This IEP comes from the Oregon Department of Education. See the full IEP here. 

Because the images are hard to read, a transcript is below.

C. SUMMARY OF PRESENT LEVELS OF ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT AND FUNCTIONAL PERFORMANCE

Strengths of Student (Academic, Functional, Behavior, Learning characteristics, etc.)
[Redacted] works hard and has strong academic abilities. He has a good memory and high comprehension skills. He is a kind and compassionate student toward his peers. He enjoys science topics such as animals and astronomy.

Concerns of the parent(s) for enhancing the education of the student
[Redacted]’s parents provided a written response to concerns of the parent section and asked that it be included as written:
[Redacted]’s concern is as content to the learning process as reading. It is a fundamental academic skill. [Redacted]’s deficits in his academic writing and written language skills therefore makes all other aspects of the learning process more difficult for him. He is unable to keep notes, convey thoughts and make meaning through writing, effectively revise work he had previously written, and use writing generally as a learning tool in the same manner as his peers. Compounding his deficits in the areas of writing related to processing, [Redacted]’s dysgraphia causes his handwriting to be inconsistent, with roughly 1 out of every 5 words illegible. He also continues to demonstrate significant difficulty with spelling. The illegibility of his writing and his spelling difficulties exacerbate the difficulty he has revising written work. Assistive technology can help with the writing process in increasing instances, but will never be a complete substitute for his ability to write by hand. Though speech to text improves his writing, other AT (i.e., word prediction) had proven less successful due to his spelling challenges. As a result of these deficits, [Redacted] needs goals related to written language, the writing process, mechanics of writing, and using assistive technology effectively.

ASHA recognizes five domains of language, all of which have implications related to writing, as follows:

• Phonology – accurate spelling of words while writing

• Morphology – appropriate use of grammar when writing

• Syntax – using correct sentence structure when writing

• Semantics – writing vocabulary

• Pragmatics – conveying point-of-view, intended message, etc.

Per these descriptions, [Redacted] struggles with phonology, morphology, semantics, and pragmatics as these domains relate to writing. It is likely, though I do not know it for fact, that he also struggles with syntax related writing skills. These deficits do not appear in his verbal language skills, and never have. However, that does not relieve the IEP team of the obligation to address them as they are very real written language concerns they are. Goals and specially designed instruction in these areas are critical to remediating his deficits and providing him the skills he needs to access the general curriculum and, therefore, provide FAPE.

Present level of academic performance, including the student’s need
The present level of academic performance, including the student’s need, is based on local and state/districtwide assessments.

EasyCBM Assessments Fall 2018
Grade 5 Fall Passage Reading Fluency: 146 Words per Minute at 89% accuracy.
Grade 5 Vocabulary Progress Monitoring 5_1: 96 Words per Minute at 100% accuracy.
Grade 5 Vocabulary Progress Monitoring 5_2: 100% accuracy
Grade 5 Vocabulary Progress Monitoring 5_3: 95% accuracy
Grade 5 Winter Vocabulary: 90% accuracy

Grade 5 Fall Multiple Choice Reading Comprehension (MCRC): 95% accuracy
Grade 5 Multiple Choice Reading Comprehension (MCRC) 5.3: The Disappearing Licorice: 80% accuracy
Grade 5 Multiple Choice Reading Comprehension (MCRC) 5.4: The Grand Experiment: 80% accuracy
Grade 5 Winter Multiple Choice Reading Comprehension (MCRC): 85% accuracy

Grade 5 Fall Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Math Benchmark: 48% accuracy
Grade 5 Fall Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Math Progress Monitoring: 70% accuracy
9/20/2018: iReady Initial testing: 461, 4th grade level in all areas.

Grade 5 Fall Progress Report Card – Score range 1-4 with a score of 3 being grade level proficient.
Reading: Score of 2 for Comprehension, 3 for Phonics and Word Recognition, and 2 for Fluency.
Writing: Score of 2 for Focus, Organization, Elaboration of Evidence, and Language/Vocabulary with a score of 1 for Conventions
Mathematics: Score of 2 for Numbers and Operations – Base Ten for both understands place value to thousandths and performs operations with multi-digit whole numbers to decimals in the hundredths.

[Redacted]’s 5th grade level writing expectations: By fifth-grade students are familiar with the basic framework of how to write a multiple paragraph essay. With informative and opinion pieces, they are required to write a clear topic sentence and create an organizational structure which ideas are logically organized. Paragraphs contain facts, definitions, concrete details, and quotations from sources to support main idea/opinions. Linking words, phrases, and/or clauses are used throughout. Precise language is present. With narratives, students provide even more description, including providing character responses to situations. Concrete words and sensory details are used to convey experiences and events.

Although [Redacted]’s core language scores place him in average to above average range, [Redacted] struggles with written expression. Parents and teachers report this difficulty is isolated to writing skills and does not/has not impacted his ability to read and decode familiar and unfamiliar words and text.

[Redacted]’s difficulties with writing skills was conducted by collecting various writing samples from his grade level class, the written language assessments and the speech room. Observations of [Redacted]’s functional skills as they relate to language are as follows:

Punctuation:
[Redacted] has been working on identifying when to use a period or comma with staff in the
classroom and in speech services. In the classroom he was able to locate when he should have used a period and made corrections independently. [Redacted] continues to make these mistakes in his own writing out loud.

Other punctuation observations include the use of apostrophes and question marks. [Redacted] was noted to inconsistently use an apostrophe for singular possessive nouns in his writing, but rarely used an apostrophe to create contractions and preferred to write out both words without writing included inconsistent appropriate use of question marks.

Spelling:
When asked to write a short paragraph, [Redacted] was able to utilize a prediction list to choose the correct word he wanted to use and then correctly copy the word (“Mischief”) on paper at the top of the page. However, while writing, [Redacted] did not reference the word at the top of the page and subsequently mis-spelled “mischief” each time he included the word in his composition.

[Redacted] was not actively writing as he was able to identify words he spelled incorrectly but was not able to correct these errors independently. When asked to reread his writing immediately after completing an assignment, [Redacted] was able to articulate that some of the words were not what he intended to say and was able to correct errors given adult support and the use of spell check or word prediction software.

[Redacted] was unable to express what he intended to write given a delay between when he turned in a classroom writing assignment and when asked to read it out loud (time lapse was 3 days). Stated, “I have no idea what this says”.

[Redacted]’s writing, without the use of spell check, word prediction software or speech to text, is often difficult to decipher. [Redacted] presents with moderate difficulties with encoding independently. For example, a percentage of words understood in a hand-written sample was taken. This percentage was calculated by counting the number of words understood and dividing by the total number of words. [Redacted]’s summary contained 78.65% of words understood and 21.35% of words were indecipherable. In contrast, a narrative writing sample taken from class using a word processor contained 86.55% of words understood and 14.5% of words were not understood. The accuracy of [Redacted]’s spelling was noted to improve, even further, when given a direct visual model of two simple sentences he was asked to combine to form one compound sentence using coordinating conjunctions.

Capitalization:
Observations of [Redacted]’s writing indicated he struggles with independently using capital letters appropriately and consistently. [Redacted] was not observed to use capital letters when referencing book titles or proper nouns. [Redacted] occasionally used capitalization of the first word at the beginning of sentences when he remembered to separate complete sentences by a period. [Redacted] used capitalization for the singular pronoun “I” in his writing when assisted by a word processor or speech to text. He demonstrated inconsistent use if capitalization for “I” in hand written samples.

Syntax:

Grammatical Morphemes:
[Redacted] used past tense in his writing when appropriate, most of the time, but occasionally omitted -ed endings. [Redacted] occasionally omitted plural and possessive -s but did not consistently use a 3rd person regular -s. [Redacted] writing included the use of some derivational morphemes most notably the -ly on the ends of words like “quickly” and “sadly” when appropriate and demonstrated consistent use of verb+ing endings.

[Redacted] writing also contained the correct use of the following grammatical morphemes: auxiliary verbs, pronouns, prepositions

Syntax:
[Redacted] writing contained the following clause types: main and dependent.

Lexical/Semantics:
[Redacted] writing contained low frequency words.

Flow:
[Redacted]’s tendency to switch between past and present tense, and his tendency to produce abrupt transitions affected the flow of his writing: narratives inserted breaks because [Redacted]
Linking words: [Redacted] wrote words that illustrated causal relationships between thoughts and ideas.

Pragmatics:
Audience/Presupposition: [Redacted] often demonstrated a lack of awareness about the background knowledge, experience, or interest of his readers.

Present level of developmental and functional performance (including results of initial or most recent evaluations)

Speech/Language Information:

[Redacted] currently substitutes a /d/ for his voiced /th/ sound in words and conversation. This articulation error does not impede his ability to be understood at this time and [Redacted] was judged as 100% intelligible to familiar and unfamiliar listeners. [Redacted]’s classroom teacher reported this does not impede his access to classroom curriculum.

[Redacted]’s classroom teacher was asked to fill out an “Educational Impact Checklist” related to Speech and language. This list helps identify areas where the student struggles and provides information about functional performance and skills within a classroom setting. [Redacted]’s teacher identified the following items, as they relate to [Redacted]’s expressive and conversational language skills: the student uses many filler words; the student exhibits disorganized thoughts in speech or writing, the student demonstrates word-finding difficulties, the student has difficulty expressing ideas verbally, and the student is unable to ask questions to clarify a message or obtain information. [Redacted] also reported that it takes much more time to complete writing assignments than other students, and that [Redacted] will change the subject or appear to be disinterested when working on writing assignments.

The CELF-5 was administered to obtain scores in relation to [Redacted]’s verbal language skills.

CELF-5 scores are as follows:
Core Language: 105
Receptive Language Index: 107
Expressive Language Index: 104
Language Content Index: 104
Language Memory Index: 106

(Scores reported have a mean of 100 and SD of 15)

[Redacted]’s standardized assessment score in conjunction with functional and observational data suggest that [Redacted] demonstrates age and grade appropriate oral language skills in the areas of morphology, phonology, syntax, semantics and pragmatics.