From a set of multiple data points you will author a psychoeducational report that synthesizes assessment results, addresses issues of eligibility for special education and provides learning goals and objectives, accommodations and supports.
The Final Case Report is scored with a rubric.
As your summative assessment for this course, you will conduct a case study and write a psychoeducational report on your findings. The purpose of the report will be to contribute to the processes for determining eligibility through the collection of multiple data points.
Option 1: Data will be provided for a case study and you will write your report from what you have received.
Educational and Diagnostic Assessment for Children and Adolescents with Disabilities
Directions for Final Case Report: OPTION 1
As your summative assessment for this course you will conduct a case study and write a psychoeducational report on your findings. The purpose of the report will be to contribute to the processes for determining eligibility through the collection of multiple data points. There are two options for completion:
Option 1: You will be provided with the data for a case study and you will write your report from what you have received.
You will be looking to answer the following questions in your report
● Does this student need to be evaluated for the presence of a disability?
● What are the cultural and familial impacts on these students’ performance in the classroom?
● How did the student perform on curriculum based measures? Standardized achievement testing? Assessment of social/emotional and behavioral functioning?
● How does the student compare with typically developing peers?
● What interventions have you (and others) put into place to address the deficits?
● How did the student respond to the interventions?
● What are the academic and social supports that are needed for this student to be successful?
● What are the goals and objectives that should be developed for this student?
Here is an outline to organize your report:
Section 1: Background Information
Student information
Family
School History
Rubric
Background, Strengths and Parent Input ||CEC 7.2
3 points
Candidate has gathered detailed information from families and other professionals to implement effective programs and services.
Case Study includes detailed information about the student’s background, strengths and family including cultural considerations. Information is extracted from multiple sources in the data set. The information presented is free from bias.
Present Levels of Performance and Adverse Educational Effects ||CEC 4.2
3 points
At an exemplary level the candidate develops, selects, administers, and interprets multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
The Case Study report include comprehensive and detailed review of the data sources that address present levels of performance for both academic and functional strengths and challenges. Interpretation and analysis of data demonstrates understanding of measurement theory, accurate reporting of data and critical thinking. Report provides details on adverse educational effects of the students learning and behavior and gathers existing data on the student to contribute to eligibility determination.
Instructional Recommendations ||CEC 4.1
3 points
At an exemplary level the candidate collaboratively develops, selects, administers, analyzes, and interprets multiple measures of student learning, behavior, and the classroom environment to evaluate and support classroom and school-based systems of intervention for students with and without exceptionalities.
The report includes a comprehensive discussion and rationale for instructional recommendations to address academic and social/emotional needs. Specific instructional strategies and approaches are included.
Recommendations for placement and services ||CEC 4.2
3 points
To an exemplary level the candidate develops, selects, administers, and interprets multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
The recommendation for placements and services is aligned with the assessment data and provide a thorough and detailed explanation of how the data supports the diagnosis.
The recommendation for service delivery is made through the lens of inclusive school environments. The report addresses placement as well as related services.
Goals and Objectives ||CEC 4.3
3 points
To an exemplary level candidate assesses, collaboratively analyses, interprets, and communicates students’ progress toward measurable outcomes using technology as appropriate, to inform both short- and long- term planning, and make ongoing adjustments to instruction.
Goals and objectives match the collected data from the Case. Long Term goals are written in SMART goal form and include a tool for measuring progress. Short Term objectives clearly provide a map toward attainment of the goal, include a timeline and tool for measuring progress
Accommodations And Supports ||CEC 5.1
3 points
To an exemplary level the candidate uses findings from multiple assessments, including student self- assessment, that are responsive to cultural and linguistic diversity and specialized as needed, to identify what students know and are able to do. They then interpret the assessment data to appropriately plan and guide instruction to meet rigorous academic and non-academic content and goals for each individual.
The Case Study report includes well thought out and appropriate accommodations and supports for use in classroom instruction and assessment. Assessment accommodations address state, district and classroom testing,
and findings include multiple assessments.
Professional Presentation ||CEC 7.3
3 points
To an exemplary level the candidate collaborates, communicates, and coordinates with families, paraprofessionals, and other professionals within the educational setting to assess, plan, and implement effective programs and services that promote progress toward measurable outcomes for individuals with and without exceptionalities and their families.
The Case Study report is well organized and thoughtfully presented in a manner that can be understood by all stakeholders including parents. The report is free from grammatical and mechanical errors and avoids the use of acronyms and jargon. The report is culturally sensitive and considers the student’s cultural background in all recommendation for diagnosis, placement and services.
Instructional Recommendations3 points
At an exemplary level the candidate collaboratively develops, selects, administers, analyzes, and interprets multiple measures of student learning, behavior, and the classroom environment to evaluate and support classroom and school-based systems of intervention for students with and without exceptionalities.
The report includes a comprehensive discussion and rationale for instructional recommendations to address academic and social/emotional needs. Specific instructional strategies and approaches are included.
Recommendation for Placement and Services3 points
To an exemplary level the candidate develops, selects, administers, and interprets multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
The recommendation for placements and services is aligned with the assessment data and provide a thorough and detailed explanation of how the data supports the diagnosis. The recommendation for service delivery is made through the lens of inclusive school environments. The report addresses placement as well as related services.
Goals and Objectives3 points
To an exemplary level candidate assesses, collaboratively analyses, interprets, and communicates students’ progress toward measurable outcomes using technology as appropriate, to inform both short- and long- term planning, and make ongoing adjustments to instruction.
Goals and objectives match the collected data from the Case. Long Term goals are written in SMART goal form and include a tool for measuring progress. Short Term objectives clearly provide a map toward attainment of the goal, include a timeline and tool for measuring progress
Instructional Recommendations0 points
The candidate does not collaboratively develop, select, administer, analyze, and interpret multiple measures of student learning, behavior, and the classroom environment to evaluate and support classroom and school-based systems of intervention for students with and without exceptionalities.
The report is missing specific instructional implications and recommendations for working with the student AND/OR the recommendations are not aligned with the data collected in the case study evaluation.
1 point
At an acceptable level the candidate collaboratively develops, selects, administers, analyzes, and interprets multiple measures of student learning, behavior, and the classroom environment to evaluate and support classroom and school-based systems of intervention for students with and without exceptionalities.
The report lacks in addressing specific instructional implications and recommendations for working with the student. AND/OR the recommendations are not aligned with the data collected in the case study evaluation.
2 points
At a proficient level the candidate collaboratively develops, selects, administers, analyzes, and interpret multiple measures of student learning, behavior, and the classroom environment to evaluate and support classroom and school-based systems of intervention for students with and without exceptionalities.
The instructional recommendations described may be lacking in adequate specificity and detail, but are well aligned to the data obtained in the case study evaluation.
3 points
At an exemplary level the candidate collaboratively develops, selects, administers, analyzes, and interprets multiple measures of student learning, behavior, and the classroom environment to evaluate and support classroom and school-based systems of intervention for students with and without exceptionalities.
The report includes a comprehensive discussion and rationale for instructional recommendations to address academic and social/emotional needs. Specific instructional strategies and approaches are included.
Score of Instructional Recommendations,/ 3Recommendation for Placement and Services0 points
The candidate does not develop, select, administer, and interpret multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
There is no alignment between the diagnosis and the data with little to no explanation of how the student meets eligibility. Recommendations for services is not present and there is little to no consideration given to inclusive special education placements. There is no discussion of related services or the recommendations do not align with the diagnosis or assessment data.
1 point
To an acceptable level the candidates develops, selects, administers, and interprets multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
There is mismatch between the diagnosis and the data with little to no explanation of how the student meets eligibility. Recommendations for services may be lacking and there is little to no consideration given to inclusive special education placements. There is no discussion of related services or the recommendations do not align with the diagnosis or assessment data.
2 points
To a proficient level the candidate develops, selects, administers, and interprets multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
The recommendation for special education placement and services is somewhat aligned to assessment data and is reasonable to the severity of the student’s difficulties. There is a description of how the data supports the diagnosis but may not provide enough detail. Consideration of inclusion may be lacking. The report may or may not include a discussion of recommended related services.
3 points
To an exemplary level the candidate develops, selects, administers, and interprets multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
The recommendation for placements and services is aligned with the assessment data and provide a thorough and detailed explanation of how the data supports the diagnosis. The recommendation for service delivery is made through the lens of inclusive school environments. The report addresses placement as well as related services.
Score of Recommendation for Placement and Services,/ 3Goals and Objectives0 points
The candidate does not assess, collaboratively analyze, interpret, and communicate students’ progress toward measurable outcomes using technology as appropriate, to inform both short- and long- term planning, and make ongoing adjustments to instruction.
The goals and objectives are missing and/or not related to the data collected or describe activities for the student rather than measurement of skill. The long term goal is missing all or most elements of the SMART goal format. The short term objectives are not related to the long term goal or do not provide a map for goal attainment.
1 point
To an acceptable level candidate assesses, collaboratively analyses, interpret, and communicate students’ progress toward measurable outcomes using technology as appropriate, to inform both short- and long- term planning, and make ongoing adjustments to instruction.
The goals and objectives are not related to the data collected or describe activities for the student rather than measurement of skill. The long term goal is missing most elements of the SMART goal format. The short term objectives are not related to the long term goal or do not provide a map for goal attainment.
2 points
To a proficient level candidate assesses, collaboratively analyses, interprets, and communicates students’ progress toward measurable outcomes using technology as appropriate, to inform both short- and long- term planning, and make ongoing adjustments to instruction.
Goals and objectives are not always clearly related to data collected in the CASE. Long term goals are missing elements of SMART goals. The Short Term Objectives provide only a vague map toward goal attainment and the tool for measuring is not explicit. The timeline for measuring may not exactly break the long term goal into 3 short term goals.
3 points
To an exemplary level candidate assesses, collaboratively analyses, interprets, and communicates students’ progress toward measurable outcomes using technology as appropriate, to inform both short- and long- term planning, and make ongoing adjustments to instruction.
Goals and objectives match the collected data from the Case. Long Term goals are written in SMART goal form and include a tool for measuring progress. Short Term objectives clearly provide a map toward attainment of the goal, include a timeline and tool for measuring progress
Score of Goals and Objectives,/ 3TotalScore of Educational & Diagnostics Final Case Study SPE NCE KEY Assessment,/ 30
Overall Score
0: Unsatisfactory
0 points minimum
1: Acceptable
5 points minimum
2: Proficient
15 points minimum
3: Exemplary
25 points minimum
Submit Assignment
Files to submit(0) file(s) to submit
After uploading, you must click Submit to complete the submission.CommentsInstructional Recommendations0 points
The candidate does not collaboratively develop, select, administer, analyze, and interpret multiple measures of student learning, behavior, and the classroom environment to evaluate and support classroom and school-based systems of intervention for students with and without exceptionalities.
The report is missing specific instructional implications and recommendations for working with the student AND/OR the recommendations are not aligned with the data collected in the case study evaluation.
1 point
At an acceptable level the candidate collaboratively develops, selects, administers, analyzes, and interprets multiple measures of student learning, behavior, and the classroom environment to evaluate and support classroom and school-based systems of intervention for students with and without exceptionalities.
The report lacks in addressing specific instructional implications and recommendations for working with the student. AND/OR the recommendations are not aligned with the data collected in the case study evaluation.
2 points
At a proficient level the candidate collaboratively develops, selects, administers, analyzes, and interpret multiple measures of student learning, behavior, and the classroom environment to evaluate and support classroom and school-based systems of intervention for students with and without exceptionalities.
The instructional recommendations described may be lacking in adequate specificity and detail, but are well aligned to the data obtained in the case study evaluation.
3 points
At an exemplary level the candidate collaboratively develops, selects, administers, analyzes, and interprets multiple measures of student learning, behavior, and the classroom environment to evaluate and support classroom and school-based systems of intervention for students with and without exceptionalities.
The report includes a comprehensive discussion and rationale for instructional recommendations to address academic and social/emotional needs. Specific instructional strategies and approaches are included.
Score of Instructional Recommendations,/ 3Recommendation for Placement and Services0 points
The candidate does not develop, select, administer, and interpret multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
There is no alignment between the diagnosis and the data with little to no explanation of how the student meets eligibility. Recommendations for services is not present and there is little to no consideration given to inclusive special education placements. There is no discussion of related services or the recommendations do not align with the diagnosis or assessment data.
1 point
To an acceptable level the candidates develops, selects, administers, and interprets multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
There is mismatch between the diagnosis and the data with little to no explanation of how the student meets eligibility. Recommendations for services may be lacking and there is little to no consideration given to inclusive special education placements. There is no discussion of related services or the recommendations do not align with the diagnosis or assessment data.
2 points
To a proficient level the candidate develops, selects, administers, and interprets multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
The recommendation for special education placement and services is somewhat aligned to assessment data and is reasonable to the severity of the student’s difficulties. There is a description of how the data supports the diagnosis but may not provide enough detail. Consideration of inclusion may be lacking. The report may or may not include a discussion of recommended related services.
3 points
To an exemplary level the candidate develops, selects, administers, and interprets multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
The recommendation for placements and services is aligned with the assessment data and provide a thorough and detailed explanation of how the data supports the diagnosis. The recommendation for service delivery is made through the lens of inclusive school environments. The report addresses placement as well as related services.
Score of Recommendation for Placement and Services,/ 3Goals and Objectives0 points
The candidate does not assess, collaboratively analyze, interpret, and communicate students’ progress toward measurable outcomes using technology as appropriate, to inform both short- and long- term planning, and make ongoing adjustments to instruction.
The goals and objectives are missing and/or not related to the data collected or describe activities for the student rather than measurement of skill. The long term goal is missing all or most elements of the SMART goal format. The short term objectives are not related to the long term goal or do not provide a map for goal attainment.
1 point
To an acceptable level candidate assesses, collaboratively analyses, interpret, and communicate students’ progress toward measurable outcomes using technology as appropriate, to inform both short- and long- term planning, and make ongoing adjustments to instruction.
The goals and objectives are not related to the data collected or describe activities for the student rather than measurement of skill. The long term goal is missing most elements of the SMART goal format. The short term objectives are not related to the long term goal or do not provide a map for goal attainment.
2 points
To a proficient level candidate assesses, collaboratively analyses, interprets, and communicates students’ progress toward measurable outcomes using technology as appropriate, to inform both short- and long- term planning, and make ongoing adjustments to instruction.
Goals and objectives are not always clearly related to data collected in the CASE. Long term goals are missing elements of SMART goals. The Short Term Objectives provide only a vague map toward goal attainment and the tool for measuring is not explicit. The timeline for measuring may not exactly break the long term goal into 3 short term goals.
3 points
To an exemplary level candidate assesses, collaboratively analyses, interprets, and communicates students’ progress toward measurable outcomes using technology as appropriate, to inform both short- and long- term planning, and make ongoing adjustments to instruction.
Goals and objectives match the collected data from the Case. Long Term goals are written in SMART goal form and include a tool for measuring progress. Short Term objectives clearly provide a map toward attainment of the goal, include a timeline and tool for measuring progress
Score of Goals and Objectives,/ 3TotalScore of Educational & Diagnostics Final Case Study SPE NCE KEY Assessment,/ 30
Overall Score
0: Unsatisfactory
0 points minimum
1: Acceptable
5 points minimum
2: Proficient
15 points minimum
3: Exemplary
25 points minimum
Submit Assignment
Files to submit(0) file(s) to submit
After uploading, you must click Submit to complete the submission.CommentsInstructional Recommendations0 points
The candidate does not collaboratively develop, select, administer, analyze, and interpret multiple measures of student learning, behavior, and the classroom environment to evaluate and support classroom and school-based systems of intervention for students with and without exceptionalities.
The report is missing specific instructional implications and recommendations for working with the student AND/OR the recommendations are not aligned with the data collected in the case study evaluation.
1 point
At an acceptable level the candidate collaboratively develops, selects, administers, analyzes, and interprets multiple measures of student learning, behavior, and the classroom environment to evaluate and support classroom and school-based systems of intervention for students with and without exceptionalities.
The report lacks in addressing specific instructional implications and recommendations for working with the student. AND/OR the recommendations are not aligned with the data collected in the case study evaluation.
2 points
At a proficient level the candidate collaboratively develops, selects, administers, analyzes, and interpret multiple measures of student learning, behavior, and the classroom environment to evaluate and support classroom and school-based systems of intervention for students with and without exceptionalities.
The instructional recommendations described may be lacking in adequate specificity and detail, but are well aligned to the data obtained in the case study evaluation.
3 points
At an exemplary level the candidate collaboratively develops, selects, administers, analyzes, and interprets multiple measures of student learning, behavior, and the classroom environment to evaluate and support classroom and school-based systems of intervention for students with and without exceptionalities.
The report includes a comprehensive discussion and rationale for instructional recommendations to address academic and social/emotional needs. Specific instructional strategies and approaches are included.
Score of Instructional Recommendations,/ 3Recommendation for Placement and Services0 points
The candidate does not develop, select, administer, and interpret multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
There is no alignment between the diagnosis and the data with little to no explanation of how the student meets eligibility. Recommendations for services is not present and there is little to no consideration given to inclusive special education placements. There is no discussion of related services or the recommendations do not align with the diagnosis or assessment data.
1 point
To an acceptable level the candidates develops, selects, administers, and interprets multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
There is mismatch between the diagnosis and the data with little to no explanation of how the student meets eligibility. Recommendations for services may be lacking and there is little to no consideration given to inclusive special education placements. There is no discussion of related services or the recommendations do not align with the diagnosis or assessment data.
2 points
To a proficient level the candidate develops, selects, administers, and interprets multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
The recommendation for special education placement and services is somewhat aligned to assessment data and is reasonable to the severity of the student’s difficulties. There is a description of how the data supports the diagnosis but may not provide enough detail. Consideration of inclusion may be lacking. The report may or may not include a discussion of recommended related services.
3 points
To an exemplary level the candidate develops, selects, administers, and interprets multiple, formal and informal, culturally and linguistically appropriate measures and procedures that are valid and reliable to contribute to eligibility determination for special education services.
The recommendation for placements and services is aligned with the assessment data and provide a thorough and detailed explanation of how the data supports the diagnosis. The recommendation for service delivery is made through the lens of inclusive school environments. The report addresses placement as well as related services.
Score of Recommendation for Placement and Services,/ 3Goals and Objectives0 points
The candidate does not assess, collaboratively analyze, interpret, and communicate students’ progress toward measurable outcomes using technology as appropriate, to inform both short- and long- term planning, and make ongoing adjustments to instruction.
The goals and objectives are missing and/or not related to the data collected or describe activities for the student rather than measurement of skill. The long term goal is missing all or most elements of the SMART goal format. The short term objectives are not related to the long term goal or do not provide a map for goal attainment.
1 point
To an acceptable level candidate assesses, collaboratively analyses, interpret, and communicate students’ progress toward measurable outcomes using technology as appropriate, to inform both short- and long- term planning, and make ongoing adjustments to instruction.
The goals and objectives are not related to the data collected or describe activities for the student rather than measurement of skill. The long term goal is missing most elements of the SMART goal format. The short term objectives are not related to the long term goal or do not provide a map for goal attainment.
2 points
To a proficient level candidate assesses, collaboratively analyses, interprets, and communicates students’ progress toward measurable outcomes using technology as appropriate, to inform both short- and long- term planning, and make ongoing adjustments to instruction.
