Evaluation
1. Once it is determined that a student will be evaluated for a suspected disability, the School Psychologist or Speech Therapist will notify the classroom teacher of the process ahead. The classroom Teacher will be notified that they will be asked to provide Present Levels of Educational Performance when the Case Conference Committee meets. The classroom teachers are asked to provide the Case Conference Committee current functioning in the classroom, such as grades, work missed, work ethic, etc. It would also be helpful to detail as many strengths as they note deficits. It would be very helpful if they provided this brief data electronically so the data can be added to the IIEP.
2. Various team members are also notified, including, but not limited to the teacher of the suspected disability (Teacher of Record) who will assist by gathering appropriate data. Give all team members the date of the conference so they can budget their time properly.
3. Do not add additional data to the evaluation unless the MCAS Protocol calls for the assessment (example: do not add a speech screening unless there is a suspected Communication Disorder. If an evaluation is needed, then state it up front and notify the various team members at once (speech therapists), but do not do so without their direct consultation.
4. If the suspected disability is Specific Learning Disabilities, the RTI data is critical because the MCAS will require specific data as per the following:
(A) Insufficient progress to meet age or state approved grade level standards in one (1) or more of the areas identified in subdivision (1) when using a process based on the student's response to scientific, research based intervention.
(B) A pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance or achievement, or both, relative to: (i) age; (ii) state approved grade level standards; or (iii) intellectual development; that is determined by the group to be relevant to the identification of a specific learning disability. The multidisciplinary team is prohibited from using a severe discrepancy between academic achievement and global cognitive functioning to meet this requirement.
A pattern is defined as well-defined RTI accommodations observing the timelines for Tiers I, II, and III. Refer to the Response to Instruction and the Response to Intervention Procedures linked below.
2. Various team members are also notified, including, but not limited to the teacher of the suspected disability (Teacher of Record) who will assist by gathering appropriate data. Give all team members the date of the conference so they can budget their time properly.
3. Do not add additional data to the evaluation unless the MCAS Protocol calls for the assessment (example: do not add a speech screening unless there is a suspected Communication Disorder. If an evaluation is needed, then state it up front and notify the various team members at once (speech therapists), but do not do so without their direct consultation.
4. If the suspected disability is Specific Learning Disabilities, the RTI data is critical because the MCAS will require specific data as per the following:
(A) Insufficient progress to meet age or state approved grade level standards in one (1) or more of the areas identified in subdivision (1) when using a process based on the student's response to scientific, research based intervention.
(B) A pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance or achievement, or both, relative to: (i) age; (ii) state approved grade level standards; or (iii) intellectual development; that is determined by the group to be relevant to the identification of a specific learning disability. The multidisciplinary team is prohibited from using a severe discrepancy between academic achievement and global cognitive functioning to meet this requirement.
A pattern is defined as well-defined RTI accommodations observing the timelines for Tiers I, II, and III. Refer to the Response to Instruction and the Response to Intervention Procedures linked below.