1

Individualized Education Program River Oaks Elementary 2015/2016

Preschool Program for Children with Disabilities Meet the Team

About the Student

Keywords

Student: Mila O. Parent: Ms. O Teacher: Madison Hopkins Physical Therapist: Jenny Educational Aides: Brenda & Norma Hearing Aid Specialist: Sarah

Individualized Education Program (IEP): the written document listing, among other things, the related services that the child will receive in his/her educational setting, developed by a team that includes the child’s parents, school staff, and other related service s providers. TSW: this abbreviation stands for the phrase, the student will, often used in the student’s goals and objectives Domain: Areas of developments such as fine motor, gross motor, self- help/adaptive, Language/communication, cognitive, and social/emotional. Language Sample Assessment: A strategy used to assess a child’s language abilities that are transcribed and analyzed. Measurable Annual Goal: Also known as an IEP goal, is a measurable statement that describes what a child is reasonably expected to accomplish from the specialized educational program during the school year. Progress Monitoring: assessment of the student’s academic performance, to quantify a student rate of improvement or responsiveness to instruction, and to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction. Short Term Objectives (STO): Intermediate milestones to achieve when moving toward the measurable annual goals. Least Restrictive Environment (LRE): To the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, are educated with children who are not disabled, and removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only when the nature or severity of the disability of a child is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. Related Services: Supportive services that is required for a child with a disability to benefit from special education. Self-Contained: Educational setting specifically designated for children with disabilities. Preschool Program for Children with Disabilities (PPCD): The public school program for young children, ages 3-5, who needs special education and related services.

Mila is a three-year-old female student who joined our class January of 2015. She has been diagnosed with a hearing impairment and developmental delays such as language and motor ability. She is also at risk for a visual impairment. Mila transitioned from crawling to walking the weekend before starting school with us in January. Although her mobility is very delayed in comparison to typically developing persons, we have seen tremendous progress since she has started school. She is becoming more and more physically independent each day. Her language has also been a struggle in communicating but we have seen a huge improvement in this domain as well. Her receptive language skills and imitation skills are some of her many strengths. Socially, Mila is very high functioning. She interacts with her peers and is a great role model to her classmates for social communication/interactions.

2

Formal Assessment Results

Formal Assessment: Early Learning Accomplishment Profile (E-LAP) Developmental Age Range Assessed: Birth- 36 months Domain Focus: Language` Administrator: Madison Hopkins After formally assessing Mila using the criterion-referenced assessment, Early Learning Accomplishment Profile (E-LAP) in the domain of Language, the student was performing at a 15-month developmental age as of 2/26/2015. Description of Results: When assessing the domain of language using the E-LAP, I noticed that the student always responds to the administrator with either verbal speech or body language (hand gestures, facial expression) even if the response was unrelated to the question asked of the student. For example, when presented with a mirror image, the student smiled and demonstrated unclear, verbal speech. However, when asked to point to a particular picture in a book, the student smiled at me and took the book as if to start reading it. When told, “no,” the student immediately stopped what she was doing and looked at me. When instructed simple, one step tasks, the student excelled. When asked where something is (for example, “where is the ball?”) the student consistently points to or grasps the appropriate object. The student had several emerging skills. For instance, when given three objects of the same color and a fourth object that was the same of one of the three, and instructed to “find matching,” she correctly matched the objects three out of five attempts.

Areas of difficulty were also noted in this domain (-). For the task of “names one picture” she was given a book with pictures of large objects. She was then asked, “What is this?” as I pointed to the picture of the ball. She pointed to the ball and verbally spoke indistinct noises. Although I believe the student knows what the name of that object is, and would be able to recognize that name if said to her, I made a negative mark (-) for that task. Another such area was seen in following two instructions. The student was given the direction to find matching and then give me matching. She was able to find the matching object by stacking the two bowls but did not follow this task by giving me the bowls. I marked this task as an area of difficulty and proceeded to assess further. I then used a hand gesture and the words “Give me the bowls,” to that she obliged. It is my understanding that she is very familiar with the hand gesture I used but not the language used in the direction. He also was unable to point to the correct picture when asked. Given two photographs of a girl swinging on the swings and another photograph of a girl swimming in a pool, the student was asked to give me swinging. The student gave me swimming three out of five times which indicated difficulty in this area. In the domain of Language, she showed consistent skills between ages birth to 15 months, with difficulty in the skills between ages 18 to 19 months. This showed that he has some acquired skills, some emerging, and some known skills. Areas of Strength:

• Points to one body part when asked • Points and vocalizes to indicate wants • Uses Jargon • Imitate simple sounds on request

Areas of Difficulty:

• Points to picture in book • Follows two directions • Speaks 20 words

3

Language Sample Assessment Results

Measurable Annual Goal

Informal Assessment: Language Sample Domain Focus: Language Administrator: Madison Hopkins After informally assessing Mila in the domain of Language using a teacher- created language sample assessment, the student has mastered four words as of 2/26/2015. Description of Results: The current results from this assessment shows that, in a naturalistic environment with familiar objects/activities, the student has no difficulty with expressive vocalization but shows deficits in language articulation and communication. The current results of the direct measures portion of the assessment indicate that the student is able to communicate using limited sign language that she has previously been exposed to in the classroom. For instance, when told to say “angry” (which was a word from the song we were listening to at the time), the student signed the sign for “angry” (as seen by the teachers during circle time/signing songs) while making a seemingly growl sound. Then, I carefully articulated the word “angry” and she attempted to mimic that sound with a similar growl sound. Mila’s communication of the term “angry” was marked as “emerging vocabulary” because she was able to make an “a” sound while signing the correct sign for the term “angry”. When she is able to clearly vocalize the word “angry”, the word will be considered mastered. Mastered vocabulary as of 2/26/2015:

• Yeah • No • All done • Ball

Emerging Vocabulary as of 2/26/2015:

• Juice- During breakfast, Mila pointed to her juice and unclearly spoke “juice”. • Angry- During circle time while listening to a song, Mila signed the lyric “angry” while vocalizing

the short “a” sound.

Goal Focus: Expressive Language Duration: 3/12/2015 to 3/12/2016 Language Delivery: English Implementer: PPCD Teacher and Staff Method of Evaluation: Data Collection, observation Progress Monitoring (frequency): Every 9 weeks during the indicated IEP duration During discrete trial training, given one picture of one object followed by the question, “What is this?” TSW correctly name 20 specified objects with no errors for five consecutive days by the end of 36 instructional weeks. This goal was derived from the results of the E-LAP assessment. According to the results, the student’s next developmental milestone in the language domain will be to speak 20 words. In order for her to successfully communicate, both speech and language skills must improve. Upon reaching this goal, Mila’s communication skills will improve.

4

Short Term Objectives

Setting & Services Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) The LRE for Mila is a self contained classroom that

provides PPCD services. This is to the maximum extent appropriate for the child’s educational success and safety. Mila requires supports that cannot be fulfilled in an inclusive setting (i.e. Mila requires physical support for many tasks such as getting seated in her chair and walking.)

Related Service Rationale Duration Frequency Grouping

Physical Therapy This is the amount of time that she is already receiving from the therapist and it has proven appropriate for her needs in mobility and balance.

30 min/day 5 days/week 1:1

Hearing Aide Specialist

This is amount the amount of time that she already receiving from the hearing specialist and it has proven to be appropriate for her needs.

15 min/day 1 day/week 1:1

Related Accommodations

To allow Mila to safely sit at the worktable and lunch table, the student will utilize a support chair that provides back support and has a safety seatbelt.

Goal Focus: Expressive Language Duration: 3/12/2015 to 3/12/2016 Language Delivery: English Implementer: PPCD Teacher and Staff Method of Evaluation: Data Collection, observation Progress Monitoring (frequency): Every week during the indicated IEP duration

1. During discrete trial training, given a picture/object and the verbal modeling of the name of that object, TSW mimic five modeled terms with no errors for 5 consecutive days by the end of 9 instructional weeks.

2. During discrete trial training, given a picture/object and the verbal modeling of the name of that object, TSW mimic ten modeled terms with no errors for 5 consecutive days by the end of 18 instructional weeks.

3. During discrete trial training, given a picture/object and the verbal modeling of the name of that object, TSW mimic 15 modeled terms with no errors for 5 consecutive days by the end of 27 instructional weeks.