Overview Assignment: Developing IEPs for Special Education This assignment involves three main parts: (1) analysis of educational testing documents--PLAAP, (2) writing IEP goals with objectives, and (3) suggesting accommodations for

a student. The goal is to provide practical experience in developing IEPs based on real-world scenarios and data. Part 1: Document Analysis Objective: Analyze the attached educational testing documents. Task: Read the breakdown information for what the Gray Reading assessment and the Woodcock- Johnson IV Tests of Achievement are assessing in a student. Review the provided document that has the score sheets for a student for the Gray's and WJ-IV, identifying key information about the student's educational needs, strengths, and areas of difficulty. Activity to Complete: Complete a PLAAP for the student based on the Score results (attached PDF) and the added information from the psychologist provided below on the last page. Part 2: Writing IEP Goals with Objectives Objective: Develop specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) IEP goals based on the analysis. Task: ● Write 2-3 IEP goals for the student, each accompanied by 2-3 objectives. These goals should address the student's unique needs identified in Part 1. PLAAP Activity to Complete: Complete the provided NY IEP Template (PAGES 3-4) Make sure each IEP goal with its corresponding objectives are: tailored to the student's needs ● are realistic within the educational context are MEASUREABLE! Part 3: Accommodations Objective: Propose appropriate accommodations to support the student's learning. Task: Based on the analysis and the IEP goals, suggest a list of accommodations that would benefit the student. Consider various types of accommodations such as instructional, environmental, assessment- related, and assistive technology. Activity to Complete: Complete the provided NY IEP Template Accommodations Section (page 5) Submission and Assessment Submit the IEP document ● Submit the PLAAP document on Word/Google document Assignments will be assessed based on the depth of analysis, relevance and specificity of the IEP goals and objectives, and the appropriateness of the suggested accommodations. GOOD IEP GOAL Examples: Academic: Math Problem Solving GOAL: John will solve grade level word problems by adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing multi- digit numbers (I.e. decimals, fractions, and/or whole numbers) in 4 out of 5 trials. Objectives: 1. John will identify the appropriate math operation in each given word problem, by highlighting, underlining or circling the operational sign or words that indicate which math operation is required to complete the problem in 4 out of 5 trials. 2. John will solve grade-level word problems by adding multi-digit numbers (I.e. decimals, fractions, and/or whole numbers) in 4 out of 5 trials. 3. John will solve grade-level word problems by subtracting multi-digit numbers (I.e. decimals, fractions, and/or whole numbers) in 4 out of 5 trials. 4. John will solve grade-level word problems by multiplying multi-digit numbers (I.e. decimals, fractions, and/or whole numbers) in 4 out of 5 trials. 5. John will solve grade-level word problems by dividing multi-digit numbers (l.e. decimals, fractions, and/or whole numbers) in 4 out of 5 trials. GOOD IEP GOAL Examples: Academic: Written Language Mechanics GOAL: Given access to graphic organizers and/or class assignment rubrics or templates, John will compose 4-5 sentences related to a given topic that include appropriate grammar and punctuation. Objectives: 1. Using an editing checklist, John will independently check his writing for capital letters (I.e. start of the sentence, proper nouns), with 80% accuracy. 2. Using an editing checklist, John will independently check his writing for use of appropriate end of sentence punctucation (I.e. period, exclamation mark, question mark) with 80% accuracy. 3. Using an editing checklist, John will independently check his writing for use of appropriate end of punctucation within the sentence (I.e. comma, quotations, colon, semicolon) with 80% accuracy. POORLY Written IEP GOAL Examples: DO NOT DO THIS. GOAL: John will solve math problems on grade level demonstrating understanding. Objectives: 1. Identify the appropriate math operation signs. 2. Solve a grade level word problem. 3. Solve a grade-level multiplication problem. General Information: Name: Sam - Age: 11 years, 5 months - Gender: Male - Grade: 6th Provided Background on Sam from Psychologist's Report: Academic Profile: Overall Performance: Sam's academic performance has been average, with grades generally in the 'C' range. - Strengths: Sam is personable, social, and popular among his peers. He excels in athletics and is known for giving strong verbal responses in class. - Challenges: Despite being capable and social, Sam faces difficulties in reading and writing. His performance in these areas is not reflective of his overall potential, leading to a perception that he is not applying himself sufficiently. - Psychological Assessment - WISC-V Scores: - Verbal Comprehension: Composite Score: 98 (Range: 91-106, Average) - Visual Spatial: Composite Score: 108 (Range: 100-115, Average) Fluid Reasoning: Composite Score: 115 (Range: 107-121, High Average) - Working Memory: Composite Score: 94 (Range: 87-102, Average) - Processing Speed: Composite Score: 105 (Range: 95-113, Average) Full Scale IQ: Composite Score: 104 (Range: 98-109, Average) - Written Notes by Psychologist Cognitive Abilities: Sam's cognitive abilities are within the average to high average range. His strengths are particularly notable in Fluid Reasoning and Visual Spatial skills, indicating a good capacity for problem-solving and understanding spatial relationships. Verbal vs. Non-Verbal Skills: While Sam's verbal comprehension is average, his verbal responses in class are noted to be strong, suggesting that he may be more comfortable with verbal expression than with written tasks. Working Memory and Processing Speed: Both these areas are in the average range, which suggests that Sam can handle average cognitive loads effectively. However, these areas might not be his strongest suit, potentially contributing to his struggles with reading and writing tasks that require sustained mental effort and speed. Reading and Writing Challenges: Despite average to above-average cognitive abilities, Sam's academic struggles, particularly in reading and writing, could indicate a possible learning difference that isn't reflected in his overall cognitive profile. Teacher Observations: Social Skills: Sam is described as personable and social, indicating strong interpersonal skills and a positive school experience in terms of peer relationships. Athletic Abilities: Excelling in athletics, Sam demonstrates physical abilities and likely thrives in environments where he can be active. Classroom Participation: His ability to give strong verbal answers suggests good oral communication skills, yet this does not seem to translate into his written work. Teacher (Perceived) Effort: Teachers view Sam as not trying hard enough in reading and writing. This perception might overlook underlying challenges Sam faces in these areas./nReport Format Link https://www.nysed.gov/special-education/general-directions-use- states-mandatory-individualized-education-program-iep-form Word Limit 8-9 For Report Need to fill the word file/n Woodcock Johnson Iv Name: Date of Birth: 06/03/2008 Age: 11 years, 5 months Sex: Male Date of Testing: 11/01/2019 TESTS ADMINISTERED Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement Form BASIC READING SKILLS READING FLUENCY MATHEMATICS BROAD MATHEMATICS MATH CALCULATION SKILLS MATH PROBLEM SOLVING ACADEMIC SKILLS BRIEF ACHIEVEMENT Letter-Word Identification Applied Problems Spelling Calculation TABLE OF SCORES Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement Form A and Extended (Norms based on age 11-5) CLUSTER/Test W AE RPI SS (68% Band) 483 8-5 44/90 468 8-0 8/90 507 11-4 89/90 505 10-11 85/90 501 10-4 75/90 509 12-1 93/90 484 8-11 37/90 489 9-3 52/90 Word Attack Oral Reading Score Report Sentence Reading Fluency Math Facts Fluency Number Matrices Science School: Teacher: Grade: 6 ID: Examiners: Kate Gmuer and Extended (Norms based on age 11-5) 82 (79-85) 74 (70-77) 99 (96-103) 97 (94-99) 93 (89-96) 103 (99-107) 80 (78-83) 84 (82-87) 483 8-9 35/90 514 13-7 95/90 471 7-11 10/90 499 10-5 77/90 482 7-11 53/90 477 7-5 28/90 459 8-2 2/90 83 (79-86) 107 (102-112) 72 (68-75) 93 (89-97) 82 (77-87) 75 (71-78) 77 (72-82) 503 10-4 72/90 93 (88-98) 503 11-2 89/90 99 (94-104) 514 14-6 96/90 109 (103-115) Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement Form A and Extended Test Session Observations Level of conversational proficiency: Very Advanced Level of cooperation: Exceptionally cooperative throughout the examination Level of activity: Typical for age/grade Attention and concentration: Attentive to the tasks (typical for age/grade) Self-confidence: Appeared tense or worried at times Care in responding: Prompt but careful in responding (typical for age/grade) Response to difficult tasks: Generally persisted with difficult tasks (typical for age/grade) Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement Form A and Extended Qualitative Observations Letter-Word Identification: Required increased time and greater attention to phoneme-grapheme relationships to determine the correct response (nonautomatic word identification skills) Applied Problems: Solved initial problems with no observed difficulty but demonstrated increasing difficulties solving the latter items (typical) Spelling: Spelled words in a laborious manner (nonautomatic) Calculation: Solved initial problems quickly with no observed difficulties but demonstrated less automaticity with the latter items (typical) Word Attack: Identified the initial items rapidly and accurately but had difficulty applying phoneme-grapheme relationships to latter items Oral Reading: Errors involving mispronunciation (7), omission (3), insertion (3), substitution (1), hesitation (9) and repetition (1) were observed 1 of 2 2019 Riverside Assessments, LLC. All rights reserved 1.800.323.9540 www.riversideinsights.com ● Riverside Insights WJ-IV SUBTEST SCORES Standard Battery Letter Word Identification Applied Problems Spelling Calculation Word Attack Oral Reading Sentence Reading Fluency Math Facts Fluency Extended Battery Number Matrices Science READING CLUSTER Basic Reading Skills Reading Fluency MATH CLUSTER Mathematics Broad Mathematics Standard Score 83 107 72 93 82 75 77 93 99 Standard Score 109 82 Standard Score 74 9-24% 25-75% 99 Standard Score 97 WJ IV Classification Low Average Average Low Average Low Average Low Low Average WJ IV Classification Average Average WJ IV Classification Low Average Low WJ IV Classification Average Average Math Calculation Skills Math Problem Solving CROSS DOMAIN CLUSTERS Brief Achievement Academic Skills Core Subtests Letter/Word Recognition Phonetic Analysis Reading Vocabulary Meaningful Reading Supplemental Subtests Listening Vocabulary Rapid Naming Phonological Awareness GRAYS Standard Scores for Subtests are called Scaled Scores. Standard Score 6 4 9 Scaled Score 9 93 7 103 8 LO 84 Scaled Score 5 80 Average Average WJ IV Classification Low Average Low Average Descriptive Rating Below Average Poor Average Average Descriptive Rating Below Average Average Poor COMPOSITE ABILITY SCORES FOR CORE SUBTESTS Standard Scores for Composites are called Ability Scores. Composite Decoding Comprehension General Reading Ability Score 70 94 80 Descriptive Rating Poor/Very Poor Average Below Average GDRT-2 Gray Diagnostic Reading Tests-Second Edition Examiner Record Booklet Form A Section 1. Identifying Information Name Date Tested Date of Birth Age Core Subtests 1. Letter/Word Recognition 2. Phonetic Analysis Section II. Record of Subtest Scores 3. Reading Vocabulary 4. Meaningful Reading Supplemental Subtests Year 2019 2008 || 5. Listening Vocabulary 6. Rapid Naming 7. Phonological Awareness 1. Letter/Word Recognition 2. Phonetic Analysis Sum of Scaled Scores Comprehension 5. Reading Vocabulary 4. Meaningful Reading Sum of Scaled Scores General Reading 1. Letter/Word Recognition 2. Phonetic Analysis 3. Reading Vocabulary 4. Meaningful Reading 2004 by PRO-ED, Inc. 2 3 4 5 12 11 Month 10 09 08 Female Male Raw Score 14 34- 22 67 18' ها ** C Section III. Composite Ability Scores for Core Subtests Decoding Scaled Score Ability Score LA Day 4/5 Scaled Score 28 ما Š 5 School Examiner's Name Examiner's Title 11-15 %ile Rank 37 37 16 2.5 Sum of Scaled Scores Section IV. Interpretations and Recommendations Decoding 70 Comprehension General Reading 80 Age Equivalent 8-6 66-6 10-3 10-6 9-6 6-3 7-6 %ile Rank 2 35 Grade Equivalent 3.4 1.4 5.2 5.4 4.4 1.2 2.4 Grade Descriptive Rating Descriptive Rating Additional copies of this form (#10970) may be purchased from PRO-ED, 8700 Shoal Creek Blvd., Austin, TX 78757-6897 800/897-3202, Fax 800/397-7633, www.proedinc.com