3. Case Studies
Case Study 1
Document 1: Referral Request for a Child Suspected of Having a Disability
Name: Amari Clayton Student ID: 721554 Age: 15-3 Grade: 9th
School: Castle High School School Division: Virginia County Public Schools
This form shall be completed when making a referral for a child suspected of having a disability. Children may be referred through a screening process, or by school staff, the parent(s) or other individuals. The referral may be in written, electronic, or oral form to the principal or designee of the school the child attends, or, if initially enrolling in the school division, in the school in the parent’s district. If the referral is made to the special education administrator or designee, the administrator shall within three business days:
- Initiate the evaluation eligibility process in accordance with Regulations Governing Special Education Programs for Children with Disabilities in Virginia;
- Require that the school-based team review and respond to the request; or
- Deny the request.
If the request is denied, prior written notice in accordance with 8VAC20-81-170 shall be given to the parent(s), including the parent’s right to appeal the decision through the due process hearing procedures.
Referring Source:
☐ School Staff: ☐ Screening Process ☒ IEP Team ☐ Other
☐ Parent(s) Name:
Date of Referral: September 15
Description of why an evaluation is requested (include qualitative and quantitative data and attach pages if needed): Amari recently transferred to Virginia County Public Schools from another Virginia public school division with expired eligibility documents. Amari was due for triennial reevaluation in July of this year, but the evaluation process was not completed because her family was in the process of moving. Amari has received special education services under a variety of categories from multiple school divisions in and out of the state. Previous eligibility categories have included: Speech-Language Impairment, Emotional Disability, and Autism. She arrived at Sandstone High School with an IEP indicating that she should be placed in a program for students with autism. However, her teachers are unsure if this is an appropriate match. Re-evaluation is needed to meet legal requirements for triennial re-evaluation, and to gain a better understanding of Amari’s academic, speech-language, and social emotional needs.
Description of efforts that have been made to address the concerns (include qualitative and quantitative data and attach pages if needed): Castle High School completed the transfer IEP process and is implementing the IEP as written by the prior school division. Amari is served, primarily, in a self-contained Autism classroom with general education integration for Language Arts Extension and Science. A special education teacher or paraprofessional provides support in these settings.
|
Office Use Only Referral form received by: ☒ Principal/Designee ☐ Special Education Administrator/Designee ☒ Procedural safeguards in determining eligibility and in ensuring the confidentiality of records were provided to the parent. If form was given to the principal or designee, the school-based team must meet within ten business days to review and respond to the request. If form was given to the special education administrator or designee, within three business days the special education administrator or designee’s decision was to: ☐ Begin the initial evaluation procedures ☐ Refer the child to the school-based team to respond to the request ☐ Deny the request, and provide prior written notice Melissa C. Administrator September 19, YEAR Special Education Administrator or Designee Date |
|
Document 2: Team Review of Referral and Team Review of Existing Data Summary
Name: Amari Clayton Student ID: 721554 Age: 15-3 Grade: 9th
School: Castle High School School Division: Virginia County Public Schools
Meeting Type:
☐ Initial – Administrator of Special Education requires team to review and respond 8VAC 20-81-50 D3b2 (Complete Part A)
☐ Initial – Administrator of Special education decided to begin evaluation process (Complete only Part B)
☒ Re-evaluation (Complete only Part B)
Part A: Team Review of Referral
When the referral was received, the administrator of special education elected to require a team review and respond to the referral request. The team is comprised of the same individuals as an IEP team and other qualified individuals as appropriate (8VAC 20-80-70). Document the summary of discussion and indicate the decision of the group in the Summary of Discussion section.
The group determines that:
☐ A disability is suspected and an evaluation is warranted. (Complete Part B of this form)
☐ A disability is not suspected and an evaluation is not warranted. Provide the child’s parent(s) with prior written notice, including information regarding the determination and the reasons for it.
Signatures of qualified professionals and the parent(s) of the child and student if appropriate.
_______________________________ ____________________________________
Parent(s) Local Education Agency Representative
_______________________________ ____________________________________
Special Education Teacher General Education Teacher
_____________________________ ____________________________________
Title: Title:
Part B: Evaluations and Re-Evaluations
A group that is comprised of the same individuals as an IEP team and other qualified professionals, as appropriate, shall review existing evaluation data on the child, including (check all that apply):
☒ Evaluations and information provided by the parent(s) of the child;
☒ Current classroom-based, local, or state assessments and classroom-based observations;
☒ Observations by teachers and related service providers
☒ Other: Records review from prior school placements
On the basis of that review and input from the child’s parent(s), identify what additional data, if any are needed to determine: (1) Whether the child is, or continues to be, a child with a disability; (2) The present educational needs of the child; (3) The child’s present level of academic achievement and related developmental needs; (4) whether the child needs or continues to need special education and related services; and (5) Whether any additions or modifications to the special education and related services are needed to enable the child to meet the measurable annual goals set out in the IEP of the child and to participate, as appropriate, in the general education curriculum. Document the summary of discussion and indicate the decision of the group in the Summary of Discussion section.
The group determines that:
☒ Additional data are needed to determine whether the child is or continues to be a child with a disability and to determine the child’s educational needs and other matters set for above. Attach Parental Consent form.
☐ No additional data are needed to determine whether the child is or continues to be a child with a disability and to determine the child’s educational needs and other matters set forth above. Provide the child’s parent(s) with prior written notice, including information regarding the determination and reasons for it. For re-evaluations, include the right of the parent(s) to request an evaluation to determine whether the child continues to be a child with a disability and to determine the child’s educational needs.
☒ Procedural safeguards in determining eligibility and in ensuring the confidentiality of records were provided to the parent.
Summary of Discussion: Include information for Part A and B
Amari recently transferred to Castle High School from another Virginia school division with an IEP and expired eligibility documents. She is past due for triennial evaluation. She has received special education services under a variety of categories from multiple school divisions in and out of the state. Previous eligibility categories have included: Speech-Language Impairment, Emotional Disability, and Autism. Based on these prior eligibilities and observations from her current teachers, the team is requesting updated information related to cognition, academic skills, speech-language development, and social-emotional skills, as well as an updated social history because Amari has moved multiple times since her last evaluation.
Names and roles of qualified professionals and the parent(s) of the student present at the meeting.
Janine Clayton – mother Elizabeth Jenkins, assistant principal
M. McGonagall- special education teacher M. E. Moody– general education teacher
Amari Clayton – student X. Lovegood – school counselor
Tonks-Lupin – school psychologist
Document 3: Parental Consent to Evaluate
Name: Amari Clayton Student ID: 721554 Age: 15-3 Grade: 9th
School: Castle High School School Division: Virginia County Public Schools
I understand that parental consent is not required before reviewing existing data as part of an evaluation or administering a test or other evaluation that is administered to all children, unless parental consent is required before administration to all children. Parental consent for initial evaluation shall not be construed as consent for initial provision of special education and related services. (34 CFR 300.300)
I understand that a variety of assessment tools and strategies will be used to gather relevant functional, developmental, and academic information about my child.
Areas of Evaluation:
☒ An Educational Assessment to determine level of academic achievement and the nature of any problems related to learning
☒ A Psychological Assessment to determine strengths and weaknesses in areas that may include: social, motor, emotional, adaptive, and intellectual ability
☒ A Sociocultural Assessment to obtain social, developmental, adaptive, and health history information and any possible effect on learning
☒ A Speech/Language Assessment to determine current level of functioning in voice, fluency, articulation, and/or language
☐ A Developmental Assessment to determine cognitive, perceptual, motor, and social functioning
☒ A Hearing Screening completed by the school nurse, speech pathologist, audiologist, or other trained staff to determine hearing acuity. This is a required component of all initial referrals for students suspected of a disability
☒ A Vision Screening completed by nurses and other trained personnel to determine visual acuity
☐ A Medical Report completed by a licensed physician to rule out and/or identify any medical problems related to the suspected disability
☐ An Occupational Therapy Assessment to determine participation in daily classroom tasks, school roles and routines, and management of classroom tools and materials
☐ A Physical Therapy Assessment to evaluate functional mobility, movement, and motor performance in order to access and participate in the classroom and school physical environment
☐ Functional Vision Assessment completed by a teacher endorsed in the area of Visual Impairments to determine strengths and weaknesses in a student’s use of vision and the impact on educational performance
☐ Observation (consent required for initial evaluations only)
☐ Other:
I consent for Virginia County School Division to conduct or administer the evaluation components listed above. The results of these evaluations may be used to determine:
- Whether my child is or continues to be a child with a disability,
- My child’s educational needs,
- The other matters set forth on the attached Review of Existing Data Summary, and/or
- IEP team decisions regarding related services or other supports and services.
☒ Procedural Safeguards: I understand my right to withhold consent for the school division to evaluate my child. I understand that my permission is voluntary and may be revoked at any time.
☒ I give consent for the evaluation.
☐ I do not give consent for the evaluation.
Janine Clayton September 23
Parent Signature Date
Document 4: Prior Written Notice
Name: Amari Clayton Student ID: 721554 Age: 15-3 Grade: 9th
School: Castle High School School Division: Virginia County Public Schools
Type of Meeting:
☐ IEP ☐ Eligibility ☒ Team Review ☐ Manifestation Determination ☐ Other:
Describe the action that the school division proposes or refuses to take:
Virginia County Public Schools proposes to complete a triennial special education evaluation to include the following: educational assessment, psychological assessment, socio-cultural interview, hearing screening, and vision screening. No actions were refused.
Explanation of why the school division is proposing or refusing to take action: Amari is due for triennial re-evaluation to determine her continued eligibility for special education services. The team would like updated information to guide instructional decision making.
Description of each evaluation procedure, assessment, record, or report the school division used in deciding to propose or refuse the action: The team reviewed records from the prior school divisions, to include the evaluations conducted just over 3 years ago and five prior IEPs. Grades and teacher observation from the current school year were also discussed. Amari and her mother shared information about prior school placements.
Description of any other choices that the team considered and the reasons why those choices were rejected: The team debated whether updated vision and hearing screenings are needed. The team determined that the updated information would provide a more detailed picture of all factors that may be impacting Amari’s learning.
Description of other reasons or other factors relevant as to why the school division proposed or refused the action: Amari’s triennial evaluation is past due as a result of her recent move. The team requests an expedited evaluation to be in compliance with state and federal regulations.
Resources for the parent to contact for help in understanding the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the related federal and Virginia Regulations: The parent may wish to contact the Parent Resource Center for Virginia County Public Schools at 555-123-1234 or visit the center’s website. Additional information specifically for parents can be found at the Virginia Department of Education’s “Special Education for Families” page Special Education for Families | Virginia Department of Education.
If this notice is not the initial referral for evaluation, explain how the parent was provided a copy of the procedural safeguards: The parent was offered a paper copy of the procedural safeguards and A Parent’s Guide to Special Education.
Document 5: Educational Evaluation Report – Sociocultural
Name: Amari Clayton Student ID: 721554 Age: 15-3 Grade: 9th
School: Sandstone High School School Division: Virginia County Public Schools
Referral Status: Re-evaluation Dates of Testing: 10/5
Evaluator: H. Granger-Weasley, LCSW Title: School Social Worker
I. Reason for Evaluation:
Amari is a 15 year old student in the ninth grade who is new to Virginia County Public Schools. She is due for triennial reevaluation to meet state and federal regulations. Amari’s IEP team is seeking information to better understand her current performance and social-emotional strengths and needs.
II. Areas of Evaluation addressed in this report:
☐ Current Educational Performance ☐ Cognitive Ability ☐ Developmental
☒ Social/Emotional ☐ Student Behavior ☐ Speech/Language
☐ Health/Medical ☐ Vision ☐ Hearing
☐ Fine Motor ☐ Gross Motor
III. Assessment Tools: (List)
- Sociocultural interview with Janine Clayton
- Gilliam Autism Rating Scale – Third Edition
- Scales for Assessing Emotional Disturbance – Third Edition
IV. Background Information: (Include relevant medical, developmental, and sociocultural information as well as past attempts to address areas of concern.)
Amari has attended multiple schools across Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania over the course of her academic career. In the last three years, she has attended three schools in two different school divisions. Amari’s mother reports that she has no medical diagnoses and is generally healthy.
V. Behavioral Observations During Assessment: Not Applicable
VI. Assessment Results and Discussion: (Include a discussion of nonstandard test administration to include the use of an interpreter and the impact on test results.
The interview with Ms. Clayton revealed that Amari began receiving special education services under the category of Speech Language Impairment as a kindergarten student in Maryland. She has consistently received services through school divisions in Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia since that time. Amari was identified as a student with an emotional disability when she was in the third grade while living in Pennsylvania. Notably, this occurred at a time when her family was experiencing a significant transition. Amari’s parents had just divorced. Amari moved with her mother to live with a family friend. Amari and her mother moved to Virginia when Amari was in sixth grade. During her triennial reevaluation that year, the team found Amari eligible for special education as a student with Autism. Amari has attended three different public schools in Virginia since that time, as her mother sought stable employment and housing. Amari’s mother recently finished a career certification program and has a stable job. They recently moved into the Castle High School neighborhood. Amari’s mother feels confident that they will be able to settle in here and hopes that Amari will be able to graduate from Castle High School.
Amari is an only child. She has had limited contact with her father over the last 2 years. She has strong connections to her maternal grandparents and aunt. Amari has no history of hospitalizations or long-term medical diagnoses. Amari loves swimming and video games. Amari’s mother reports that Amari is quiet and reserved when she meets new people but opens up once she gets to know them. Amari does not have a lot of friends. Her mother states that Amari has always seemed to be more comfortable with adults.
To address concerns presented by the eligibility team, I gave the Gilliam Autism Rating Scale (GARS-3) to Amari’s mother and special education teacher. The GARS-3 can be used to determine the degree to which a student demonstrates characteristics of an Autism Spectrum Disorder. Individuals who are familiar with a student answer a series of questions which classify behaviors along six subscales associated with characteristics of autism. The subscales include:
- Restrictive/Repetitive behaviors – stereotyped behaviors, fixed interests
- Social Interaction – social behaviors, engagement with others
- Social Communication – communication skills that support social interaction
- Emotional Responses – emotional expression
- Cognitive Style – flexibility in thinking
- Maladaptive Speech – speech deficits or idiosyncratic speech
Scores across the subscales are combined to create an Autism Index which can be used to ascertain the likelihood that a student has an Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Ms. Clayton completed the rating form during our interview. The parent ratings resulted in an Autism Index score of 42, which falls in the Unlikely range of probability that Amari has an Autism Spectrum Disorder. The rating scale was also completed by Amari’s special education teacher. The teacher ratings resulted in an Autism Index score of 52. This score also falls in the Unlikely range of probability for Autism Spectrum Disorder. The area of most concern was Emotional Responses. Amari’s teacher reports that she often responds negatively when given commands, requests or directions and has temper tantrums when she doesn’t get her way or is asked to stop doing something that she enjoys.
The Scale for Assessing Emotional Disturbance (SAED-3) was also used in order to assess Amari’s social/emotional functioning. Her special education teacher completed the rating scales. A form was also provided to Amari’s mother but was not returned at the time of this report. The SAED-3 is a behavior rating scale that assesses behaviors associated with the five characteristics of an Emotional Disability as outlined by the federal guidelines. The five ED characteristics measured include: Inability to Learn, Relationship Problems, Inappropriate Behavior, Unhappiness or Depression, and Physical Symptoms or Fears. The completed rating scales indicated that Amari’s behaviors across the five scales are inconsistent with the behaviors of students who have an Emotional Disability. She did have two areas that were mildly indicative of emotional disturbance. Those were Inability to Learn and Inappropriate Behavior. Within these areas, the special education teacher indicated that Amari has poor written expression, reading skills, and listening skills. She is also able to complete a minimal amount of work independently. The teacher noted that when bored or frustrated, Amari can be disrespectful, disruptive, or loud.
VII. Summary and Recommendations: (Include implications for instruction.)
The information in this report was gathered through a socio-cultural interview with Amari’s mother, Janine Clayton. Amari’s social history includes significant periods of transition with multiple homes and schools throughout her developmental history. Her mother and maternal grandparents have always been a consistent presence. Amari has no known health conditions.
Additional information was collected through completion of the GARS-3 by Amari’s mother and special education teacher. The SAED-3 was completed by Amari’s special education teacher. The Autism Index from the GARS-3 indicates that Amari’s behaviors are Unlikely representations of Autism Spectrum Disorder, though she was noted to have some slightly concerning emotional responses by the special education teacher. The SAED-3 results indicate that her pattern of behaviors is inconsistent with those of learners who have an Emotional Disability. Amari does display some characteristics of Inability to Learn and Inappropriate Behavior.
The results of this assessment should be considered in coordination with other evaluation elements in describing Amari’s learning profile and understanding her educational needs.
IX. Evaluator Signature and Date:
Granger-Weasley School Social Worker
Name Title
October 7
Date of Signature
Document 6: Educational Evaluation Report – Academic Achievement
Name: Amari Clayton Student ID: 721554 Age: 15-3 Grade: 9th
School: Sandstone High School School Division: Virginia County Public Schools
Referral Status: Re-evaluation Dates of Testing: 10/5, 10/6
Evaluator: N. Tonks-Lupin Title: School Psychologist
I. Reason for Evaluation:
Amari is a 15 year old student in the ninth grade at Virginia County Public School. Amari recently transferred from another Virginia school division. She is due for triennial reevaluation to meet state and federal regulations. Amari has attended multiple public schools in Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania. She has been found eligible for special education under a variety of categories since Kindergarten including Speech-Language Impairment, Emotional Disability, and Autism. Amari’s IEP team is seeking information to better understand her current performance and social-emotional strengths and needs.
II. Areas of Evaluation addressed in this report:
☐ Current Educational Performance ☒ Cognitive Ability ☐ Developmental
☐ Social/Emotional ☐ Student Behavior ☐ Speech/Language
☐ Health/Medical ☐ Vision ☐ Hearing
☐ Fine Motor ☐ Gross Motor
III. Assessment Tools: (List)
- Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Fifth Edition (WISC-V)
VI. Background Information: (Include relevant medical, developmental, and sociocultural information as well as past attempts to address areas of concern.)
Amari has attended multiple schools across Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania over the course of her academic career. In the last three years, she has attended three schools in two different school divisions. Amari was found eligible for special education as a student with a Speech-Language Impairment when she was in kindergarten. She was later identified for services as a student with an Emotional Disability and Autism. Amari has received instruction largely in self-contained classrooms, with some time in general education classes with special education support. Amari has no medical diagnoses and recently passed the vision and hearing screenings conducted by the Castle High School nurse. Please see the socio-cultural report for detailed information about Amari’s background.
V. Behavioral Observations During Assessment:
Amari was tested in two sessions over two days. She engaged in conversation with this examiner and reported that her new school is “okay.” Amari said that math is more enjoyable than reading. She also said that she enjoys playing Minecraft and watching TikTok videos. During testing, there were times when Amari required extra explanation of directions. However, there were also times when she demonstrated good strategies in attempting to figure out answers. Overall, she appeared to put forth her best effort on all tasks presented. Therefore, the results can be considered a valid representation of her overall ability.
VI. Assessment Results and Discussion: (Include a discussion of nonstandard test administration to include the use of an interpreter and the impact on test results.
Amari’s cognitive abilities were measured using the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Fifth Edition (WISC-V) following standard administration procedures. The WISC-V is an individually administered, norm-referenced assessment designed for children between the ages 6 and 17. This assessment includes 16 subtests which measure performance of various psychological processes that are often associated with intelligence. The subtests can be combined to produce several composite scores and a Full-Scale IQ (FSIQ) score that represents general intellectual ability.
Student performance on the composites and FSIQ is reported as a Standard Score (SS), where the mean is 100 and standard deviation is 15. WISC-V Standard Scores are interpreted as follows:
| Score Range | Interpretation |
| 130 and above | Extremely High |
| 120 – 129 | Very High |
| 110 – 119 | High Average |
| 90 – 109 | Average |
| 80 – 89 | Low Average |
| 70 – 79 | Very Low |
| 69 and below | Extremely Low |
Scores can also be reported as a percentile rank (PR), in which the student’s performance is compared to same-age peers. These rankings range from 1 to 99. A PR of 59, for example, indicates that the student performed as well as or better than 59% of same-aged students who completed the WISC-V.
The scores reported from the WISC-V represent the student’s performance in one moment in time and should be considered to have some degree of error. A more accurate understanding of a student’s “true performance” can be represented by a Confidence Interval, which provides a range of scores in which the student’s true score likely falls. Scores are reported using the 95% Confidence Interval, meaning there is 95% certainty that the student’s true score falls within that range.
Amari had notable variability in her scores across subtests. Her overall intellectual abilities, as measured by the FSIQ score, are in the Very Low range when compared to other children her age (Standard Score = 78, Percentile Rank = 7, Confidence Interval = 74-84). The FSIQ score was impacted by low performance in two areas of psychological processing, Verbal Comprehension and Working Memory. (Her performance on these indices is described in detail below.) Amari had average performance in all other areas. Because Amari is a student who has been previously identified with a Speech-Language Impairment and she demonstrated significant difficulties with Verbal Comprehension subtests, the Nonverbal Index (NVI) may provide a more meaningful representation of her general intellectual abilities. The NVI consists of subtests that minimize expressive language demands. When reducing the impact of her processing deficit in Verbal Comprehension, Amari’s general cognitive abilities are in the Average range compared to other children her age (Standard Score = 90, Percentile Rank = 25, Confidence Interval = 85-96).
Scores for the indices that make up the FSIQ and Nonverbal Index are as follows:
The Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI) measured Amari’s ability to verbalize meaningful concepts, think about verbal information, and express herself using words. Overall, Amari’s performance on the VCI was much lower than most children her age and was an area of personal weakness compared to her overall ability (Standard Score = 62, Percentile Rank = 1, Extremely Low, Confidence Interval = 59-71).
The Working Memory Index (WMI) measured Amari’s ability to register, maintain, and manipulate visual and auditory information. This skill requires attention and concentration, as well as visual and auditory discrimination. Working memory was an area of significant weakness, with scores that were below most other children her age (Standard Score = 74, Percentile Rank = 4, Very Low range, Confidence Interval = 70-83).
Amari’s performance in the other areas of psychological processing were in the average range. Visual spatial processing was an area of strength. Her performance was in the average range compared to other children her age (Standard Score = 105, Percentile Rank = 63, Confidence Interval = 98-111). This skill requires visual spatial reasoning, recognition of part-whole relationships, attention to visual detail, and visual motor integration.
Amari also demonstrated average skill and a personal strength in Processing Speed. The Processing Speed Index assessed her ability to rapidly identify information and make decisions about visual stimuli. Her overall processing speed performance was typical of same-age students (Standard Score = 95, Percentile Rank = 37, Average, Confidence Interval = 88-103).
VII. Summary and Recommendations: (Include implications for instruction.)
Amari is a 15 year, 3 month old student undergoing re-evaluation as part of the triennial special education process. She has been receiving special education services since kindergarten under various disability categories. Amari is a new student in the Virginia County Public School system and has attended many schools over her academic career, including multiple transitions between states and three different schools in the last school year.
Amari’s overall intellectual abilities are in the Very Low range when compared to same-age peers. Her FSIQ was significantly impacted by low scores in the areas of Verbal Comprehension and Working Memory. As Amari is a student who has been previously identified with a Speech-Language Impairment, the Non-Verbal index is likely a more meaningful indicator of her abilities. She performs in the Average range on this index. Amari has a statistical and personal weakness in Working Memory, performing in the Very Low range. This indicates that she may have difficulty retaining and manipulating new information when it is presented to her. She will likely benefit from having information presented through multiple modalities, cues to focus her attention during instruction, and instruction in metacognitive strategies such as self-monitoring.
Amari has a personal strength in Visual Spatial processing. She performs in the average range on tasks which require her to attend to visual details, manipulate objects, and recognize part-whole relationships. She may benefit from graphic organizers and manipulatives when learning new content.
The assessment results reported here are believed to provide an accurate representation of Amari’s intellectual skills as they apply to traditional academic tasks. Amari likely has a broad array of strengths and interests which are not captured through formal assessment. Therefore, it is important that the eligibility team consider varied assessments and sources of information before making a decision about Amari’s educational needs.
IX. Evaluator Signature and Date:
Tonks-Lupin School Psychologist
Name Title
October 8
Date of Signature
Document 7: Educational Evaluation Report – Speech-Language
Name: Amari Clayton Student ID: 721554 Age: 15-3 Grade: 9th
School: Sandstone High School School Division: Virginia County Public Schools
Referral Status: Re-evaluation Dates of Testing: 10/7
Evaluator: D. Thomas Title: Speech-Language Pathologist
I. Reason for Evaluation:
Amari is a 15 year old student in the ninth grade who has been receiving speech-language services through her IEP since kindergarten. Amari has IEP goals to address receptive and expressive language delays, as well as some pragmatic skill deficits. This assessment is part of her triennial reevaluation.
II. Areas of Evaluation addressed in this report:
☐ Current Educational Performance ☐ Cognitive Ability ☐ Developmental
☐ Social/Emotional ☐ Student Behavior ☒ Speech/Language
☐ Health/Medical ☐ Vision ☐ Hearing
☐ Fine Motor ☐ Gross Motor
III. Assessment Tools: (List)
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test – Fifth Edition
Oral and Written Language Scales – Second Edition
IV. Background Information: (Include relevant medical, developmental, and sociocultural information as well as past attempts to address areas of concern.)
Amari has been receiving speech-language services since kindergarten. She has no known medical conditions which would impact speech. She passed her hearing screening. She currently receives 30 minutes of speech-language services per week to address expressive, receptive, and pragmatic language delays.
V. Behavioral Observations During Assessment: Amari was cooperative and pleasant during the evaluation which occurred during her normal speech service time. She is familiar with the evaluator and the types of tasks completed during the assessment. The results are believed to represent an accurate portrayal of her speech-language development.
VI. Assessment Results and Discussion: (Include a discussion of nonstandard test administration to include the use of an interpreter and the impact on test results.
Amari completed the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test – 5 (form B). The assessment measures receptive vocabulary (i.e., the ability to understand words and phrases) for children and adults who primarily speak English. Standard Scores are reported where the average range falls between 85 and 115. Amari demonstrated delays in her receptive language skills earning a Standard Score of 79, which is Below Expected performance for children of her age.
Amari was also given the Oral and Written Language Scales – II. These scales evaluate a student’s ability to convey ideas through spoken language or writing and also include measures of pragmatic skill, which describes applied social use of language. Amari demonstrated delays in Expressive Language as shown by a Standard Score of 77. When asked to label pictures using nouns, verbs, and categories. Some of her answers suggest that she is making word associations. For example she said “fan thing” to describe a windmill and “screwdriver” to describe a wrench.
Amari has specific difficulty interpreting verb tenses and complex sentences across formal measures and in her weekly speech-language sessions. Amari also presents difficulties using pragmatic language to communicate her wants and needs effectively. She has difficulty asking for clarification when she does not understand a direction. She also has difficulty with when or how to interrupt appropriately or initiate and maintain conversation. Amari has basic syntax knowledge of simple sentence grammar skills (i.e., subject-verb agreement), yet she does not consistently apply this skill in conversation.
Amari’s voice and fluency appear to be within the normal range.
VII. Summary and Recommendations: (Include implications for instruction.)
Amari is a 15 year old girl who has been receiving speech-language services since kindergarten. She receives 30 minutes of speech-language therapy through her IEP each week. The current evaluations indicate continued delays in expressive and receptive language, as well as pragmatic skills. The degree to which Amari’s language development has been influenced by her academic placements is unclear and would be worth exploring through increased inclusive experiences with support. The results of this assessment should be considered in coordination with other elements of the multidisciplinary evaluation.
IX. Evaluator Signature and Date:
D. Thomas Speech-Language Pathologist
Name Title
October 8
Date of Signature
Document 8: Teacher Educational Report
Student Name: Amari Clayton Teacher: M.E. Moody
Subject: Language Arts Extension Date: 10/12
Current grades in class: Amari currently has a 68% in my class.
What strengths and weaknesses are evident in academic performance (e.g., assignment completion, test performance, academic skills): Amari understands key concepts, like character, setting, plot, and theme when we discuss them. She can make connections to her own experiences, but she has difficulty comparing these areas across texts. Amari seems to enjoy listening to me and others read aloud. When content is read aloud, she answers comprehension questions with about 75% accuracy. When reading independently, her comprehension drops below 50%.
Behavior (e.g., attitude, effort, response to frustration): Amari has difficulty maintaining appropriate behavior in class, particularly when she is required to work independently on academic tasks or follow multi-step directions. She performs better academically when working in small groups, but she engages in inappropriate behavior when a task is challenging. On one occasion, she was sitting at the table with the teaching assistant working with one other student. After being directed to complete a task, she became disruptive by talking across the room to another student who was working on a computer. She was also tapping her pencil and tapping her feet in an apparent attempt to distract others. Once redirected, she began to work quietly. However, within a few minutes she began to make random and inappropriate noises, again. On another occasion, when I asked her to read a section of text aloud in class, she used her head to knock over a stack of books.
Social interactions with teachers and peers: Amari seems to want social interactions with students in the class, but she does not always seem to know how to engage peers. Sometimes, Amari speaks appropriately with her peers. However, Amari has also been observed to lash out and say very mean things to her peers. Amari is very shy with me. However, she seems to be more comfortable with her special education teacher.
What accommodations, modifications, or interventions have been used with this student in class? The class is designed to provide remediation and support for ninth grade language arts standards. A teaching assistant is present to support Amari and one other student in my class.
What strategies work well with this student? Amari likes to draw. When working on group projects, I can often engage her by asking her to illustrate a concept.