Transcript SLD DETERMINATION: INITIAL REFERRALS

LISD ELIGIBILITY AND EVALUATION
REQUIREMENTS
SPECIAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
AUGUST 23,2012
LISA HORTON, LEAD ASSESSMENT SPECIALIST
AGENDA
Best Practice Guidelines for Evaluations
Texas Professional Educational Diagnosticians
Board of Registry, Inc
1. Observe the student in various settings prior to the administration of
tests.
2. Select valid and appropriate evaluation instruments based on student
needs and strengths. Examiners should select instruments with which
they are proficient.
3. Consider all suspected conditions and components of the evaluation.
4. Consult with other professionals throughout the evaluation process.
5. Create a strong foundational evaluation that will be used to develop an
individual instructional program.
6. Construct a report that accurately reflects the uniqueness of the
individual student.
7. Consider both formal and informal evaluation data.
8. Encourage the evaluation team to function as a cohesive unit, focusing
on the whole child.
Best practices continued
9. Encourage active and appropriate parent participation in the
evaluation process. Ensure that all communications with parents
are clearly understood.
10. Convey honest, accurate information with integrity, empathy
and respect for confidentiality.
11. Use language that all members of the evaluation team
understand.
12. Meet with parents regarding new information prior to IEP/ARD
meetings to review the evaluation and ARD procedures.
13. Adhere to high ethical standards.
14. Develop and maintain a congenial working relationship with
other professionals.
15. Engage in continuous education to increase knowledge of the
field and enhance job performance.
16. Be knowledgeable of language acquisition history.
Region 18 Legal Framework
http://fw.esc18.net/Display/Webforms/LandingPage
 Lewisville ISD District Code- 061 902
Categories of Disability
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Specific Learning Disability
Intellectual Disability
Non Categorical Early Childhood
Auditory Impairment
Visual Impairment
Multiple Disabilities
Traumatic Brain Injury
Orthopedic Impairment
Emotional Disturbance
Other Health Impairment
Speech or Language Impairment
Autism
Deaf Blind
LISD : Identification of :
SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY
(SLD)
SLD will be based on an integrated model
approach combining Response to Intervention
(RtI) and cognitive processing assessment
•
+
TEA GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
 The determination of SLD must be made
through the use of professional judgment,
including consideration of multiple
information/data sources to support
eligibility determination
 Written report must include the basis for
making the determination.
RIOT METHOD
R-Review of Records
I-Interviews
O-Observation
T-Tests
FOUR QUESTIONS WILL GUIDE
THE ASSESSMENT SPECIALIST
IN DETERMINING SLD
1. Does the student exhibit a pattern of
cognitive strengths and weaknesses?
2. Does the student have a normative deficit
in academic achievement?
3. Is there a relationship between the
cognitive deficits and academic deficits?
4. Is there evidence of functional
impairment?
1. DOES THE STUDENT EXHIBIT A PATTERN OF
COGNITIVE STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES?
Students considered having a condition of a SLD must have
significant cognitive deficits that occur within an otherwise welldeveloped profile of cognitive abilities.
A student exhibiting a “flat” profile should NOT be considered for
SLD eligibility as they do not demonstrate a pattern of strengths
and weaknesses as required in the federal definition. (C.F.R.
§300.311)
COGNITIVE TESTING
The Assessment Specialist will complete a FULL
COGNITIVE PROCESSING EVALUATION AND
DETERMINE ABILITIES:
MUST INCLUDE AT MINIMUM THESE 7 G’s
 Gf Gc Glr Ga Gsm Gv Ga
 Crystallized Intelligence (Gc): acquired
knowledge
 Long Term Retrieval (Glr) : ability to take in
and store information , then retrieve it quickly
using association
 Short-Term Memory (Gsm) : ability to
apprehend and hold information and use
within a few seconds
 Visual Processing (Gv): ability to think about
and generate, perceive, analyze, synthesize,
store , retrieve, manipulate , transform, and
think with visual patterns and stimuli
 Fluid Reasoning (Gf): problem solving type
of intelligence
 Auditory Processing (Ga): ability to
perceive, analyze and synthesize patterns
among auditory stimuli
 Processing Speed (Gs): the ability to
fluently and automatically perform
cognitive tasks, especially when under
pressure to maintain focused attention and
concentration
Overall Cognitive Functioning
 Students considered having a condition of a SLD
must have significant cognitive deficits that occur
within an otherwise well-developed profile of
cognitive abilities
 This well developed profile must reflect evidence of
average or better functioning (i.e. standard scores
generally > 90) in cognitive domains that are not as
highly correlated with the presenting problem.
 A student exhibiting a “flat” profile must NOT be
considered for SLD Eligibility as they do not
demonstrate a pattern of strengths and weaknesses as
required in the federal definition. (C.F.R. §300.311)
When using the WJ III:
Must have 1 or more areas of intracognitive discrepancy/variance.
When using the WISC IV:
A pattern of strengths and weaknesses is
illustrated by a statistical difference
between 2 index scores as indicated by
Base Rate of 10% or less.
Non Unitary Scores
 Additional testing may be necessary when non-unitary




“G’s” score are evident. (Unitary as it relates to cognitive
processes - When the highest & lowest subtest scores do
not exceed 1.5 standard deviations).
What does non-unitary look like:
On the WJ 3 more than 22 points between 2 G’s (1.5+
standard deviation) would be considered non-unitary and
additional testing in the weaker area is recommended.
For example-Glr 80 Gc is 103. Additional testing to address
Glr is needed.
KABC and WISC-with a mean of 10 and standard deviation
of 3, a factor or index would be non-unitary if there is a
difference of 5 or more points.
2. DOES THE STUDENT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT and
NORMATIVE DEFICIT IN ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT?
A PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
•FORMAL ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
•COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF CUM RECORDS
•CBAS, STATE ASSESSMENT,
•RTI, PARENT, TEACHER, STUDENT INTERVIEWS
•CLASSROOM PERFORMANCE OVER TIME +1-3 YEARS
Assessment Specialist will
complete a global assessment of
ALL academic areas.
STANDARD SCORES OF 84 OR LESS
A normative academic weakness is one in
which standard scores are more than one and
half standard deviations below the mean.
READING
Basic Reading: For suspected deficit in Basic Reading, administer
WJIII, WIAT II, or Woodcock Reading Mastery.
Reading Fluency: For a suspected deficit in reading fluency WIAT
3, GORT 4, or other comprehensive reading fluency test
Reading Comprehension: For a suspected deficit in reading
comprehension, the GORT-4, WIAT 3, WJ III Achievement, KTEA II
or Woodcock Reading Mastery Test will be used.
MATH
Math Calculations and Math Reasoning:
For a suspected disability in math, all subtests
representing the Operations or Applications
Cluster from KeyMath, WJIII or WIAT III will be used.
WRITTEN EXPRESSION
Written Expression: For a suspected deficit in
written expression the WJ III Written Expression
Cluster, WIAT III Written Expression, OWLS WE
or the TOWL-4 will be used.
LISTENING COMP/ORAL EXPRESSION
Listening Comprehension and/or Oral Expression: For a suspected
deficit, the OWLS, WJ III, WIAT III will be used.
A referral for a speech language evaluation is not required for a
student to be identified as SLD in either listening comprehension
and/or oral expression unless the standard score obtained on the
OWLS is 78 or less. If SS is 78 or less referral is made for a speech
language evaluation.
3. IS THERE A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
THE COGNITIVE DEFICITS AND
ACADEMIC DEFICITS?
NORMATIVE WEAKNESS SS <84 IN BOTH A
COGNITIVE AREA AND CORRELATING ACADEMIC
AREA must be evident.
In addition, the Assessment Specialists reviews a
variety of sources including, but not limited to RtI data,
parent information, teacher, student interviews,
criterion-referenced measures, CBA,s TAKS,
Benchmarks, reading fluency probes and other district
measures to determine functional implications .
4. IS THERE EVIDENCE OF FUNCTIONAL
IMPAIRMENT?
Functional Impairment:=educational need
Whether the pattern of strengths and weaknesses is
consistent with the condition of a SLD is determined by the
assessment specialist and the recommendation is made to
the ARD Committee to establish a SLD.
The ARD Committee may accept the recommendation of
SLD, or reject and ask for additional evaluation.
CLASSROOM OBSERVATION
 The Assessment Specialist must ensure that the child
is observed in the child’s learning environment
(including the regular classroom setting or natural
environment if preschool aged) to document the
child’s academic performance and behavior in the
areas of suspected difficulty. Best practice suggests
the Assessment Specialist complete the observation,
but any member of the evaluation team may be
assigned to complete the observation (CFR 300.310).
***Exclusionary Factors ***
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The multi-disciplinary team has determined that the
findings are not primarily the result of visual, hearing, or
motor disability
mental retardation
emotional disturbance
cultural factors
environmental or economic disadvantage
or limited English proficiency;
and is not due to lack of appropriate instruction in
reading and mathematics.
INTERVENTIONS
The relationship between the specific
cognitive and specific academic
weaknesses and the impact the cognitive
impairment has on learning must be
described and interventions provided.
REEVALUATION SLD
 If there are two previous complete evaluations (IQ to include




WJ-III (1-7; 11-17); WISC-IV (1-10) or other district approved
FULL batteries) with at least one evaluation in grade 6 or above,
further formal cognitive evaluation is not required unless
requested by the ARD committee.
For those students requiring re-evaluation there must be
evidence of continued functional impairment (according to
objective data sources such as criterion-referenced measures,
curriculum based assessments , TAKS, benchmarks, reading
probes, and fluency probes, and parent, teacher, and student
interviews).
The scope of evaluation is to be decided by the ARD committee.
LISD is obligated to evaluate if parent requests.
Achievement testing is required in the area of eligibility but is
not limited to the area of eligibility.
RE-EVALUATION CONTINUED
 Evaluation/reevaluation must occur when:
 Student qualified in reading, but has not passed TAKS math. It would




then be necessary to consider testing in the areas of reading and
math.
Student receiving resource instruction in any subject must be reevaluated in that area.
Student is failing math, reading or English/LA, in conjunction with poor
Benchmarks and CBA’s must be evaluated. Re-evaluation must also
occur if student is failing a content area class (science or social
studies).
Student has failed TAKS (or who has been identified as at risk for
failing) in reading, writing, or math must be evaluated in the area of
failure.
A student can only be REEDed forward one time and then an new FIE
must be requested and completed. The scope of the evaluation is
determined by the REED/ARD Committee.
DISMISSING STUDENTS
 For those students being considered for dismissal of the SLD
eligibility, a re-evaluation is required. Caution must be
exercised when determining the scope of the re-evaluation for
students on modified achievement standards.
 The scope of reevaluation is determined by the ARD committee
and based upon the comprehensiveness of previous evaluation
information.
 The same criteria used to establish initial eligibility (i.e. simpledifference method) must be considered for dismissal with
emphasis on the area of functional impairment.
 If students are reevaluated and do not appear to qualify the
Assessment Specialist must consult with their discipline
director to review the case and determine additional actions.
A FEW THOUGHTS ABOUT THE FIE
 If the paragraph says more about the
subtest and less about the student, it’s not
a good paragraph.
 Test observations should be more of a
focus in our reports and specific to the
student’s performance on the subtests.
 FIE should have multiple sources of data,
sources and methods
 All aspects of conducting the FIE are
critical-Your product reflects you as a
professional.
SLD Exclusionary Factors
 The ARD Committee must determine:
“..that the findings are not primarily the result of visual,
hearing, or motor disability; mental retardation;
emotional disturbance; cultural factors;
environmental or economic disadvantage; or limited
English proficiency; and is not due to lack of
appropriate instruction in reading and mathematics.”
Peer Evaluation Review Committee
~PERC~







Peer Evaluation Review Committees (PERC) will review case profiles of students who do
not meet the condition of a learning disability using LISD’s SLD Determination process,
but whose cognitive and academic profile requires further professional review and
consideration.
The PERC will review case profiles sent electronically to the Lead who will disseminate to
PERC Teams for review.
Use only the student ID number on all Compu-Score reports and PERC Request form.
The Assessment Specialist completes the Peer Evaluation Review request form,
Compuscore reports, RtI data, observations, and any other pertinent information and
sends electronically to the Lead Assessment Specialist. At least 3 school days should be
allotted for review and feedback.
The Lead Assessment Specialist assign cases to a PERC Team who will review all
information and determine if the data presented supports a diagnosis of a specific
learning disability.
Key points to remember: The student ‘s profile must exhibit a pattern of cognitive
strengths and weaknesses that adversely impacts academic achievement and is not due
to sensory, motor, mental retardation, emotional disturbance or cultural and language
diversity.
SLD will only be considered if other suspected disabilities have been ruled out, i.e. OHI,
ED, etc.
PERC and DAG Members 2012-13
Committee Members for 2012-13 School Year:
 Jennifer Vasquez
 Hope Currin
 Dezra Edwards
 Leslie Flisowski
 Diane Fox
 Michelle Hall
 Jake Hampton
2. INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY
 An Intellectual Disability is categorized by significantly sub-
average intellectual functioning measured by standardized,
individually administered test of cognitive ability. The
overall test score is at least two standard deviations below
the mean, when taking into consideration the standard
error of measurement (SEM) of the test.
 In addition, a person identified with an intellectual
disability must exhibit concurrent deficits in at least two of
the following areas of adaptive behavior: Communication,
Self-Care, Home Living, Social/Interpersonal Skills, Use of
Community Resources, Self-Direction, Functional Academic
Skills, Work, Leisure, Health, and Safety.
Intellectual Disability cont.
• Concurrently exhibits deficits in at least two of the
following areas of adaptive behavior
– Communication, Self-Care, Home Living
– Social/Interpersonal Skills
– Use of Community Resources, Self-Direction
– Functional Academic Skills
– Work, Leisure, Health, and Safety
• No specific score noted in law about adaptive
behavior.
– Deficit? Defined by age expectations
– Moderately Low or Low?
ID continued
 It’s imperative that identification be made before age
18 to ensure students receive appropriate transition
services to adult agencies.
 If using the Vineland II, it is important to use the
Survey Form either by itself (children not in school) or
in conjunction with the Teacher Survey.
 Sound clinical judgment must be used when selecting
test instruments for very low functioning students
who cannot take an individualized intelligence test.
3. Non-categorical Early Childhood
 Non-categorical. A student between the ages of 3-5 who is
evaluated as having intellectual disability , emotional
disturbance, a specific learning disability, or autism may be
described as non-categorical early childhood.
 The child with a NCEC category of disability must be
reevaluated prior to turning age 6.
 The FIE must clearly identify a category of disability and state
that the child is NCEC-AU or NCEC-ED. NCEC by itself is not a
category of disability.
 OHI and SI cannot be considered for a NCEC eligibility.
4. Auditory Impairment
 Upon receipt of a referral for auditory deficits, contact
the teacher of the Auditory Impaired immediately.
 Invite the AI Teacher to the Informed Consent Meeting
but proceed with consent if unable to attend.
 Secure Release of Confidential Information to allow
district personnel to exchange information with
outside agencies.
 Email the district contract audiologist with any
questions regarding the evaluation.
Auditory Impairment continued
 AI Teacher will secure the following documents:
Part A- Otological completed by the ENT
Part B- Audiological completed by the Audiologist
 Upon receipt of Part A and B, the AI Teacher will notify
the Assessment Specialist of results and make
recommendations for testing accommodations.
 The Assessment Specialist does not test until these
recommendations have been made.
 Part C- Communication will be completed by the AI
teacher and if necessary the SLP.
Auditory Impairment continued
 The AI Teacher must be at ALL ARDS for students being
considered or identified as having an Auditory
Impairment.
 If not in attendance, it isn’t a legal ARD meeting.
 Add the “Audiological Functioning” section to the FIE
Template in ARM on all evaluations where AI is
evaluating.
5. Visual Impairment
 Upon receipt of a referral for Visual Impairment,
contact the teacher of the Visual Impaired
immediately.
 A State Eye Exam must be secured from a licensed
ophthalmologist or optometrist stating the child has
a progressive medical condition that will result in no
vision or a serious visual loss after correction; or has
no vision or has a serious visual loss after correction;
 And a functional vision evaluation and a learning
media assessment indicate that the child has a need
for special education.
Visual Impairment Continued
 Invite the VI Teacher to the Informed Consent Meeting but
proceed with consent if unable to attend.
 Secure Release of Confidential Information to allow district
personnel to exchange information with outside agencies.
 The VI teacher will make recommendations to the
Assessment Specialist as to any accommodations needed
to conduct the evaluation. No testing can begin until
the Functional Vision and Learning Media
Assessment are completed by the VI teacher.
 The VI teacher will complete the functional
vision evaluation and learning media assessment.
Visual Impairment continued
 The VI Teacher must be at ALL ARDS for students being
considered or identified as having a Visual
Impairment.
 If not in attendance, it isn’t a legal ARD meeting.
 Add the “Vision Functioning” section to the FIE
Template in ARM on all evaluations where VI is
evaluating.
6. MULTIPLE DISABILITIES
 Multiple disabilities means concomitant impairments
(such as Intellectual Disability and Orthopedic
impairment), the combination of which causes such
severe educational needs that they cannot be
accommodated in special education programs solely
for one of the impairments. Multiple disabilities does
not include deaf-blindness.
 The disabilities severely impair the child’s
performance in two or more of the following areas:
psychomotor, self help, social and emotional,
cognition or communication.
Multiple Disabilities continued
 The FIE must document the justification for the
recommendation of Multiple Disabilities by including a
statement in the Consideration of Special Education
Disability section of the FIE.
 A student with a specific learning disability and speech
impairment would not be identified with MD. Other
examples that would not meet MD criteria would be
OHI (ADHD) LD and SI.
 The disabilities are expected to continue indefinitely
and severely impair performance in two or more
areas:
7. Traumatic Brain Injury
 A child may be considered to be a child with a traumatic
brain injury (TBI) if:
 The child has an acquired injury to the brain caused by an
external physical force; The injury results in total or partial
functional disability or psychosocial impairment, or both;
 Applies to both open or closed head injuries resulting in
impairments in one or more areas: such as cognition,
memory, language, attention, reasoning, abstract thinking,
problem solving, sensory perceptual and motor abilities,
psychosocial behavior, physical functions, information
processing, and speech.
 It is not congenital, degenerative, or induced by birth
trauma.
TBI continued
 The traumatic brain injury adversely affects the child's
educational performance; and
 By reason of the traumatic brain injury, the child
needs special education and related services.
 Must have the Disability Evaluation Report signed by a
licensed physician. This form is found in Forms Packet
in SEAS.
8. Orthopedic Impairment
 The term orthopedic impairment includes:
Impairments from other causes (e.g., cerebral palsy,
amputations, and fractures or burns that cause
contractures); Impairments caused by a congenital
anomaly; Impairments caused by disease (e.g.,
poliomyelitis, bone tuberculosis);
 and the severe orthopedic impairment adversely
affects a child's educational performance; and by
reason of the severe orthopedic impairment, the
child needs special education and related services.
Orthopedic Impairment cont.
 A Disability Evaluation Report (DER)signed by a
licensed physician must be received in order for a
child to be considered for special education eligibility
under Orthopedic Impairment.
9. Emotional Disturbance
 Criteria determination for eligibility under Emotional




Disturbance is established by the LSSP for Lewisville ISD.
The LSSP is invited to all informed consent meetings when
a psychological evaluation is being requested.
If the LSSP is unable to attend, the Assessment Specialist
must indicate that an ED eligibility may be the result of the
evaluation.
In general, a cognitive evaluation is completed as part of
the initial referral for students suspected of having an
Emotional Disturbance.
In most cases, a global assessment of all academic areas
will be completed as part of the FIE when ED is suspected.
10. Other Health Impairment
 OHI-ADHD
 For all students suspected of having OHI for ADHD, it is
necessary to request a psychological evaluation. If the LSSP
determines the student demonstrates characteristics of
ADHD, they will state in their report and make a
recommendation for an OHI.
 Always invite the LSSP to the Informed Consent Meeting if
a psychological evaluation is being requested.
 At the Informed Consent Meeting, secure Consent for
Release of Confidential Information to share with the
student’s primary care physician.
OHI (for ADHD) continued
 Inform parent that the results of the evaluation will be
shared with the physician and the physician’s input will be
sought for ARD Committee consideration.
 As soon as it is apparent that the LSSP’s recommendation
will be that the student meets the diagnostic criteria for
ADHD, the Assessment Specialist sends cover letter, copy
of FIE documenting ADHD, blank OHI form and Consent for
Release of Information to the child’s physician.
 If, and only if, the parent states they cannot afford to pay
for a visit to their child’s physician, the campus LSSP will
make arrangements with the district contracted physician
for a one time visit.
OHI for other than ADHD
 The Assessment Specialist is responsible for ensuring
OHI form received is completed, has no blanks and is
signed by a physician.
 The Assessment Specialist will request that all fax
copies received have the original signed copy mailed
to the campus to place in the student’s SEAS folder.
 A new OHI form is required every 3 years. Consult
with campus director for exceptions.
 It is never appropriate to hand out an OHI Eligibility
form to the parent.
11. Autism
 New Autism Guidelines are being drafted at this time.
 What we know: Campus Diagnostician must
participate in the evaluation of all students suspected
of having autism.
 Assessment specialists having more than one campus
must arrange their schedule so they are at each
campus on either a Tuesday or Thursday.
 Formal cognitive assessment should be attempted on
all initial evaluations where autism is suspected.
 Formal adaptive behavior must be conducted on all
initial evaluation where autism is suspected.
12. Deaf-Blindness






A student with deaf-blindness is one who has been determined to meet the criteria for
deaf-blindness:
(A) meets the eligibility criteria for auditory impairment specified in subsection (c)(3)
of this section and visual impairment specified in subsection (c)(12) of this section; or
(B) meets the eligibility criteria for a student with a visual impairment and has a
suspected hearing loss that cannot be demonstrated conclusively, but a
speech/language therapist, a certified speech and language therapist, or a licensed
speech language pathologist indicates there is no speech at an age when speech would
normally be expected;
(C) has documented hearing and visual losses that, if considered individually, may
not meet the requirements for auditory impairment or visual impairment, but the
combination of such losses adversely affects the student's educational performance; or
(D) has a documented medical diagnosis of a progressive medical condition that will
result in concomitant hearing and visual losses that, without special education
intervention, will adversely aff.ect the student's educational performance.
The combination of auditory and visual impairments causes such severe communication
and other developmental and education needs that they cannot be accommodated in
special education programs solely for children with deafness or children with blindness;
and
13. Speech or Language Impairment
 Speech or language impairment means a communication disorder, such as
stuttering, impaired articulation, a language impairment, or a voice
impairment, that adversely affects a child ’ s educational performance.
 The multidisciplinary team that collects or reviews evaluation data in
connection with the determination of a student's eligibility based on a speech
impairment must include a certified speech and hearing therapist, a certified
speech and language therapist, or a licensed speech/language pathologist.
SI with Additional Supports
 Only Students Who Are Suspected of Being in Need of Additional
Special Ed Supports and Services
 The FIE for a student who has been tested by a speech pathologist
without additional evaluation(s) and identified as Speech Impaired
does not have the in-depth evaluation(s) required in cognition,
behavior, and academics to determine the need for supports and
services other than speech therapy. Because services and placement
are based upon evaluation, students may not receive additional sp ed
supports and services without a full individual evaluation by the
diagnostician and other appropriate evaluation staff.
 The comprehensive FIE would need to contain specific data and a
summary indicating there is a need for additional supports and
services before the ARD Committee could put those in place.
SI with additional supports continued
 Steps when considering the need for additional sp ed supports and







services for SI only students:
Step I –
Set up a staffing with the campus diagnostician and other appropriate
personnel (Psychologist, OT, etc.) to discuss the needs of the student
and establish exactly what needs to be done.
Step II –
In collaboration with the diagnostician schedule a REED/ARD and
request a full evaluation to include ______________ (whatever
additional testing is determined to be necessary for the student).
At this point the diagnostician becomes the case manager for the
student.
Step III –
Diagnostician and other evaluation personnel complete their
evaluation(s).
SI with additional supports continued
 Step IV –






Schedule ARD to review evaluation(s).
If the student qualifies for other supports and services the ARD
Committee must:
Put in place an instructional IEP designating the classes the student
requires the additional supports in.
Develop any additional goals/objectives to specifically address the
needs identified in the comprehensive FIE.
The diagnostician will remain the case manager and a sp ed teacher
will become the contact teacher for the student.
If the student does not qualify for additional supports and services:
the SLP becomes the case manager again after the ARD that
determines no additional supports and/or services are necessary.
Evaluation Requirements
Medically Fragile
Severe Cognitive Disabilities
Dyslexia
English Language Learners
Medically Fragile
 Medically fragile refers to a student receiving special education




and related services who is:
in the age range of birth to 22 years, and
has a serious, ongoing illness or a chronic condition that has
lasted or is anticipated to last at least 12 or more months or has
required at least one month of hospitalization, and that requires
daily, ongoing medical treatments and monitoring by
appropriately trained personnel which may include parents or
other family members, and
requires the routine use of medical device or of assistive
technology to compensate for the loss of usefulness of a body
function needed to participate in activities of daily living, and
lives with ongoing threat to his or her continued well-being.
Medically Fragile
The following are some examples of conditions that could be regarded as meeting the
definition of "medically fragile." This is not an exhaustive list. Ventilator dependence,
tracheotomy dependence/breathing through tracheostomy tube, nutritional difficulties
causing gastrostomy tube dependence, bronchial or tracheal malacia, congestive heart
problems, life threatening respiratory infections, apnea monitoring, kidney dialysis,
conditions requiring suctioning of lung and throat, or state of health is tenuous to the
point of being life threatening.
 Students with medically fragile disabilities require an intensive individual education
program of special education services that includes specially designed instruction,
related services, assistive technology, school health services, and/or other services
required for the provision of a free appropriate public education. Although services are
frequently provided in a self-contained instructional setting, they may also include
activities in other academic and non-academic inclusive settings. A multi-disciplinary
team consisting of the student's parents, educational specialists, and medical specialists
in the areas in which the student demonstrates problems should work together to plan
and coordinate necessary services.
 Medically Fragile is documented using the ARD Supplement found in Forms Packet in
SEAS.

Severe Cognitive Disabilities







The determination of severe cognitive disability is an ARD committee responsibility and is not linked
to a specific disability. The student must have a documented cognitive disability that affects
intellectual potential. Traditionally, this includes students with severe to profound cognitive
impairments or mental retardation. They may also have additional significant disabilities, including
physical impairments, sensory losses, behavior problems, and a variety of medical problems.
Students with severe cognitive disabilities may exhibit a wide range of characteristics, depending on
the combination and severity of disabilities and the students age, that may include, but are not
limited to, the following.
Limited speech or communication;
Difficulty in basic physical mobility;
Tendency to forget skills through disuse;
Trouble generalizing skills from one situation to another; and/or
A need for support in major life activities (e.g., domestic, leisure, community use, vocational).
Students with severe cognitive disabilities and multiple disabilities typically require an intensive
individual education program of special education services that includes specially designed
instruction, related services, assistive technology, school health services, and/or other services
required for the provision of a free appropriate public education. Although services are frequently
provided in a self-contained instructional setting, they may also include activities in other academic
and non-academic inclusive settings. A multi-disciplinary team consisting of the student's parents,
educational specialists, and medical specialists in the areas in which the student demonstrates
problems should work together to plan and coordinate necessary services.
IDENTIFYING DYSLEXIA
 According to the TEA Dyslexia Handbook, Revised
2007, Updated 2010, “the primary difficulties of a
student identified as having dyslexia occur in
phonemic awareness and manipulation, single-word
decoding, reading fluency, and spelling. Secondary
consequences of dyslexia may include difficulties in
reading comprehension and/or written expression.
These difficulties are unexpected for the student’s
age, educational level or cognitive abilities.
Additionally, there is a family history of similar
difficulties”.
DYSLEXIA CONTINUED
 Using the results of the evaluation and the
Characteristics Profile of Dyslexia Chart, the
Assessment Specialist determines if the data supports
an educational identification of dyslexia. If the data
supports an identification of dyslexia, a statement
must be included in the Summary section of the FIE.
In addition, the FIE must include recommendations
addressing appropriate reading instruction in the
areas of decoding, encoding, word recognition,
vocabulary, fluency and comprehension.
DYSLEXIA TESTING GUIDELINES WHEN
DYSLEXIA IS SUSPECTED

1. “Speech only” student is referred for MTA screening: A REED/Brief ARD is

held to determine scope of the evaluation based on student need to determine

eligibility of dyslexia and/or LD. Notice is given and consent is obtained.

2. Speech student, who is up for re-evaluation and also receives MTA and is not

being successful or more problems are suspected by the speech therapist or MTA

teacher: Testing is completed by the Diagnostician.

3. Speech student who is up for re-evaluation with MTA and is being successful:

Testing is completed by the MTA teacher

4. Regular education student is referred to special education and MTA screening:

Testing is completed by the Diagnostician

5. Student is in MTA and is not progressing: Student is referred to special

education. MTA teacher shares previous test scores with the Diagnostician and

the Diagnostician decides what additional assessment is necessary.

6. Regular education student is referred to Special Education and DNQs but

Dyslexia is suspected: Student is referred to MTA and the Diagnostician and the

MTA teacher together decide who will finish any additional testing.

7. Student is in MTA and a re-evaluation for MTA is due: Student is tested by

the MTA teacher

8. Student is in MTA and is also a Sp Ed student. Student is doing well in MTA

and is up for re-evaluation. MTA teacher will complete the GORT when it is not

a three year-reevaluation or no special ed testing has been requested.

9. A regular education dyslexia teacher or the dyslexia assessment person or

coordinator will be consulted concerning MTA placement prior to the ARD.
English Language Learners
REFERRAL AND EVALUATION PROCEDURES
SY 2012-13
Intranet: ELL
Types of Referrals
Campus EE Referrals
with ESL /Bilingual
Programs
Campus EE Referrals
w/o
ESL/Bilingual
Programs
ECI Referrals
Initial School Age
REFERRAL
 ALWAYS Review the Home Language Survey (HLS)
first!!
 If language other than English is noted, the referral
packet MUST include information from the Oral
Language Proficiency Testing (OLPT) or the LPAC
Summary if school age.
 If this is not included, contact the RtI Chair and ask to
have this information submitted.
Preschool (EE) OLP Testing
 At intake, the HLS is completed by parents.
 If language other than English is indicated on HLS, the
AS/SLP will refer the student to the ELL office for Oral
Language Proficiency Testing by completing the top
portion of the OLP Testing Request form and faxing to
the ELL Director followed up by a phone call.
EARLY EDUCATION CAMPUS REFERRALS
 At intake The HLS is completed by parents. Only one
HLS is ever completed and original given to campus to
be secured in Cumulative folder after the ARD/IEP
Meeting.
 For campuses with ESL/Bilingual Programs, the AS/SLP
will complete the top portion of the OLPT Form and
submit to appropriate campus personnel who will
then conduct the OLP Testing.
 This form is returned to the AS/SLP.
OLP EVALUATION REQUEST (INTRANET)
EE Campus Referrals without
ESL/Bilingual Programs
 The AS/SLP will refer the student to the ESL/Bilingual
office at the Annex for OLPT prior to conducting any
evaluation.
 AS/SLP completes the top of the form, faxes to the
Annex, follows up with a phone call.
 Annex personnel will determine if OLPT is conducted
at Annex or campus.
 Once completed, the OLPT is placed in the referral
packet by the AS/SLP.
ECI Referrals
 After the 120 day meeting, the LISD Sp Ed Rep will
complete the top portion of the OLPT form and fax to
the Annex.
 If possible the OLP Testing is conducted at the Annex
and the green folder submitted to Special Ed where it
will be attached to the referral and sent to the
assigned campus.
 IMPORTANT~ immediately upon determination of
eligibility, the green folder is given to the LPAC
representative.
INITIAL ARD MEETINGS AND LEP STATUS
 For students where LEP Status has not been
determined, the following must occur:
 The Initial ARD/IEP Committee in collaboration with
the LPAC will determine LEP Status at the Initial
ARD/IEP Meeting with the key ARD and key LPAC
members present.
 Collaboration and decisions will be documented using
the “LEP ENTRY” form found on the Special Ed
Intranet Website.
Determining LEP Status on any 3 year
olds.
 LEP status will be determined at the Initial ARD
meeting on any 3 year old whose HLS indicates a
language other than English.
 Determination of ELL services is made at the Initial
ARD meeting in collaboration with the LPAC.
 If the student is unable to be tested at age 3, the child
may be retested prior to entering Kindergarten if LPAC
recommends new testing be completed.
 Give consideration to PreK if student is eligible. The
PreK flyer is given at the Initial ARD meeting for all 3
and 4 year olds.
INITIAL SCHOOL AGED REFERRALS
 All ELL students who are designated Limited English
Proficient (LEP) or who have been evaluated for LEP
status should have a green folder in their cumulative
folder.
 Look for the Initial LPAC Classification Report and all
annual LPAC reports if student is carried as LEP.
 LEP students are tested by ESL staff upon entry to
LISD, and if LEP, at the end of each year.
Initial School Age Referrals cont.
 The language information contained in the green
folder MUST be part of the referral data.
 If student qualified LEP and parent declined the
recommended language program, then a referral to
special education is generally inappropriate.
 Exited LEP students are monitored for 2 years and if
having difficulty, there should be a consultation
w/ESL/Bilingual personnel prior to consideration for
referral to special ed.
Initial School aged continued…
 Once LEP status has been identified, the RtI team chair
will ensure the LPAC representative is invited to attend
the RtI meetings and provide recommendations for
the team to review.
 Environmental, language and educational factors must
be considered when determining appropriate
interventions. But prior to referral the RtI team must
consider whether the student has had consistent
schooling over the past 2 years, reason for concern is
not because of a lack of command of English and/or
other cultural/environmental factors.
Effectiveness of Various ELL Programs:
Long Term Study
INITIAL EVALUATIONS: SPANISH/ENGLISH
 Locate the CALP Levels documented on the most
recent OLPT form. If student has not had recent OLPT
testing, encourage the RtI Team to have this testing
conducted both in Spanish and English as part
gathering data in Tier 1.
 Next, refer to the Cognitive Academic Language
Proficiency (CALP) Evaluation Reference Guide to
determine scope and language of the evaluation.
5
CALP LEVELS
Advanced
4-5(4.5)
Fluent to Advanced
4
Fluent
3-4 (3.5)
Limited to Fluent
3
Limited
2-3 (2.5)
Very Limited to Limited
2
Very Limited
1-2 (1.5)
Negligible to Very Limited
1
negligible
Evaluation Reference Guide
COGNITIVE TESTING
4
SPANISH
OLPT/CALP
4
Speech Only Referral
Both Languages1
Automatic REFERRAL TO
SLP
No
4
3
Both Languages1
No
Eng/Spanish
4
2
English
No
English Only
4
1
English
No
English Only
ENGLISH OLPT/CALP
COGNITIVE TESTING
3
SPANISH
OLPT/CALP
4
3
Eng/Spanish
Speech Only Referral
Both Languages1
Automatic REFERRAL TO
SLP
No
3
Both Languages1
Yes (Eng/Sp)
Eng/Spanish
3
2
Both Languages1
Yes (Eng/Sp)
Eng/Spanish
3
1
English + Non-verbal
No
English
ENGLISH OLPT/CALP
Eng/Spanish
CALP REFERENCE GUIDE
COGNITIVE TESTING
2
SPANISH
OLPT/CALP
4
Speech Only Referral
Spanish
Automatic REFERRAL TO
SLP
No
2
3
Both+NonVerbal
Yes (Eng/Sp)
Eng/Spanish
2
2
Non-Verbal
Yes (Spanish)
Eng/Spanish
2
1
English
Yes(English)
En/Sp:EE/ EngK-12
COGNITIVE TESTING
1
SPANISH
OLPT/CALP
4
Spanish
Automatic REFERRAL TO
SLP
No
1
3
Spanish
No
Span/Eng Obs
1
2
Non-Verbal
Yes
Eng/Sp
1
1
Nonverbal
Yes
Eng/Sp
ENGLISH OLPT/CALP
ENGLISH OLPT/CALP
Eng/Spanish
Speech Only Referral
Span/Eng Obs
USING THE CALP CHART
 A CALP Level of 4 indicates language proficiency.
Cognitive testing would be conducted in that
language(s).
 When CALP levels indicate lack of proficiency in either
language, a referral should be made to the SLP. Refer
to chart.
 If student has English CALP or 3 or 4, must administer
a cognitive measure in English. If verbal, Gc, is within
average range 85-115, no nonverbal or Spanish
cognitive is needed unless the results of English are
questionable.
Points to Consider in Determining Test
Battery
 Cognitive Evaluation: IDEA 2004 requires students be
testing in the language and form most likely to yield
accurate information on what the child knows and can
do academically, developmentally, and functionally,
unless it is clearly not feasible to so provide and
administer.
Forms of Cognitive Assessment
 Non verbal
 Low-Verbal (LI and L2)
 Native Language Assessment (LI)
 Second Language Assessment (L2)
 Bilingual Assessment (combo of both languages, with
one serving as foundation language
 Both languages tested separately (LI and L2)
Culture-Language Classification Matrix,
C-LIM
 The C-LIM can be used to assist the assessment
specialist in determining the level of language and
culture embedded in standardized tests
C-LIM Graph
INITIAL EVALUATIONS: SECOND
LANGUAGE OTHER THAN SPANISH
 If OLPT indicates English CALP levels of 4 or 5,
cognitive testing will be conducted in English.
 When English CALP levels are 3 and below, a
nonverbal cognitive measure will be administered
coupled with a Bilingual Verbal Abilities Test (BVAT)
utilizing an interpreter if available in native language.
 Academic achievement will be administered in
English.
Academic Achievement Testing
 Achievement testing is dependent on language of
instruction. If ELL student has received any formal
schooling in native language in previous 2 years,
achievement testing in both languages is required
(Spanish only).
 If ELL student has received English only for at least 2
years, conduct English testing only.
 English achievement testing should be attempted for
all students requiring an academic evaluation. Will
serve as base-line data if needed.
Achievement testing cont…
 If evaluation instruments are not available in native
language, informal assessment can provide an
estimate of academic ability.
 Student can relate events or tell a story, student
writes sentences or story in native language.
 A student’s educational history, sociological/economic
factors and language background must be considered
in the interpretation of test results.
Re-Evaluations
 The REED Committee including LPAC Rep. will review
LPAC Summary, previous assessment results from
TELPAS Ratings Report to determine scope of the reevaluation.
 Achievement testing will be conducted in language of
instruction.
 If current OLPT testing is available, follow CALP
Evaluation Reference Guide
 Remember students acquiring a second language can
experience dramatic changes between initial and reevaluation.
Documenting in the FIE
 The FIE must document current language functioning







including but not limited to:
HLS Results
Language Proficiency Results
LEP Committee Recommendations
Teacher information on receptive and expressive
language skills
Educational opportunity
Relevant sociological/cultural information.
Previous and current alternative language
programming (ESL, native language, etc)
Sample Language Section of FIE
 LANGUAGE BACKGROUND/COMMUNICATION DEVELOPMENT
 According to the Home Language Survey, the language spoken by XXXX is both
English and Spanish and the language spoken in the home is both Spanish and
English. XXXX is considered a Limited English Proficient (LEP) student and
participates in TELPAS. Results of TELPAS from 2008-09 school year report
Listening, Speaking, Reading and Writing in the “Advanced High” range with an
overall Composite of Advanced High. In addition, results from Oral Language
Proficiency Testing using the Woodcock-Munoz Language Survey report CALP
scores of 4 in grades 3rd and 4th. CALP scores of 4 indicate fluent English
compared to others at her grade level. And according to the Woodock Munoz
Language Bilingual Verbal Ability Test administered on 1/29/10, XXXXX
dominant language is English as evidenced by an English Oral Language score
of 89, and CALP level of 3. Conversely, results of the Woodcock Munoz Batería
III Normative Update Pruebas de aprovechamiento measured her Oral
Language skills in Spanish in the very low range, SS 34 and a CALP score of 2.
Exclusionary Factors
 REMEMBER!!!
 To qualify for special education services, the
evaluation team must rule out a lack of command of
the English language as well as cultural/environmental
factors as contributing factors to any identified
category of disability.
ARD Committee Meetings
 A LPAC representative with second language expertise must attend all ARDs
for LEP students. The administrator may serve as LPAC rep and administrator if
trained and the student is NOT in an ESL or bilingual classroom. If LEP student
is in ESL, bilingual or Dual language classroom, the LPAC trained teacher must
attend.

At any initial ARD/IEP meeting for a student not already enrolled in LISD the
ARD C in collaboration with the key LPAC members will determine the LEP
status for a student using the LEP ENTRY form.

For initial ARDs and re-evaluations for LEP students at ESL/Bilingual campuses,
the primary campus LPAC trained representative should serve as the
designated LPAC representative. The ESL or Bilingual teacher who provides
language program services should also be in attendance. Effort must be made
to meet the language needs of the LEP student.

ARD Meetings cont…
 For initial ARDs and re-evaluations for LEP students at non-
ESL/Bilingual campuses, the Bilingual/ESL Director or an
experienced LPAC representative from a neighboring
ESL/Bilingual campus should serve as the LPAC representative.
 Every ARD of a LEP student must be audio recorded if an
interpreter is used during the ARD. This is not an option. A copy
of the audio file must be presented to the parent. It is essential
to test the audio recorder device. This is best done before the
ARD. While parents may decline an interpreter, the interpreter
must be present in case the parent changes their mind during
the ARD or it becomes apparent that the parent does not
understand the information presented during the meeting.
THANKS FOR ALL YOU DO!!