Kristen Parrott

IEP Meeting
September 18, 2015
EDUC 230
The overall eligibility decision in scenario one was that Anna did not need any special
education services. In the scenario, Anna is having difficulty in her reading class and her teacher
thinks that there is a learning disability present. In order to address if there is a learning disability
present, there was a meeting scheduled with different faulty members and Annas mother. I think
that the reason for the decision of not placing Anna with special needs services is because Anna
really does not have a learning disability. One of the factors that play into Anna not preforming
well is the tasks she is given at home. She has a lot to do as a third grader and with her mother
not coming home until later in the evening, Anna may not be getting the help she needs at home.
I also think that Annas teacher should let her read aloud, because even though she stumbles now,
it could help Anna in the future. The intelligence test that were given to Anna showed no
evidence of a learning disability. With these results, we can conclude that Anna is just a slow
learner and might need a little bit more attention along with a lighter work load at home.
The overall decision in scenario two is that Anna does have a learning disability and does
need services from a special education teacher. The teachers and Annas mother have a good
relationship and have been communicating for some time now. It was noticed that Anna had
some difficulty in the first grade with reading, so some actions were taken. Anna was given a
series of tests called Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) to asses her
level of reading. Annas mom works long hours and still is doing what she can to help her
daughter when she gets home. I feel that the decision to have Anna continue her daily classes
with having special help with reading is a good idea and I feel that it will definitely help. This
decision was made because even after the years of trying, the different programs used to try to
help, and the support of teachers and parents just wasnt working and Anna continued to struggle.

Kristen Parrott
IEP Meeting
September 18, 2015
EDUC 230
After reading these two scenarios, I have learned that IEPs take a lot to create. IEPs
should be precise and extremely detailed in order to best benefit the child. Individualized
Education Programs should include all the attempts that were taken to come to the conclusion of
a child needing assistance or not. During an IEP meeting, the people there usually consist of the
child (depending on age, in these scenarios, the child was not present), the parent(s)/guardian(s)
of the child, the childs teacher, the childs principle, a guidance counselor, and possibly a social
worker. The contribution these people had differed in each scenario. In the first scenario, Annas
mother was there, but did not say much at all. In the second scenario, Annas mother was much
more involved. She had great communication with Annas teacher and guidance counselor.
Annas teachers role changed between scenarios as well. In the first scenario, Annas teacher did
not try to help Anna at all. She just knew Anna was having difficulty reading and thought she
should have special needs services. In the second scenario, Annas teacher helped Anna as much
as she could. Annas teacher worked very hard with not only Anna, but Annas mother as well.
Ms. Liu had great communication with Annas mother. She noticed that Anna was having
difficulty, so she helped set up an IEP meeting to assess what best would benefit Anna. I feel that
the second scenario is more like how most IEP meetings go, or should go. The first scenario was
not very detailed and really did not seem like anything was done to help Anna. The second was
more detailed and seemed to be more beneficial to Anna. The participants in scenario two are
much more involved compared to scenario two. To me, it seemed that scenario two was much
more beneficial to Anna than scenario one was.