EDTP 3305

A&E Assignment
TAP Indicator: Goals and Objectives

1. Using the information provided (Case Study: Josh), complete the PLAAFP
Statement Form. Resources: PLAAFPs Explained PDF (Module 3).
(25 pts.)

2. Based on your PLAAFP statement, complete the Writing Goals worksheets for
Josh. Be sure to complete each section. You are required to connect the goal
that you write for Josh to at least one grade-level TEK for reading. Use
Module 3 Resources and TEKS Snapshot - Grade 6 Reading. Include at least
one additional instructional intervention and one additional accommodation
for Josh. (35 pts.)

3. Complete the Reflection Document. (15 pts.)

4. Review the A&E Assignment Grading Rubric for expectations.

5. Upload the PLAAFP Statement Form (25 pts.), Writing Goals Worksheet (35
pts.), and Reflection Document (15 pts.) to Blackboard.
CASE STUDY: JOSH

In January, Josh, a sixth-grade student in an urban middle school, was referred for a
psychoeducational evaluation because of his deteriorating achievement in language
arts and social studies. A multidisciplinary team met to formulate an assessment
plan. Attending this meeting were Josh’s mother; his language arts teacher, who
represented the other teachers on his team (i.e., social studies, science, and math);
the school principal, Josh’s counselor, and the building’s school psychologist.

Josh’s teachers began the discussion by expressing their concern that Josh was not
completing his homework and was earning poor scores on tests and quizzes in
language arts and social studies; depending on his performance on the last tests in
the grading period, he might pass those courses. In contrast, Josh was earning an A
in science. In his mathematics class, Josh was a contradiction. He could do all of the
calculations with speed and accuracy. He solved word problems accurately, but
slowly. He was going to ear a C in math for the semester because he did not
complete the homework and because his written explanations about how he solved
the problems were incomplete. All of his teachers felt Josh was a bright student but
some worried that he was becoming discouraged.

Josh’s mother reported that he is the youngest of three children. Josh’s older brother
and sister had not experienced any difficulties in school. The mother reported that
Josh spent several hours every day working on his homework and studying for tests.
Although he wanted to go to college to become an engineer and build bridges, he
doubted his ability to even pass sixth grade.

Josh’s counselor summarized his elementary school records. Josh earned a full-scale
IQ score of 128 on the group intelligence test administered in third grade. Yet his
records indicated that he had had more difficulty than other students in reading. He
was consistently evaluated as outstanding in math and science. Last year, his fifth-
grade teacher had noted upon each report card that Josh was a slow reader.

The team felt that the school psychologist should complete a formal assessment of
Josh’s intelligence and achievement to see if he had a learning disability in reading
that was affecting his school performance. The school psychologist administered the
fifth edition of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC V). The
psychologist also administered the third edition of the Wechsler Individual
Achievement Test (WIAT III) because it corresponded nicely to the district’s
curriculum and instruction.

Josh earned the following standard scores (mean = 100; S = 15) on the WISC V:

Verbal Comprehension 127

Visual Spatial 126
Working Memory 100
 Fluid Reasoning 105
Processing Speed 80

Josh earned the following standard scores (mean = 100; S = 15) on the WIAT
III subtests, supplemental subtests, and composites.

SUBTESTS
Listening Comprehension 121
Reading Comprehension 102
Math Problem Solving 115
Sentence Composition 91
Word Reading 88
Essay Composition 97
Pseudoword Decoding 84
Numerical Operations 123
Oral Expression 119
Oral Reading Fluency 77
Spelling 100
Math Fluency – Addition 125
Math Fluency – Subtraction 123
Math Fluency – Multiplication 130

SUPPLEMENTAL SUBTESTS
Oral Reading Accuracy 91
Oral Reading Rate 79

COMPOSITES
Oral Language 120
Reading 88
Written Expression 96
Mathematics 123

The psychologist also reported that Josh was quite forthcoming about how school
was going and why he was having trouble in language arts and social studies. He
said that the reading was really hard to understand that he had to read the same
passage a few times to get it. He also said that by the time he had finished his
reading assignments, he was so tired that he just rushed through his written
homework. He said that he did not like to write “that stuff in math class” and that it
should be enough to get the right answer by doing the problem the correct way.

The team concluded that Josh demonstrated a cognitive deficit in the area of
Processing Speed which is the ability to fluently and automatically perform
cognitive tasks, especially when under pressure to maintain focused attention and
concentration. Josh also demonstrated difficulty with reading decoding. He was slow
and inaccurate. Lack of reading fluency in and of itself reduces reading
comprehension, and Josh was clearly below that threshold of reading fluency. His
lack of fluency combined with his poor performances in word reading and
pseudoword decoding strongly suggested that Josh was having a major problem in
decoding. Given the nature of the school’s curriculum in middle school, where
reading is a primary way in which students acquire information, Josh’s limited
reading skills necessarily were causing achievement problems in language arts and
social studies, where reading is stressed. His reading skills were also having an
impact on science, but to a lesser degree. The team concluded that Josh was eligible
for special education in the area of reading. However, given that the multiple-skill
test of achievement (WIAT III) only provided initial information suggesting that Josh
was struggling with decoding, additional information was collected using a
diagnostic reading test, which provided a greater sampling of Josh’s specific skills,
and lack thereof, in the area of reading decoding. Furthermore, more detailed
information was collected on the nature of reading instruction he had been
provided. This information could better inform instructional planning to address
difficulties.

An IEP team was formed, and the team met and developed a plan whereby Josh
received intensive instruction in phonics starting with a focus on vowel diagraphs,
with additional emphases on both accuracy and fluency.

The following instructional interventions were recommended:

 Provide activities to increase rate and fluency, such as flash cards or speed
drills through educational software.
 Provide strategies that improve the rate of task completion.
 Encourage Josh to self-monitor progress, such as graph for reading fluency
and writing fluency.

The following accommodations were also recommended:

 Shortened instructions
 Provide copy of lecture outlines with key terms highlighted.
 Structure writing activities with graphic organizers
 PLAAFP Statement Form

(1) Need (2) Focus (3) Data

PLAAFP Format: JOSH is working on/developing his skills in the area of (1),
specifically with an instruction focus in (2). JOSH is currently (3 with condition/s).

PLAAFP Statement:
 Writing Goals Worksheet

PLAAFP:

6Ws Strategy

By when?

Who?

Will do?

What?

How well?

Under what conditions?

*Annual Goal:

Time Frame Condition Behavior Criterion

 Enrolled Grade Level Standard
(Selected from TEKS Snapshot - Grade 6 Reading)

*Annual Goal

Instructional Intervention Recommendation

Accommodation Recommendation
 Reflection Document

TAP Indicator: Standards and Objectives

Planning effective lessons aligned to the standards is dependent upon the teacher’s
ability to create and communicate clearly defined learning outcomes or objectives
appropriate for the students. In many ways this indicator is the foundation for all
other indicators, because if the teacher is not clear about what he or she wants
students to know and be able to do as a result of the lesson, the balance of the lesson
cannot be properly developed or implemented. Both the students and the teacher
should understand what is to be accomplished during each lesson and the purpose
for what takes place.

Proficient Descriptors for Standards and Objectives

 Most learning objectives and state content standards are communicated.
 Sub-objectives are mostly aligned and logically sequenced to the lesson’s
major objective.
 Learning objectives are connected to what students have previously learned.
 Expectations for student performance are clear.
 State standards are displayed.
 There is evidence that most students demonstrate mastery of the objective.

Answer the following questions in your own words:

1. List one detailed example of how a teacher in your field placement displayed
the standard/objective for the lesson.
2. Why is it important to display the standard/objective for a lesson?
3. Why is it important for a general education teacher to know a student’s IEP
goal?
 EDTP 3305
A&E Assignment
Grading Rubric

PLAAFP Unsatisfactory Developing Proficient

Statement Form
Need Content/skill area is Content/skill area is Content/skill area is
not identified. identified but is not identified and is
appropriate for the appropriate for the
student’s area of student’s area of
need. need.
Focus The content/skill is The content/skill is The content/skill is
not clearly and too general and not clearly and
specifically measurable (you specifically
identified. can count it or identified and is
observe it). measurable (you
can count it or
observe it).
Data The data is not The data is based on The data is based on
based on the Case the Case Study but the Case Study and
Study information does not clearly and clearly and
does not support the explicitly supports explicitly supports
identified need and the identified need the identified need
focus. and focus. and focus.
Statement The statement does The statement does The statement does
not reflect the Case reflect the Case reflect the Case
Study data, is too Study data but is too Study data, is
general (does not general (does not specific (follows the
follow the suggested follow the suggested suggested format),
format), and not format) and may or and measurable
measurable (you not be measurable (you can count it or
can count it or (you can count it or observe it).
observe it). observe it).

Writing Goals Unsatisfactory Developing Proficient

Worksheet
6 Ws Strategy The 6 Ws are The 6 Ws are The 6 Ws are
incomplete and/or complete and the complete and the
the information is information is information in each
not based on the mostly based on the category is based on
PLAAFP statement. PLAAFP statement. the PLAAFP
statement.
Annual Goal The goal is not The goal is based on The goal is based on
based on the the PLAAFP but the PLAAFP and
PLAAFP and does does not include an does include an
not include an appropriate time appropriate time
appropriate time frame, condition, frame, condition,
frame, condition, behavior, and behavior, and
behavior, and criterion. criterion.
 criterion.
Enrolled Grade- The standard is not The standard is The standard is not
Level Standard linked to the linked to the linked to the
PLAAFP and Annual PLAAFP and Annual PLAAFP and Annual
Goal. Goal but is not the Goal and is the
appropriate grade appropriate grade
level. level.
Instructional The instructional The instructional The instructional
Intervention intervention does intervention targets intervention targets
not target Josh’s Josh’s deficit areas Josh’s deficit areas
deficit areas and but does not clearly and supports his
does not support his support Josh’s Annual Goal.
Annual Goal. Annual Goal.
Accommodation The accommodation The accommodation The accommodation
does not target targets Josh’s deficit targets Josh’s deficit
Josh’s deficit areas areas but does not areas and supports
and does not clearly support his Annual Goal.
support his Annual Josh’s Annual Goal.
Goal.

Reflection Unsatisfactory Developing Proficient

Document
Question 1 A detailed example A brief example is A detailed example
is not provided. The provided. The is provided. The
response is limited response is at least 3 response is
(1-2 sentences). sentences. sufficient (more
than 3 sentences.).
Question 2 The response is The response The response
limited (1-2 includes some includes specific
sentences) and does details/examples details/examples
not include specific and is a minimum of and is more than 3
details/examples. 3 sentences. sentences.
Question 3 The response is The response The response
limited (1-2 includes some includes specific
sentences) and does details/examples details/examples
not include specific and is a minimum of and is more than 3
details/examples. 3 sentences. sentences.