Running Head: IEP CASE STUDY

IEP Case Study

Victoria Poynter
Towson University
12 April 2016

IEP CASE STUDY

2
Part I- Background Information

I. A. Student Background
The student involved in this IEP case study is a seventh grade student at Franklin Middle
School. Her name has been changed to protect her identity, in this case study she will be referred
to as Sarah. I have also changed the names of the members involved in Sarahs IEP to protect
their identities. After reviewing Sarahs records, performing informal observations, and gaining
information from other team members I was able to learn about her home and school
background.
This is Sarahs first year at Franklin Middle School. She transferred here from Baltimore
City Public Schools where she lived with her mom. Sarah now lives with her father and
stepmother. The team was informed by her father that her mother let Sarah do anything she
wanted to do such as stay out late, not go to school, etc. We were also informed that Sarah has
done drugs with her mother before.
Sarah was first evaluated for special education services in February of 2013 as a fourth
grader. Teachers and staff were concerned about late arrival, absences from school, and failing
grades. When she would arrive late she would miss the title one services provided at the school.
Additionally, her academic performance, specifically in reading and math, were resulting in
failing grades. The teachers and staff were also concerned with Sarahs significant anxiety in
class as well as withdrawal. The IEP meeting that this case study is based off of was a three-year
annual review. The original psychological evaluation was conducted in 2013 and Sarah was
reevaluated for this meeting, in 2016.
The category of Sarahs disability falls under Emotional disability. The areas that are
affected by her disability are mathematics, writing, reading, and social/emotional/behavioral.

IEP CASE STUDY

Although Sarah does not meet the criteria for intellectual learning disability there are deficits in
verbal processing and communication. Sarah also has a need for limited distractions, repeated
directions, and smaller tasks.
Additionally, Sarah also has behavioral needs involved with social/emotional functioning
and behavior. Sarah has a tendency to withdrawal, show signs of anxiety, and trouble with
socialization. On the other hand, she does not have any cultural or linguistic differences.
I was able to informally observe Sarah on two different occasions. The first observation I
conducted was in her first period class, math. This period takes place from 7:50am to 8:35am.
This is a self-contained math setting. At the beginning of the period the students were working
on the drill and Sarah came into class five minutes late. As the class was going over the answers
to the drill Sarah was talking to her neighbor and then began to look at her neighbors paper for
the answer. Once the drill was over the class was introduced to two-step equations. Sarah was
drawing on her paper and once the teacher wrote something down on the board she then began to
write it and returned to drawing. Overall, during this time period she was quiet. Once the
students started to work on their independent practice Sarah sat quietly and did not work. Sarah
also did not raise her hand/ask for help. However, she would look onto her neighbors paper and
copy down the answers. Throughout the observation it was clear the student did not like to offer
a response to the teachers questions and was mostly quiet throughout the period.
For the second informal observation I was able to observe Sarah in her language arts
class. This class occurs during period five from 11:50am to 12:40pm. This class is also a selfcontained class. During this class period the students were participating in PRIDE day. PRIDE
day is a time for students to make up missing assignments, organize their binders, etc. Because of
this I did not see Sarah complete much work. She started out sitting quietly by herself but once

IEP CASE STUDY

her peers began to finish their work she started talking to them. Additionally, Sarah was drawing
on her paper. Overall, I did not observe Sarah complete work and I am not sure if that is because
she did not have any work to make up or if she just didnt complete her makeup work.
I. B. IEP Process
After collaborating with team members, my mentor, and other individuals involved in the
IEP Process at Franklin Middle School, it is clear that they are meeting the requirements set by
IDEA. At the start of the school year the IEP chair as well as the case managers create a schedule
of each students requirements for the year involving IEP teams. This includes, but is not limited
to annual reviews, testing updates, and much more. Once the time gets closer for an IEP meeting
the appropriate tests are given, information is collected, IEPs are rewritten, and so on based on
the needs of the student.
According to IDEA and at this school, the parents receive notification of upcoming team
meetings in the mail. If the parents are unable to make this meeting date and/or time they have
the option to change the date and/or time. Once an official meeting date and time are set, all of
the paperwork, assessments, etc. are mailed home in time to ensure the parents receive the
information ten days prior to the team meeting. As the team meeting approaches, Ms. Smith
follows up with the parents by phone to see if they are coming to the meeting, ensure they
received the paperwork, etc.
On the day of the meeting there are a few things that may occur before the meeting
officially starts. For example, if a parent is not present, the IEP chair will call the parents to
verify whether or not they plan on attending or would like to participate over the phone. This
covers regulation fourteen under IDEA. Additionally, in instances where the parents do not
receive the proper paperwork within that ten-day time frame, the IEP chair makes sure to ask

IEP CASE STUDY

permission from the parents on the day of the meeting if it is acceptable to continue with the
meeting. Finally, the IEP will request permission for members to attend the meeting, such as
myself, which were not on the original invitation form. This helped to ensure regulation four
under IDEA was met.
There are a multitude of key members involved in the IEP Process at Franklin Middle
School. These members include, but are not limited to, the IEP chair, case manager,
classroom/general education teacher, school psychologist, and related service providers. The IEP
chair is in charge of facilitating the meeting, keeping the other members on task, ensuring every
topic is covered appropriately, and much more. The case manager is in charge of gathering any
reports, administering any educational testing, informally assessing the student, and assessing the
progress the student is making towards his/her goals. The classroom/general education teacher is
responsible for providing input on student progress in his/her class. The school psychologist
administers any psychological testing, comes up with the determination/disability, and much
more. Finally, related service providers can include but are not limited to occupational therapists,
speech pathologists, social workers, etc. These service providers provide feedback on those
related goals and services.
To prepare for Sarahs IEP meeting, these key members had many responsibilities. The
speech pathologist had to administer a speech assessment to Sarah and review the results of this
assessment in order to discuss those results during the meeting. The social worker was
responsible for reviewing Sarahs previous IEP goal and creating a new IEP goal since her last
one for attendance was met. The school psychologist was responsible for administering the
psychological evaluation in order to discuss Sarahs psychological results during the meeting.
The case manager was responsible for administering educational assessments, examining the

IEP CASE STUDY

results, assessing student progress in math class and towards her IEP goals, and preparing the
results to be discussed during the meeting. Finally, my responsibility was to informally observe
and assess Sarah in math class, discuss progress made in math class, and prepare information
regarding her strengths and areas of need to be discussed during the meeting.
Part II- Content of the IEP
II. A. Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Performance
This meeting was Sarahs three-year annual review. Sarah was being reevaluated to
determine whether or not she was still eligible for special education services. Based on her
present level of academic achievement and functional performance there are four areas that
impact the students academic achievement and/or functional performance. These for areas are
mathematics, writing, reading, and social/emotional/behavioral. Mathematics, writing, and
reading fall under the category of academics and social/emotional/behavioral fall under the
category of behavioral.
To assess Sarahs mathematics skills, the formal assessment Woodcock Johnson IV (WJ
IV) was used. This assessment is an educational assessment. Based on the WJ IV, Sarahs
instructional grade level performance is below grade level. Her strengths include counting
money and basic math facts. Her needs are in the area of math calculations. Like previously
mentioned, this area does impact her academic achievement and/or functional performance.
Like Sarahs mathematics skills, her writing skills were also assessed using the WJ IV.
Based on this assessment, Sarahs instructional grade level performance is below grade level.
Her strengths in writing include basic sentences. What she needs to improve on is writing
detailed paragraphs. Like previously mentioned, this area does impact the students academic
achievement and/or functional performance.

IEP CASE STUDY

Sarahs reading skills were also tested using the formal assessment the Woodcock
Johnson IV (WJ IV). Based on this assessment, Sarahs instructional grade level performance is
below grade level. Her strength in reading is word identification. On the other hand, Sarah needs
to improve on her passage comprehension. Again, this area does impact the students academic
achievement and/or functional performance.
Finally, the BASC or the Basic Assessment System for Children was used to assess
Sarahs social/emotional/behavioral strengths and needs. Her level of performance is below
average. She scored a twenty-three in interpersonal relations, a twenty-five in self-esteem, a sixty
in anxiety, a seventy-five in depression, a sixty-seven in attention and a sixty in social stress.
During the meeting, these results were discussed in detail to ensure the parents understood the
results. Her areas of strength include responding to routines and establishing friendships. On the
other hand her areas of need include self-esteem and interpersonal relations. Sarahs
social/emotional/behavioral skills also impact her academic achievement and/or functional
performance.
II. B. Instructional and Testing Accommodations
Sarah does not have any special communication accommodations as well as she does not
require any assistive technology other than a calculator. In the form of instructional and testing
accommodation, she does require response accommodations in mathematics. These include tools
such as a ruler, protractor, etc. and a calculation device. These devices and tools allow Sarah to
complete tasks in math with less stress and help her to focus on the content of a math problem
rather than spending her time focusing on the math calculations. When it comes to timing and
scheduling accommodations, Sarah is provided with extended time (50%) and reduced

IEP CASE STUDY

distractions. By providing Sarah with extended time and reduced distractions some of her anxiety
is relieved which allows her to stay focused on her work.

II. C. IEP Goals and Objectives

Sarah has one reading, one math, one written language, and one social work goal. The
social work goal was not written by my mentor and myself but by the social worker, but I have
still included it below.
Sarahs reading goal is aligned to the College and Career Ready Anchor Standard: read

and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently.
Her goal for this standard is that after independently reading a grade-level, multi-paragraph,
informational text, Sarah will write a brief summary (5-7 sentences) that identifies at least two
key ideas represented in the text and at least two examples of how those ideas relate to
individuals or events in the text for four out of five passages. The target date for Sarah to meet
this goal is by March 15, 2017 and will be evaluated through classroom-based assessments. The
first objective for this goal is that given an information text, Sarah will be able to identify at least
two key ideas represented in the text. The second objective with this goal is that given an
informational text, Sarah will be able to give an example of how the key ideas relate to
individuals or events in the text. Finally, the third objective aligned with this goal is that Sarah
will write a summary five to seven sentences long that identifies two key ideas in the text and at
least two examples of how those ideas relate in individuals in the text.
SarahsmathgoalisalignedwiththeCommonCoreStandard:
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.7.NS.A.3 Solve real-world and mathematical problems involving the
four operations with rational numbers. Her goal is when given a series of twelve real-world*

IEP CASE STUDY

word problems involving two sets of rational numbers (including complex fractions), and
requiring any of the four operations (i.e. addition, subtraction, multiplication, division), Sarah
will select an operation and solve ten out of twelve problems correctly with 80% accuracy. *Real
world math word problems are linked to the application of math in real life. The target date for
Sarah to meet this goal is by March 15, 2017 and will be evaluated through informal procedures.
The first objective that aligns with this goal is that when given a real-life problem, Sarah will
identify the question in the problem. The second objective is that when given a real-life problem,
Sarah will identify the needed information to solve the problem. The third objective aligned with
this goal is to add or subtract rational numbers in order to solve the problem. Finally, the fourth
objective is Sarah will multiply or divide rational numbers in order to solve the problem.
Sarahs written language goal is aligned to the College and Career Ready Standard:

Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas and

information clearly and accurately through the effective selection, organization, and
analysis of content. Her goal is that by March 15, 2017, Sarah will be able to write an
expository essay that includes an introductory paragraph that previews at least three main ideas,
at least three body paragraphs that feature at least two explanatory strategies (e.g. definition,
comparison/contrast, cause/effect), a title and subheadings for each paragraph, and at least one
related graphic or multimedia for two our of three writing topics as measure by a teacher-created
rubric after reading at least three grade-level, informational texts on a specific topic. The first
objective for this goal is that Sarah will outline her essay to better organize her thoughts. The
second objective aligned to this goal is that Sarah will write a rough draft of her essay. Finally,
the third objective is that Sarah will write her essay that includes an introductory paragraph that
previews three main ideas, at least three body paragraphs, and at least two explanatory strategies.

IEP CASE STUDY

10

Although my mentor or myself did not write Sarahs social work goal I have provided the
information for this goal as well. The goal is that by March 2017, when Sarah is experiencing
frustration or anxiety during class time or other school contexts, Sarah will select a self-calming
strategy and demonstrate on-task behavior (e.g. engaging with teacher and peers, keeping eyes
on work) for 30 minutes in three out of four independent practices. The first objective is when
given direct instruction in strategies to manage emotions Sarah will use designated selfcalming/coping strategies to reduce anxiety or frustration in three out of four independent
practices. The second objective aligned with this goal is during direct instruction Sarah will
demonstrate on-task behavior for 30 minutes in three out of four independent practices.
II. D. Supplementary Aids and Services, Program Modifications, and Supports
Sarah receives multiple supplementary aids and services, program modifications, and
supports both inside the general education and outside of the general education setting. The first
instructional support that Sarah has is to be provided with a copy of student/teacher notes. The
service provider will make available copies of the teachers notes or another students notes,
which outlines necessary information from the lesson. This may be in advance of the lesson or
after the lesson has taken place but should be given in a timely manner to ensure the student can
complete assignments. Also, when in class Sarah should repeat and/or paraphrase information.
The service provider will check with Sarah and ask her to repeat or paraphrase the directions or
information given to ensure she understands it. If Sarah does not understand the instructions or
information then it should be repeated for her. The last instructional support that Sarah receives
is the use of visual supports.
Sarah receives two program modifications both inside and outside of the general
education setting. The first modification is the breakdown of assignments into smaller units. The

IEP CASE STUDY

11

service provider will ensure that Sarah is availed to support with assignments having many parts.
Additionally, periodically, Sarah will receive altered/modified assignments. The service provider
will avail Sarah to chunked information or will group information into small portions before it
is presented to her.
Sarah receives services in the forms of classroom instruction, career and technology
education with support and social work services. She is outside of general education for ten
sessions, forty minutes each, weekly, for a total of six hours and forty minutes each week. She is
inside general education for fifteen sessions, thirty minutes each, weekly, for a total of seven
hours and thirty minutes each week. Sarahs career and Tech. Ed. with Support services are
inside the general education setting for one session that is thirty minutes long each year. Finally,
her social work services are outside the general education setting once a week for thirty minutes.
Part III- Reflection
Overall, I would say the IEP meeting for Sarah was successful. The meeting was on
March 15, 2016, began on time, and took place in a conference room in the main office. As the
members entered the room they each took a seat around a rectangular table. There were no
seating arrangements pre assigned besides Ms. Kale who sat towards the front of the room in
order to connect her device up to the large overhead screen. Throughout the meeting Ms. Kale
displayed any documents such as the IEP on this screen to allow all team members to see
changes made and follow along each section we covered.
At the start of the meeting each member introduced him or herself and expressed their
role in Sarahs education and part in the meeting. The members that were at the team included
Ms. Kale, the Administrator/Designee, Mr. Santa the case manager and teacher for Sarahs math
class, Mr. Fish, the general educator and Sarahs reading teacher, the school psychologist Mr.

IEP CASE STUDY

12

Answorth, the speech/language pathologist Ms. Good, the school social worker Ms. Jones and
myself. Like mentioned previously, the names of each member involved were changed to protect
their identities. The parents were not in attendance but they were contacted by phone and
remained on the phone throughout the meeting. Because the parents were not present at the
meeting physically, they did not receive a copy of the procedural safeguards but they were
mailed home and the parents have also received a copy at earlier meetings.
Although there was no printed out agenda for this meeting, Ms. Kale made it very clear
from the start of the meeting what topics would be covered throughout. Her main role in the
meeting was to facilitate, guide topics, keep conversations on track if topics began to stray away,
and edit any documents on the computer.
After Ms. Kale discussed the major topics that would be covered she asked Mr. Santa to
begin the meeting by sharing the results of Sarahs educational assessment. After Mr. Santa
discussed the results of each section Ms. Kale would be sure to check with the parents to see if
they had any questions regarding the results. After all sections were reviewed, Mr. Santa
reiterated Sarahs overall strengths and needs for improvement. Mr. Santa also went over the
grade reports he received from Sarahs teachers and her grade in those classes.
Ms. Kale then asked Mr. Answorth to go over the results of the psychological assessment
that was conducted. Similarly to when Mr. Santa reviewed the results of the educational
assessment, Ms. Kale made sure to ask the parents if they had any questions regarding the results
after each section. Mr. Answorth discussed Sarahs overall strengths and areas of need in regards
to her psychological well being such as her anxiety and withdrawal.
After Mr. Answorth concluded going over the results of the assessment, Ms. Kale then
proceeded to ask Ms. Good to go over the results of the speech assessment. Ms. Good expressed

IEP CASE STUDY

13

that she believed Sarah no longer required speech services due to the fact that all of the services
she still needed could easily be implemented in class, meaning the speech pathologist was not
required. Ms. Good reassured the parents that she would be available if Sarah needed assistance
with the strategies she provided her with but did not think they needed to continue to meet
regularly.
Once all of the assessment results were reviewed Ms. Kale opened the floor to any of the
members to discuss any important information they needed to before beginning to evaluate and
revise Sarahs IEP. Mr. Fish began to discuss his concerns for Sarahs grade in his class but
stressed that he knew she could be successful as long as she is present, completes the work, and
asks for assistance when it is needed. Additionally, Mr. Santa and myself discussed Sarahs
progress in math and our fears of her attendance dropping again. Mr. Santa also discussed
Sarahs progress towards her IEP goals and I also discussed the informal assessments from math
and observations I conducted in math and language arts.
After Sarahs teachers spoke of her strengths and areas of need we began to go over her
IEP, make any corrects, add anything that needed to be added, etc. At this point the social worker
expressed that her goal about attendance was met and therefore we needed to add a new goal in
that regards.
Each section of the IEP was reviewed and the parents were asked if they had any
questions about any of the sections. Once we reached the end of the IEP Ms. Kale made sure to
ask the parents if they had any other comments or concerns before the meeting ended. The
parents made a few more comments regarding their hopes for Sarah. Finally, Ms. Kale informed
the parents that all of the documents would be printed out, signed, and mailed home for them to
sign as well. To conclude the meeting, Ms. Kale asked the members of the team if they had any

IEP CASE STUDY

14

other comments, concerns, etc. before thanking the parents for their time. At this point the
meeting had ended.
Throughout the meeting it was clear that all of the members involved wanted what was
best for Sarah, for her to succeed, and knew what worked and did not work for her in the
classroom. As a whole, we collaborated and provided input on what supplemental aids we have
seen work and not work, what accommodations she uses and doesnt use, what might work in
one class but not in another, and so on. We were able to use each others feedback and
collaborate in order to revise and create the best IEP possible for Sarah.
It is important to note that the IEP notice included all relevant information required by
IDEA, all of the appropriate persons were in attendance for this meeting, and the timelines for
evaluation/eligibility/IEP development were followed. Although her parent(s) were not
physically at the meeting, they were on the phone. Additionally, the parents received all
appropriate paperwork in the mail ten days prior to the meeting and even though the parent
originally canceled the meeting, this meeting day still fit within the required timeline.
Critique
Before the IEP meeting took place it was my job to informally observe Sarah, evaluate
her progress in math, and think about her strengths and areas of need. These were all things that I
was going to discuss during the meeting. During the IEP meeting I was able to discuss my
concerns with Sarah being absent more frequently recently and how she has been succeeding in
math but needs to improve on asking for help when she doesnt understand something.
Additionally, I discussed her strengths and weaknesses, such as her positive behavior but needs
some assistance to stay on task and complete the material. I was also able to give input on how
the student is doing overall in math class since I have been teaching in that class.

IEP CASE STUDY

15

I believe that overall I did very well for formally participating in my first IEP meeting. In
previous IEP meetings I have given my input on small things as conversations went on, but never
anything preplanned. Additionally, I believe that teaching and having Sarah in class helped me
get to know the student more personally and be able to evaluate some of her strengths and
weaknesses. It also made it easier to talk about her performance in the class since I have been
grading her work and I am able to see the progress she has made on her assignments.
Being able to informally observe Sarah in two different settings allowed me to compare
her behavior in the two classes and see how she behaved similarly and differently. I was also able
to see Sarah in a different manor than when I am teaching. I could see things that I dont
normally notice while I am teaching and/or working with her.
On the other hand, there are also areas I will need to improve for future IEP meetings.
Although I wrote down topics I wanted to cover during the meeting, I think I would have felt
better prepared to communicate during the meeting if I had actually practiced what I was going
to say. This would have allowed me to feel more confident with my words and showed my
preparation for the meeting to the other members and the parents. Also, in the future I would like
to participate more in the conversation. I tended to stick to what I wrote down and had planned to
say originally. However, there were times when I felt I had comments that I could have added to
the conversation but did not want to overstep any boundaries.
Collaborating with my mentor throughout the process helped me learn how to not only
write an IEP for a student but also participate in a meeting. By participating in this experience I
feel more prepared for working with the students on my future caseload. Receiving feedback
from my mentor following the meeting also allowed me to reflect on the experience and think
about what I did well on and what I need to improve on for the future.

IEP CASE STUDY

16

References
IDEA Regulation Requirements retrieved from:
http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/,root,dynamic,TopicalBrief,9,