question whether the team was correct in stating that he would not qualify for special education services. At the very least, it is my professional opinion that Lamar would benefit from certain accommodations that are provided through a 504 plan. The team has made recommendations that are reasonable within a typical general education classroom, despite the response of Ms. Jones. If I were the administrator and special education designee working with Ms. Jones at the time of her refusal to comply with the suggestions set forth, I’d ask that she specifically state why each of the steps suggested by the team can’t be implemented within her classroom. If her reasoning were legitimate, I’d ask that the team work to find a more reasonable plan for Ms. Jones. I suspect that the problem may lie more in the explanation of the steps proposed than her actual ability to implement them. I often find that the “lingo” we use in special education has a tendency to “scare off” general educators and make them feel as though we are asking for a much larger commitment than we are actually stating, just because the language we use is riddled with acronyms. As an administrator, I think it’s my duty to make sure that general educators and special educators alike have the necessary training to implement the appropriate strategies within their classroom. Ms. Jones may feel more comfortable with the proposal set forth by the TAT if she has someone to show her how to implement the strategies. As an administrator I would offer to demonstrate the suggestions for Ms. Jones or provide her with the assistance of an aide or other teacher who could mentor her through the process.