Monitoring Maxwell's Improvement
 
Main Page >Teaching >> Student Improvement >>> Monitoring Maxwell's Improvement >>>> Student History

Before determining what modifications to implement, I examined Maxwell's history and disability classification. His confidential file revealed the first signs of disability appeared in pre-school when he demonstrated particular difficulty with consonant clusters. The information in the file implies that this speech difficulty resulted in delayed reading and written language skills. This difficulty is also demonstrated through his End of Grade Scores throughout elementary school (See Table 2).
 
Grade Level Reading Score Precentile Math Score Percentile
3 11 44
4 20 96
5 66 96
6 42 98
7 74 99
8 75 99
Table 2. Maxwell Butterfield's End of Grade Test Scores

Because of the obvious discrepancy between his math scores and his reading scores, Maxwell was tested for a learning disability in fourth grade and identified through the results of two tests: the Woodcock Johnson Test and the Wechshler Intelligence Scale for Children or WISC-III (See Tables 3 and 4).
 
 
Subject Tested Scores in 1995 Scores in 1998 Scores in 2001
Broad Reading 95 100 97
Mathematics 134 132 138
Written Language 81 75 98
Table 3. Maxwell Butterfield's Woodcock Johnson Scores
 
 
Subject Tested Scores in 1995 Scores in 1998 Scores in 2001
Verbal 126 119 116
Performance 129 111 125
Full Scale 130 116 135
Table 4. Maxwell Butterfield's WISC-III Scores

Both of these tests are used not only to compare the student to a norm group, but also to identify whether there is a specific learning disability present. A person can be labeled as having a specific learning disability when a discrepancy of 15 points exists between the WISC-III and the Woodcock Johnson test. The proctor of the two tests reported that Maxwell was unable to hold information in short-term memory while performing some operation or manipulation utilizing it. He also had difficulty scanning and sequencing simple, visual information. However, what resulted in Maxwell's being diagnosed with a specific learning disability in reading and the written language was the fact that his Woodcock Johnson scores in reading and the written language were not as high as his WISC-III scores. However, his consistently high scores in mathematics allowed the proctor to identify him as academically gifted in that subject. The proctor also observed Maxwell's behavior and noted that Maxwell always put forth excellent effort. When the proctor had difficulty understanding Maxwell's speech impediment and had to ask him to repeat his answer, Maxwell always did so willingly.
 As shown in Tables 3 and 4, there was little change in Maxwell's scores from 1995 to the present. In 1998, the proctor noted that Maxwell continued to struggle with phonological processing and decoding skills. She reasoned that these struggles resulted in him having difficulty getting information through reading. Additionally, he has to work hard to express his thoughts and ideas in writing, having a plethora of errors in spelling, punctuation, and omission of words. His troubles with language can be clearly seen when his Woodcock Johnson Scores are compared with a norm group (See Table 5).
 
 
Subject Tested Discrepancy from Norm Group
Reading Comprehension -23
Written Expression -41
Mathematics +16
Table 5. Comparison of Maxwell Butterfield's 1998 Woodcock Johnson Scores to Norm
 

 After the 1998 tests, a group of special education and general education teachers met with Maxwell's parents to form an individualized education program. They created a list of short-term goals, which were to be met with 85% accuracy over the next year:
Maxwell Butterfield would

The evaluation of whether the goals were met would be conducted using report cards and grades on papers. Additionally, the group created a list of modifications that would be used in the classroom in order to give Maxwell the proper support:
For classroom instruction: For testing situations: For paper/essay situations: In a list of long-term goals, the parents mentioned Maxwell's strong desire to attend college and expressed their hope for Maxwell to be a productive citizen in the community.
In 2001, a similar process to 1998 was conducted. Maxwell's Woodcock Johnson scores were compared to a norm group again, but this time using a percent (see Table 6).
 
 
Subject Tested Maxwell Butterfield's Percent Correct Average Percent Correct for Norm
Passage Comprehension 96% 90%
Letter-Word Identification 63% 90%
Mathematics 100% 90%
Broad Written Language 45% 98%
Dictation 75% 90%
Table 6. Comparison of Maxwell Butterfield's 2001 Woodcock Johnson Scores to Norm
 

The proctor again mentioned Maxwell's struggles with the written language and noted that he was creative in developing paragraphs and in organizing papers. His creativity, however, was causing him to write complex sentences that were difficult to discern. His short, straightforward sentences were much easier to understand. In their discussion of short-term goals, it was decided that the goals would remain the same since they were not reached to 85% accuracy. In terms of his modifications, the group eliminated all of the classroom instruction modifications and left the following:
For testing situations:

For paper/essay situations:
Back to Monitoring Maxwell's Improvement Current Performance
Main Page Reflection
Evaluation Learning