Description
Review the following case scenario and complete the tasks that follow:
Student: Hannah
Age: 8
Grade: 3
Hannah is a third-grade student who transferred to Cartwright Elementary School late in the fall from a neighboring district. According to her records, Hannah has been in five different schools since kindergarten. Hannah is a very artistic and is easily distracted by her drawings. Her teacher, Mrs. Pei, has noticed that she seems to struggle with many independent reading assignments. When Mrs. Pei administered the mid-year universal screening measure, she was not surprised to see that Hannah’s score had fallen below the grade-level benchmark. Consequently, Mrs. Pei decided to monitor Hannah’s reading performance once a week for seven weeks using a measure of reading fluency. The rate of growth she is expected to achieve by the end of seven weeks is 1.2. Hannah’s scores are in the graph and table below.
Compose a 500-750-word evaluation of Hannah. Incorporate the following:
- Review journal articles on response-to-intervention (RTI) activities, including data-based decision-making, determining performance level, and making tier placement decisions.
- Using the seven weeks of progress monitoring data outlined above, calculate Hannah’s slope (change in x over the change in y) and identify the change in the number of words read correctly from beginning to end.
- Determine whether Hannah is responding adequately to Tier 1 instruction. Elaborate.
- Based on your evaluation, what tier of instruction would you recommend for Hannah?
- What do you recommend Hannah read, based on her interests and background?
- Cite a minimum of two scholarly sources.
Source: The IRIS Center for Training Enhancements, http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/
Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
Other material that might help answer the assignment
Read “Differentiated Instruction: Making Informed Teacher Decisions,” by Watts-Taffe, Laster, Broach, Marinak, McDonald Connor, and Walker-Dalhouse, from Reading Teacher (2012).
Reading Strategies for Elementary Students With Learning Difficulties: Strategies for RTI (2nd Edition) William N. Bender, Martha J. Larkin
“Crossing Boundaries and Initiating Conversations about RTI: Understanding and Applying Differentiated Classroom Instruction” by Walker-Dalhouse et al., from Reading Teacher (2009).
Read pages 17-20 of “RTI: Data-Based Decision Making” from the Iris Center.
http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/ICS-012.pdf
At Risk and Struggling Readers Assignment Data
© 2014. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Course Code
SPD-580
Class Code
SPD-580-O501
Criteria
Criteria
Percentage
100.0%
Student Evaluation
35.0%
Student Recommendations
35.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose
10.0%
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling,
punctuation, grammar, language use)
5.0%
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the
major and assignment)
5.0%
Research Citations (in-text citations for
paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference
page listing and formatting, as appropriate to
assignment and style)
10.0%
Total Weightage
100%
At-Risk and Struggling Readers
No Evidence (0.00%)
No submission.
No submission.
No submission.
No submission.
No submission.
No submission.
50.0
Nominal Evidence (69.00%)
Student evaluation provided fails to outline slope, number of
words read, and tier instruction response.
Student recommendations fail to provide detailing tiered
instruction and suggested reading.
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing
claim.
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice
and/or sentence construction are used.
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format
is rarely followed correctly.
No reference page is included. No citations are used.
Unacceptable Evidence (74.00%)
Inadequate student evaluation provided outlining slope,
number of words read, and tier instruction response.
Evaluation somewhat supported by research.
Inadequate student recommendations provided detailing
tiered instruction and suggested reading. Recommendations
somewhat supported by research.
Main claim is insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose
is not clear.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the
reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or
word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but
not varied.
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing
or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.
Acceptable Evidence (87.00%)
Adequate student evaluation provided outlining slope,
number of words read, and tier instruction response.
Evaluation supported by research.
Adequate student recommendations provided detailing
tiered instruction and suggested reading. Recommendations
supported by research.
Main claim is clear and forecast the development of the
paper. It is descriptive and appropriate to the purpose.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may
be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence
structures and figures of speech.
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no
errors in formatting style.
Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited
sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is
usually correct.
Target Evidence (100.00%)
Comprehensive student evaluation provided outlining slope,
number of words read, and tier instruction response.
Evaluation clearly supported by research.
Comprehensive student recommendations provided detailing
tiered instruction and suggested reading. Recommendations
clearly supported by research.
Main claim is comprehensive. The essence of the paper is of
the paper clear.
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic
English.
All format elements are correct.
In-text citations and a reference page are complete and
correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.
Comments
Points Earned
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
