David Reiner

SPED 498
IEP Case Study

Part I: IEP Process

Educators at New Town High School do an excellent job of creating detailed IEPs for all
students who need one, ensuring that each plan details what the student needs in order to be
successful. At New Town, the IEP process is completed in seven steps. These steps, in order of
occurrence, are pre-referral, referral, assessment, eligibility, development of the IEP,
implementation of the IEP, and review of the plan and student progress.
First, the pre-referral stage occurs. During this stage, interventions are implemented in
order to try and solve or alleviate a problem that a student is having. These observable issues
could be behavioral, academic, or both. Staff members look to document and explain the
difficulties and challenges faced by the student, the effectiveness of classroom accommodations
and/or modifications, the usefulness of interventions in the classroom, and the progress of the
student. This stage is useful for determining if a student needs special education services or if
their issues can be resolved in the typical general education setting.
If a students challenges persist beyond the pre-referral stage, the student is likely going
to be referred for special education services. . This step of the process can be initiated by the
parents of the child or a school staff member. By doing so, the referring party enlists the help of

an IEP team. Once a child has been referred to the team, they will begin to formulate a plan to
assess and evaluate the student.
Students who have been referred for special education services must be assessed to
determine several things. During this stage, it will be decided if the student has a disability,
whether special education services are required, and what specific services are necessary for the
child. For students over 16, the team will determine a potential need for transition services.
Professionals will administer formal tests that measure intelligence, academic ability and
achievement, vision and hearing, and possibly learning style. Less formal methods of
information gathering, such as observations in the school building or examining a portfolio of
student work, are also utilized. All of this information is gathered and compiled to create a
baseline of performance that will ultimately guide the development of an effective IEP.
Information from the assessment stage is used to identify students who do in fact have a
disability and qualify for services. For a student who has been found to have a disability
requiring special education services, those developing the IEP must find the eligibility of the
student for specific services. The full range of special education and related services needed is
necessary information. Educators need this information in order to plan for and ultimately deliver
exactly what the student needs to be successful in school.
After all screening, assessment, and determination of services is complete, the team will
develop the actual IEP. Parents and the IEP team work together to reach decisions concerning
appropriate education, services, and placement for the student. The knowledge gained from all
steps prior will be used to create a plan that allows the student to best access the general
education curriculum and contains goals for the student. The ultimate goal when creating an IEP
should be to ensure that a student has everything that he or she needs in order to have a fair and

appropriate education that supports their unique needs. Following the completion of the written
IEP, it becomes time for the plan to be implemented in the child's classes. Educators are expected
to use the IEP to guide their instruction. The teacher needs to have access to the IEP so that they
can provide the student with the proper accommodations and/or services. Implementation of an
IEP is a time where the team and the parents can see what is working, what is not, and if any
changes need to be made to the plan.
Finally, there is the review process that occurs for all students with IEPs. In Maryland,
the IEP needs to be reviewed at least one time per year. During these reviews, the team and
parents are able to discuss the students progress towards their goals as outlined in the plan, the
students overall academic performance, and any changes that may be necessary. Some parents
and teams choose to have more than one IEP review per year at their discretion. Reviews are
intended to keep all parties involved with the student on the same page and to ensure that the IEP
is working as intended.
During my time as an intern at New Town High School, I have been fortunate enough to
be a participant in two real IEP team meetings. These meetings were both concerning the same
tenth grade student and took place on February 4 and April 20, 2015. The meetings were a
pleasant and smooth experience. Both meetings started promptly at the scheduled time and all
necessary members of the team were in attendance. Once the meeting began, an agenda was
distributed to all members, the parent, and the student. During the actual meeting, members of
the team took turns presenting their information on the student. All members were given
adequate time to speak and to contribute anything that they needed. The student's current level of
performance in classes, standardized test results, and progress towards goals were points of
discussion. The IEP chair made sure to make sure that the family had no questions or concerns

before moving on to a new member of the team. I feel very fortunate because the team and
family clearly had the same goals in mind; the meetings were quick, to the point, and without
conflict. Each meeting was a smooth and pleasant experience that I am glad I was able to
witness.
Over the course of the two IEP meetings, I became familiar with the learning and
behavioral needs of the student as related to her disability. Behaviorally, the student has no
persistent issues, special needs, or a requirement for special education or related services.
Academically, the student has several needs. She receives several accommodations in the
classroom (including a human reader or audio recordings for tests, calculation devices in math,
and extended time on assignments) and requires special education supports and services in her
classes on a daily basis. In addition to the services the student receives in the general education
setting, she also receives instruction in math in an adapted class.

Part II: IEP Content

Background Info
This student was referred for special education services because of consistent struggles
and poor performance in her academic courses in school. These struggles were found across
multiple content areas and were most significant in the areas of math and reading. Despite her
desire to succeed and willingness to complete all tasks presented to her, the student was found to
be performing several grade levels below her current grade level. Her struggles were not a result
of cultural or linguistic differences, as the student was born and raised in the United States and

her entire family speaks English as their only language. Record reviews indicated that there is no
relevant information concerning her family history and her disability.
In conjunction with analyzing the background of the student, it is important to note the
learning and behavioral characteristics of the student. By speaking with her other teachers and by
observing the student in class, this information can be easily obtained. The student has no
chronic negative behaviors in the classroom. The student is nearly always engaged, alert, and
ready to work. She is quiet and generally remains on-task during instruction. In terms of her
learning, the student has characteristics of note. While she was and is a normally developing
child, she still showed significant delays in her academic development. Following the
administration of diagnostic assessments, the student was categorized as having a specific
learning disability. This diagnosis becomes evident through an analysis of test scores, both those
used in academic classes and during the assessment stage of the IEP process. In addition, it was
determined that the students least restrictive environment (LRE) at school is the general
education classroom.
The current levels of performance for the student are most recently reflected in results
from Brigance testing in 2014. This testing revealed that the student, who was in ninth grade at
the time, was below grade level in math. She functions at a sixth grade level without a calculator
and at an eighth grade level with a calculator. The student showed strength in basic addition in
subtraction, basic multiplication, adding/subtracting common denominator fractions, and number
sense. The student tested poorly on multi-step problems. In addition, the student received a score
of 414, in the Proficient range, for math.
The same Brigance testing also showed that the student functions at a sixth grade level in
the area of reading. She performed well with basic sight words, concrete and literal

interpretation, reading fluency, and reading schedule words without pictures. The student showed
weakness with reading comprehension, specifically with inferential interpretation.
In terms of the specific services that the student receives, this can be broken down into
two categories. The first can be categorized as the services that the student receives In General
Education. These services are given to the student in seven out of her eight classes, as needed,
throughout the entire school year. These services include accommodations (human reader or
audio recordings, calculators, extended time), supplementary aids (manipulatives, organizational
aids), and altered/modified assignments utilized by her classroom teachers. The other category of
services is listed as Outside General Education. This type of services is given two or three
times a week (depending on the AB schedule for any given week) during one class throughout
the entirety of the school year. For this class, the student is pulled out of the general education
setting and placed into an adapted setting. As per her IEP, [Student] will receive special
education classroom instruction via the inclusive education model, with the exception of the
adapted math class, which will take place for one hour and 30 minutes every other day on the
high school AB block schedule. The needs of the student are certainly met via the specific
services that she receives.
Content of IEP
Below are pictures of a snapshot of the students current IEP. Included in these pictures
are the goals for the student as set by the IEP team. The student has goals set for achievement in
both math and reading. For math, the goal is for the student to be able to apply concepts,
processes, and skills at grade level. The team determined that this goal was to be achieved with
80% accuracy and would be assessed via classroom-based assessment. Further, this goal was
broken down into two objectives. Objective one states that given mathematical word problems,

[Student] will be able to identify the question in the problem. Objective two states that given
mathematical word problems, [Student] will be able to make a plan to solve a problem. Both
objectives, keeping in line with the overall goal, are to be measured using classroom-based
assessment and the student is expected to show at least an 80% increase. The family of the
student will be notified of the progress towards these goals with quarterly progress reports.
For reading, the goal is that the student will be able to use strategies to demonstrate
understanding of the text to include inferential and analytical thinking at grade level. The goal
would be evaluated using classroom-based assessment and other informal measures and the
student is expected to complete the goal with 80% accuracy. As was the case with the math goal,
the reading goal is broken down into two objectives. Objective one indicates that the student
will be able to critically read and discuss texts representing diversity in content, culture,
authorship, and perspective, including areas such as race, gender, disability, religion, and
socioeconomic background in order to demonstrate comprehension for analytical and inferential
understanding. The team aimed to see 80% accuracy of this goal when assessed via classroombased assessment and other informal procedures. Objective two states that the student will be
able to discuss reactions to and ideas/information gained from reading experiences with adults
and peers in both formal and informal situations in order to demonstrate comprehension of
information to analyze and infer. Again, the team looked to see 80% accuracy through the use of
classroom-based assessments and other informal methods. Similar to the math goals, the progress
towards reading goals will be presented to the family of the student quarterly through progress
reports.

Part III: IEP Procedures and Reflection

For both IEP meetings that I attended, a notice of the meeting was sent to the parents of
the student two weeks prior to the date of the meeting. This was done to ensure that the parents
were notified at least ten days before the meeting, as is required by law. The notice included all
relevant information, including the proposed date, time, and location of the meeting, the purpose
of the meeting, and the required consent forms for the parents to complete. All parties involved,
meaning all team members and parents, were well aware of the meeting and its purpose in
advance. In addition to the notice of the meeting, parents were provided with a copy of the
procedural safeguards at the beginning of the school year before the first team meeting; this was
in compliance with IDEA which requires that parents receive this document at least once every
school year. The team was consistently professional from the beginning to the end of the IEP
process; timelines for assessment, IEP creation/development, implementation, etc. were done
following procedural guidelines found in IDEA.
At New Town, all IEP meetings are held in a dedicated IEP team room located in the
front office near the guidance offices. The space is an efficient room for holding team meetings;
its small enough to be intimate and for all members to be able to adequately interact, but not so

small that the room feels cramped. All those present at the meeting sit around an oval table such
that all members can see and actively engage one another.
All appropriate persons were in attendance at both meetings. The student, the students
father, the schools IEP chair, the students case manager and special education teacher, a general
education teacher, the students guidance counselor, and the school psychologist were all present
during the meetings. At the meeting in February, an additional general education teacher was
present. The seating arrangement for the two meetings were the same, if not extremely similar.
At the table, seated to my left was the student and, continuing in that direction, next to the
student was her father, the guidance counselor, the case manager/special education teacher, the
IEP chair, the school psychologist, and the students classroom teachers that were asked to
attend.
Both meetings started on time, if not a few minutes early. An agenda was distributed at
the very beginning of both meetings and was followed closely. It was outlined before anyone
spoke or reported on the student so that everyone was aware of what would be completed during
the meeting. The team was prepared, knew what was to be done in the meeting, and ensured that
all parties involved knew the same via the meeting schedule.
Everyone at the meeting had a specific role to fulfill. The IEP chair acted as a sort of
moderator or facilitator for the meeting. She ensured that all parties were given their chance to
speak and that the agenda was followed. Both the general education and special education
teachers reported on the student's progress with course work in their respective classes. The
special educator, who is also the case manager, updated the team on recent diagnostic testing that
had taken place. The guidance counselor, in the February meeting, made recommendations for
the student's fall schedule. The school psychologist had little to say, only because the student has

no behavioral issues or a psychological disorder. Each member of the team had a job to do and
did it well.
The amount of collaboration between team members was excellent. Everyone played a
distinct role, but still came together to work towards a common objective. All people at the
meeting were given the opportunity to speak and to contribute. Communication was open and
honest, with respect given to whomever was speaking. It was evident that all team members,
both the family of the student and the school staff, valued the ideas and input of the others in the
room . It was clear that the team members, the family, and the student are all on the same page in
terms of wanting what's best for the student and have common goals.
Following each meeting, I found it useful to reflect and to critique my role during the
meeting. During my first meeting on February 4, I had little to no role in the meeting. Being not
only my first meeting for this student, but also my first at NTHS, I was apprehensive. I was
thankful that the parent and team were willing to have me sit in on the meeting. In all honesty, I
wanted to experience the process more as an observer more than a full-on participant for this
meeting. I had only seen the student for a few classes at this point in my internship, so I really
wouldn't have had much of substance to contribute to the team. In any case, I felt good that I got
to sit in on a real meeting and be treated as though I belonged.
When I sat in on my second meeting, I became a more active participant. While I was
certainly not the most vocal participant, I did manage to contribute to this meeting. When asked
about the student's behavior in class, I took the opportunity to share my thoughts. I was able to
share with the team my thoughts on the student's behavior, attitude, motivation, and success in
her English class. I based my comments on my observations as a student intern over the course
of several months. Though I feel like I didn't do much at the meeting, it certainly did feel good to

be more than a body in the room. It felt great to be able to share my feelings about what a
pleasure the student is to have in class to her teachers and especially her parent. Despite the fact
that not all IEP meetings are as easy and smooth as what I experienced at New Town, I'm both
anxious and excited to become a real member of a team.