EVALUATION REPORT

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

1

EVALUATION REPORT (ER) School Age Student Name: StudentA Date of Report (mm/dd/yy): April 27, 2009 Date Report Provided to Parent/Guardian/Surrogate: April 28, 2009 Student Birth Date: June 10, 2001 Age: 7 years, 10 months Grade: 2nd Local Education Agency (LEA): PA School District School Student is Attending: Elementary School Current Educational Program: Regular Education County of Residence: Franklin Name and Address of Parent/Guardian/Surrogate: Phone (Home): Phone (Work): Other Information:

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

2

Complete Sections 1 through 6 for all students. If determining eligibility for Specific Learning Disability (SLD), the SLD component near the end of this document must be completed and used to complete Sections 5 and 6. 1. REASON(S) FOR REFERRAL StudentA was referred by the school team for inadequate growth in reading despite instruction and intervention over a marked period of time. 2. SOURCES OF EVALUATION DATA – In interpreting evaluation data, the school must draw upon a variety of data sources, including those listed below, and carefully consider the information obtained. Document the information obtained from the sources below.

A. Evaluations and information provided by the parent of the student (or documentation of LEA’s attempts to obtain parental input):

StudentA’s parents completed a family questionnaire and indicated the following: StudentA lives at home with his mother and older brother (age 12). StudentA’s pre and neo natal periods were unremarkable and developmental milestones were met within normal limits. It was noted that when young, he would throw himself on the floor when upset, and as an elementary age child, he stomped and slammed doors. StudentA did have tubes placed in his ears at age 18 months. No speech or vision issues were noted, and no motor or medical concerns were reported. StudentA was diagnosed with AD/HD at age 6 years by his family doctor and was currently treated with the Daytrana patch (15mg). StudentA liked playing games with other children, riding his bike, 4 wheelers, and go-carts. He also enjoyed swimming. Family history was significant for AD/HD and LD. StudentA’s teacher had discussed StudentA’s reading level and progress with his mother and she read with StudentA at home. His teacher also completed a Vanderbilt rating scale (used by local doctors to assist in AD/HD diagnoses) in October and in January. During the parent teacher conference in the fall, the teacher discussed a plan to help StudentA to focus on his behaviors. Each day, the teacher writes in his planner to communicate his behavior to mother, who signs the planner each night.

B. Observations – Include teacher observations and observations by related services providers, when appropriate:

StudentA’s teacher observed that StudentA had made improvements in his confidence level since the beginning of the year and that he no longer told the teacher that he hated to read. His behavior was not good during morning hours. Often, StudentA called out and walked around the classroom. After lunch, his behavior was somewhat better and he was slightly more focused. His teacher also noted that StudentA often does not follow along when directions are given for an assignment. He looks around the room and is often out of his seat. During afternoon subjects, he does stay in his seat and tries to participate in class discussions. He usually plays with his peers, but some days he likes to work on an individual activity, such as a puzzle. Adaptive skill-wise, his teacher noted that StudentA has some problems with communication. He often does not

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

3

respond or he will say that he does not know. In example, he does not remember what he ate for breakfast or what he did the night before. The reading resource teacher observed that StudentA needs close supervision and one-on-one assistance. She usually read with him when he was to read independently in the Phonics for Reading Level 1 book. She also read with StudentA and monitored him during Six Minute Solution work. She commented that he tries and has made some gains over the year. The school counselor observed StudentA on two occasions during 1st grade. His time on task was 68% on one observation and 59% on another (both took place in October). The school counselor noted that StudentA also participated in one of her groups. Several times he had to be reminded of the group rules. On one occasion he had to be asked to return to his classroom due to his poor behavior. He was the only one in the group asked to do this. Observation by the school psychologist during evaluation found that StudentA was very interested in the things in his environment and appeared to be easily distracted. At times, his distracted could have been purposeful avoidance of difficult (or at least perceived to be difficult) tasks, but at other times came about during easy or non-task (transition) times. StudentA was very active during assessment, often moving in his chair and/or playing with something while responding. He responded well to a game where he was told that he had set a “world record” when finished with subtests from the assessment. StudentA was very motivated to try and set “world records” and worked very hard when reminded of the possibility. It appeared that StudentA was more capable of task completion than he let on, and when properly motivated, it appeared that he was able to engage and work hard. During interview with StudentA prior to testing, and prior to the world record game, he often responded to questions with “I don’t know.” It appeared that such was more of a defense than accurate, and that in fact he did know, but had to be motivated to attempt to figure out the answer.

C. Recommendations by teachers: StudentA’s teacher noted that reading intervention worked for StudentA. He enjoyed working one-on-one and/or in small groups. Behavior plans worked at times, but not always, and need to be adjusted on a regular basis to keep him interested. His teacher noted that she had observed many positive changes in StudentA during his 2nd grade year.

D. The student’s physical condition (include health, vision, hearing); social or cultural background; and adaptive behavior relevant to the student’s suspected disability and potential need for special education:

There was no evidence to suggest that health, vision, or hearing were a major concern for StudentA and the report from the school nurse was unremarkable. There was a lack of evidence to suggest that social or cultural background did or did not present as notable barriers to success. StudentA did not present with adaptive behavior concerns beyond the communication concerns noted by his teacher.

E. Assessments – Include, when appropriate, current classroom based assessments; aptitude and achievement tests; local and/or state assessments;

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

4

behavioral assessments; vocational technical education assessment results; interests, preferences, aptitudes (for secondary transition); etc.:

StudentA’s reading progress was monitored through the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS). His results from kindergarten through second grade are listed in the table below:

Kindergarten First Grade Second Grade Third Grade BOY MOY EOY BOY MOY EOY BOY MOY EOY BOY MOY EOY

ISF 8 9* PSF 59 36 47 42 LNF 0** 13** 36* 27* NWF 3** 18* 11** 30* 43* 23** ORF 7** 24* 8** 18** * Strategic **Intensive Results show that StudentA entered kindergarten with acceptable phonemic awareness skills (measured by ISF) but very limited alphabetic principle knowledge (measured by LNF). By the end of kindergarten, StudentA had mastered phonemic awareness (measured by PSF) but continued to struggle with phonics (measured by LNF and NWF). On benchmark assessments, StudentA never mastered his phonics skills (measured through 1st grade and the beginning of 2nd grade by NWF). StudentA’s ORF scores (indicator of general reading skill) have always been in the at risk range. He showed acceptable growth over the course of the second half of 1st grade, but regressed a great deal over the summer and made minimal progress between the beginning of 2nd grade and the middle of the year. The chart below shows StudentA’s progress in reading (ORF) as measured by progress monitoring probes given during the second half of 2nd grade. As can be witnessed in the chart, StudentA’s middle of the year score of 18 words correctly was markedly below the grade level expectation of 68. The end of the year expectation was 90 words read correctly in a minute, and the expected growth rate, or rate of improvement (RoI) was about 1.5 words per week. As of April, StudentA’s highest probe was measured at 33 words correct per minute and his rate of improvement, calculated based on a linear regression formula, was about 0.8 words correct per minute per week. Based on this data, it could be observed that StudentA was reading significantly slower than his same grade peers and he was making growth at a delayed pace compared to his peers. Such is remarkable in-and-of-itself, but is of more concern when the increased intensity of his reading instruction and intervention are considered. StudentA received all the regular education instruction as the rest of his 2nd grade peers, but also received 30 minutes per day, five days per week, of instruction from the Phonics for Reading program, 10 minutes per day, five days per week, of instruction from the Six Minute Solution program, and 10 minutes per day, five days per week, or drill and practice on high frequency words.

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

5

Oral Reading Fluency January through April

68

90

18 19 25

33 33

23 28

y = 1.4667x + 66.533

y = 0.7975x + 19.305

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

01/16/0901/23/0901/30/0902/06/0902/13/0902/20/0902/27/0903/06/0903/13/0903/20/0903/27/0904/03/0904/10/0904/17/0904/24/0905/01/09

W C

P M

Benchmark Student Linear (Benchmark) Linear (Student)

The table below shows StudentA’s progress on the Timed Reading With Meaning measure on the Imagination Station Indicators of Progress (ISIP). Timed reading with meaning (TRWM) is an indicator of comprehension. As can be witnessed, StudentA struggled to record a score on most assessments. It was not clear if this was a fair assessment of his skill or influenced by his attention to task on the computer based assessment. BOY

BM BOY PM

MOY BM

MOY PM

MOY 2 BM

MOY 2 PM

EOY BM

EOY PM

StudentA 0 0 0 0 0 1 Benchmark 22 30 37 45 The Core Phonics Survey was administered to StudentA in October and April of his 2nd grade year. He demonstrated progress to the point of mastery with long vowel sounds. He demonstrated progress but still had more to gain in short vowel sounds and short vowels in CVC words and short vowels with digraphs and tch. StudentA still struggled with long vowel words; vowel diphthongs; R and L controlled vowels, and multi-syllable words. 3. IF AN ASSESSMENT IS NOT CONDUCTED UNDER STANDARD CONDITIONS, DESCRIBE THE EXTENT TO WHICH IT VARIED FROM STANDARD CONDITIONS (including if the assessment was given in the student’s native language or other mode of communication): The assessment was conducted under standard conditions.

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

6

4. DETERMINING FACTORS – A student must not be found to be eligible for special education and related services if the determining factor for the student’s disability is any of those listed below. Respond Yes or No to, and provide evidence for, each determining factor below. Yes ____ No __X__ Lack of appropriate instruction in reading, including the essential components of reading instruction. Provide evidence: StudentA was taught reading from the Houghton Mifflin (HM) reading series, 60 minutes per day five days per week. The HM focuses on all five of the essential components of reading including phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. StudentA also received additional reading instruction using the Phonics for Reading program, 30 minutes per day five days per week and the Six Minute Solution program, 10 minutes per day five days per week. Guided reading in small group was provided for 15 minutes per day, five days per week, and drill on high frequency words was done 10 minutes per day, five days per week. StudentA’s teacher noted that word family poems were used to address phonemic awareness and fluency. Daily phonics activities and the Six Minute Solution were used as part of the daily routine to practice long and short vowels and fluency. Each week the class read a Text Talk story to address vocabulary and comprehension. Additional stress on phonics instruction was provided through the Phonics for Reading program. StudentA’s absences were not reported. Yes ____ No __X__ Lack of appropriate instruction in math. Provide evidence: StudentA was taught math from the Scott Foresman math series, 40 minutes per day five days per week. In addition, 15 minutes per day five days per week were spent on the Problem of the Day. Yes ____ No __X__ Limited English proficiency. Provide evidence: StudentA’s primary language was English. NOTE: IF DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY FOR SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY, COMPLETE THE DETERMINATION OF SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY COMPONENT AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT BEFORE COMPLETING SECTIONS 5 and 6. Complete Sections 5 and 6 for all students.

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

7

5. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS/INTERPRETATION OF EVALUATION RESULTS – Considering all available evaluation data, record the team’s analyses of the student’s functioning levels.

A. PRESENT LEVELS OF ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT – Describe the student’s present levels, strengths, and the resulting academic needs, when appropriate. Include communicative status, motor abilities, and transition needs as appropriate. For students with limited English proficiency (LEP), include current level(s) of English language proficiency in reading, writing, speaking and understanding/listening:

ACHIEVEMENT

StudentA was assessed with the Woodcock-Johnson, Third Edition, Normative Update Tests of Achievement (WJ-III Ach), an individually administered measure of academic, or learning, performance. Standard scores obtained fall into broad categories (very low, low, low average, average, high average, superior, very superior) that best and most accurately explain a student’s level of functioning. StudentA’ scores were calculated based on his age.

READING The Broad Reading score from the WJ-III is an estimate of the level to which StudentA can perform when engaged in reading tasks. He scored in the low average range. Cluster/Test Standard Score Range Broad Reading 84 Low Average Brief Reading 87 Low Average Letter-Word Identification 93 Average Reading Fluency 90 Average Passage Comprehension 78 Low StudentA’s word reading and phonics skills were measured using the Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE). His scores are listed below.

Standard Score Range Total Word Reading Efficiency 82 Low Average Sight Word Efficiency 88 Low Average Phonemic Decoding Efficiency 82 Low Average StudentA’s basic phonological awareness was assessed using the Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP). His scores are listed below. Composite Score Range Phonological Awareness 100 Average Phonological Memory 91 Average Rapid Naming 91 Average Overall, StudentA’s lowest performance was in reading comprehension; however, he scored markedly below age and grade level expectations in areas related to phonics/decoding on the

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

8

TOWRE. His reading fluency score was in the average range, as were all processing related scores on the CTOPP. When performance on oral reading fluency probes and the Core Phonics survey are compared to standardized assessment results, it appears clear that StudentA struggles with multiple parts of the reading process, from word reading/decoding to understanding/comprehension. MATH The Broad Math score from the WJ-III is an estimate of the level to which StudentA can perform when engaged in math tasks. He scored in the average range. Cluster/Test Standard Score Range Broad Math 95 Average Brief Math 96 Average Calculation 87 Low Average Math Fluency 91 Average Applied Problems 104 Average StudentA’s scores suggest that math is a stronger skill area than reading. His basic skills were in the low average range, and his fluency was near the low end of average. However, his ability to problem solve was well within the average range. WRITING StudentA’s writing skills were measured using the WJ-III. His scores are listed below. Cluster/Test Standard Score Range Writing Samples 87 Low Average StudentA was able to write at a level that was somewhat delayed given his age and grade level.

B. PRESENT LEVELS OF FUNCTIONAL PERFORMANCE – Describe the student’s present levels, strengths, and the resulting functional and developmental needs, when appropriate:

StudentA did not present with any functional delays save for the communication concerns noted by his teacher and observation found that he was age appropriate in most other skills.

C. BEHAVIORAL INFORMATION – Include social and emotional status and behavioral strengths and needs, when appropriate:

StudentA’s mother and teacher completed the Behavior Assessment System for Children, Second Edition (BASC-II) Parent and Teacher Scales, assessments designed to measure home, school, and community behaviors of children and young adults. Scores are reported as T scores, where those between 40 and 59 are within normal limits. Scores on the School Problems, Internalizing Problems and Inattention/Hyperactivity composites, as well as on the Emotional Symptoms Index that are between 60 and 69 are considered to be “at-risk,” while scores above 70 are considered “clinically significant.” Scores on the Adaptive Skills composite that are between 30 and 39 are considered to be “at-risk,” whiles scores below 30 are considered “clinically significant.”

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

9

The Behavioral Symptoms Index (BSI) is the most general indicator of problem behavior on the BASC. StudentA’s parent and teacher rated him in the at risk range. Behavioral Symptoms Index

Rater T Score Range Parents 67 At Risk Teacher 63 At Risk

The Externalizing Problems Index addresses behaviors that are overt and can be easily observed. StudentA’s ratings are listed below.

Index/Scale Parent T Score Range Teacher T Score Range Externalizing

Problems 71 Clinically Significant 58 Normal

Hyperactivity 80

Clinically Significant 62 At Risk

Aggression 60 At Risk 52 Normal

Conduct Problems 68 At Risk 56 Normal

StudentA’s mother observed a great deal of externalizing behaviors in the home setting, most problematic of which was over activity. In the school setting, his teacher noted similar trends, with over activity the most concerning of StudentA’s outward behaviors. The Internalizing Problems Index addresses behaviors that are associated with thoughts and feelings within the student. While the behaviors are easy to observe, the thoughts and feelings are not, and thus, conclusions from ratings are somewhat speculative. StudentA’s ratings are below.

Index/Scale Parent T Score Range Teacher T Score Range Internalizing

Problems 47 Normal 44 Normal

Anxiety 55 Normal 43 Normal

Depression 51 Normal 50 Normal

Somatization 36 Normal 42 Normal

StudentA’s mother and teacher did not observe any internalizing behaviors of concern. The Adaptive Skills Index looks at behaviors that are related to daily functioning, including taking care of one’s self and getting along with others. StudentA’s ratings are below.

Index/Scale Parent T Score Range Teacher T Score Range Adaptive Skills

34 At Risk 35 At Risk

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

10

Adaptability 39 At Risk 38 At Risk

Social Skills 39 At Risk 32 At Risk

Leadership 36 At Risk 40 Normal

Functional Communication 35 At Risk 33 At Risk

Activities of Daily Living 34 At Risk N/A

Study Skills N/A 42 Normal

Both StudentA’s mother and teacher noted some apprehension with adaptive skills, rating most areas within the at risk range. StudentA’s ability to communicate and adjust to change were noted as two areas on concern. The BASC offers a small number of scales that do not fit into a certain Index and those scores are listed below.

Index/Scale Parent T Score Range Teacher T Score Range Atypicality

49 Normal 59 Normal

Withdrawal 75

Clinically Significant 64 At Risk

Attention Problems 70

Clinically Significant 69 At Risk

Learning Problems N/A 64 At Risk

Concerns with attention were noted in both home and school settings, and should be considered in light of hyperactivity ratings from the externalizing problems composite. StudentA had a diagnosed AD/HD, and rating scale results suggested that behavior manifestations of that diagnosis continued to be present. It should also be noted that StudentA was rated outside of normal limits on the withdrawal scale. Specifically, he was noted to refuse to join groups in both settings and to often avoid competing with others. Interview with StudentA during evaluation found that he enjoyed playing football at home. He liked his video games and watching Drake and Josh on TV. StudentA struggled to answer open ended questions and at points did not appear to fully understand what he was being asked. Many of his answers were “I don’t know.” When asked about his favorite food, StudentA responded that he liked bacon, and then continued to use “bacon” as his response to a number of different questions.

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

11

6. CONCLUSIONS – Determination of Eligibility and Educational Needs Complete A or B or C.

A. The student does not have a disability and therefore is NOT ELIGIBLE for special education.

Yes ___ No _____

B. The student has a disability but does not need specially designed instruction, and

therefore is NOT ELIGIBLE for special education.

Yes ____ No _____

C. The student has a disability AND is in need of specially designed instruction, and therefore IS ELIGIBLE for special education.

Yes __X__ No _____

1. Disability Category

a. Primary Disability Category _Specific Learning Disability (Basic Reading Skills and Reading Comprehension)_

b. Secondary Disability Category ___________________

2. Recommendations for consideration by the IEP team to enable the student to participate as appropriate in the general education curriculum (including special considerations the IEP team must consider before developing the IEP, measurable annual goals, specially designed instruction, and supplementary aids and services):

1. StudentA presented as a student with significant and unexplained delays in both basic and comprehension reading skills. StudentA also presented with marked attention and over activity concerns. The former are recognized at this time and allow StudentA to be eligible for special education support (when paired with a number of other met criteria). The latter, his attention concerns, are not formally recognized at this time as reasoning for special education support (under the Other Health Impaired (OHI) category), but should be closely monitored. If attention and/or over activity appear to prevent StudentA from accessing information, behavior assessment and positive support should be considered. If such is unsuccessful and other, more successful remedies can be found within special education, reconsideration of OHI as a secondary disability category might be appropriate. 2. The school and parent team should discuss placement into special education services. As is documented in this evaluation report, StudentA meets the legal criteria as a student with a disability in the educational setting. Students who meet these criteria may receive special education if their parents consent to services. 3. StudentA will continue to benefit from supplemental reading instruction in basic reading skills.

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

12

- Programs such as Phonics for Reading, which is being used currently, should continue to help StudentA systematically be exposed to the rules by which words are decoded and encoded.

- In the future, programs such as Rewards, might be necessary to continue to support StudentA’s word reading skill development.

- Great effort should continue to be made to ensure that StudentA uses the decoding skills he is taught when reading text, both during intervention, in the classroom, and/or at home.

4. StudentA will continue to benefit from supplemental reading instruction in comprehension.

- Programs such as Soar to Success, a rather in depth intervention that focuses on many aspects of reading comprehension, could help to buttress StudentA’s reading comprehension skills. Such could be done in small group for about three to five sessions per week.

- Drill with modeling of the thinking process by a teacher or aide using questions/quizzes from the Study Island program is another strategy that could help to increase skill.

- StudentA might be taught how to use a graphic organizer to record and organize details from a story/text so that he might better understand the content.

- Comprehension strategies from the Florida Center for Reading Research could be downloaded (for free) and used. http://www.fcrr.org/Curriculum/studentCenterActivities23.htm

5. Given his delays in both basic word reading as well as reading comprehension, StudentA’s Individualized Education Plan (IEP) should reflect the need for specially designed instruction for both. Recommendations #2 and #3 can be used by the IEP team for specifics in regard to SDI. 6. Progress toward goals in basic word reading as well as reading comprehension can be measured using oral reading fluency (ORF). Oral reading fluency is a general indicator of reading growth, and an increase in the number of words read correctly per minute should reflect growth in phonics skills as well as comprehension ability. Other measures (such as the Core Phonics survey or ISIP) can also be used to understand StudentA’s skill growth. 7. StudentA responded well to motivational and/or incentive plans when learning. In order to maximize his potential, and take full advantage of instruction and intervention, a goal in the IEP that reflects effort might be considered, with an incentive plan used as specially designed instruction (SDI) to increase effort and motivation.

- Any plan should be geared toward rewarding StudentA for hard work and effort. - Rewards should be fluid, that is, often changing in order to keep StudentA

interested in achieving them. A reward or motivation survey might be completed in order to better understand what motivates StudentA. Rapport should be established prior to surveying to ensure accurate results.

- Data on effort should be kept to monitor progress and comment upon the usefulness of any incentive plan.

8. In the classroom, StudentA’s teachers should continue to check for his comprehension of ideas presented, either through simple retell (stating, “StudentA, please tell me how to…”) or even by asking him to write down or draw pictures of the details of what was taught.

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

13

9. StudentA’s family is encouraged to read with StudentA five to seven days per week for at least 20 minutes. Such time is designed to increase StudentA’s ability to read as well as his interest in reading. Such time can be spent reading to StudentA, reading with StudentA, or listening to StudentA read. Text should be of topics of interest to StudentA and when he is reading such should be on his instructional level. It is important to end reading time talking about what was read, which will allow StudentA to fully understand the purpose of reading; to understand the meaning of the text.

- When talking about reading, discussions on things in StudentA’s personal life that relate to the subject of what was read can be tied in. Similarities and differences between reading and what he knows should be pointed out (by both him and parent/other reader).

10. StudentA’s family is encouraged to involve him in extra curricular activities such as sports, clubs, etc. Such is important so that StudentA can meet and see peers outside of the school setting, so that he can be a part of something that is easier than school, and so that he can see and model appropriate social behavior. 11. StudentA’s family is encouraged to share the results of the current school based evaluation with others that work with or help StudentA. One such person should be StudentA’s primary care provider, or other medical professional who monitors the medical therapy for his diagnosed AD/HD. School based information suggested that attention and over activity continue to manifest at levels that exceed what is typical for his age and grade.

- School staff can monitor any adjustment in medical therapy and provide feedback to medical professionals so that effectiveness of any change can be judged.

DETERMINATION OF SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY NOTE: This component must be completed when determining eligibility for Specific Learning Disability. The information must be attached to and/or incorporated into Sections 5 and 6 of the completed Evaluation Report. Provide documentation for items 1-10. 1. The student does not achieve adequately for the student’s age or does not meet State- approved grade-level standards in one or more of the following areas when provided with learning experiences and scientifically based instruction appropriate for the student’s age or State-approved grade level standards and level of English language proficiency: oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading fluency skills, reading comprehension, mathematics calculation, and mathematics problem-solving. StudentA scored below age and/or state approved grade-level standards in the following areas:, basic reading skills, reading comprehension, mathematics calculation, and written expression.

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

14

2. Check below to identify the process(es) used to determine eligibility.

x Response to Scientific Research-Based Intervention (RtI). Document the criteria below. The student does not make sufficient progress to meet age or State-approved grade-level standards in one or more of these areas: oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading fluency skills, reading comprehension, mathematics calculation, and mathematics problem-solving: StudentA displays insufficient progress in basic reading skills and reading fluency in spite of the provision of evidence-based interventions.

Severe Discrepancy between Intellectual Ability and Achievement. Document the criteria below. The student exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement or both relative to age, standards or intellectual development: 4. The educationally relevant medical findings, if any StudentA was diagnosed with AD/HD and had historically as well as currently had concerns with over activity and off task behavior. It is likely that StudentA’s academic levels were negatively influenced by his attention concerns; however, it appeared that his reading delays were not solely a result of attention problems. Evidence for this conclusion stems from his lack of growth despite rather intensive small group intervention attempts as well as the difference in his performance between reading and math. 5. The effects of the student’s environment, culture, or economic background: There was no evidence to suggest that academic delays were a result of homelessness, child abuse, poor nutrition, chronic medical conditions, frequent absences, or a sleep disorder. 6. Data demonstrating that prior to referral or as part of the referral process for a specific learning disability, the student’s regular education instruction was delivered by qualified personnel, including the English as a Second Language (ESL) program, if applicable: According to the school principal, teachers were highly qualified by state standards. StudentA did not receive ESL support. 7. Data based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting progress during instruction, which was provided to the parents: Data (progress monitoring data) is detailed in section 2 E of the report. 8. An observation in the student’s learning environment (including the regular classroom setting) to document the student’s academic performance and behavior in the areas of difficulty. Note the relationship of that behavior to the student’s academic functioning:

PA SCHOOL DISTRICT EVALUATION REPORT Student’s Name: StudentA

15

Observations of StudentA are detailed in section 2 B of the report. 9. Other data, if needed, as determined by the evaluation team: None needed at this time. 10. Include a statement for each item below to support the conclusions of the evaluation team that the findings are not primarily a result of Visual, hearing, motor disability: There was no evidence of a visual or hearing disability. Mental retardation: StudentA’s has displayed appropriate developmental milestones and appears to function as a typical student cognitively. For example, he displays grade-level performance in mathematics and near-grade-level performance in written expression. In addition, no adaptive deficits were noted, save for some communication skills observed by his teacher. Emotional disturbance: There was no evidence of an emotional disturbance. Cultural factors: There was no evidence that cultural factors played a role in reading delays. Environmental or economic disadvantage: There was no evidence that environmental or cultural factors played a role in reading delays. Limited English proficiency: StudentA’s only language was English. Upon completion of the SLD Component, attach and/or incorporate this information into Sections 5 and 6 of the completed Evaluation Report.