PED 5313 WEEK 2 CASE STUDY 2026 |
S
Complete Solutions | Lamar University |
Special Education Assessment | Pass
Guaranteed - A+ Graded
ase Study: Maya Chen
C
Background
Maya Chen is a 9-year-old third-grade student at Lincoln Elementary School in a mid-sized
suburban district. Maya was born in the United States to parents who immigrated from China
when Maya was an infant. Mandarin is the primary language spoken at home, though Maya is
conversationally fluent in English. Maya was identified with a Specific Learning Disability (SLD)
in reading (primarily in decoding and word recognition, consistent with dyslexia characteristics)
in first grade and has received special education services under an IEP since that time. Her
current IEP includes 45 minutes daily of pull-out reading intervention, extended time on all
assessments, and text-to-speech software for grade-level reading passages.
Maya also has a medical diagnosis of ADHD (Other Health Impaired) managed with a low-dose
stimulant medication prescribed by her pediatrician. Her parents, Mrs. and Mr. Chen, have
expressed increasing concern that Maya's reading progress has plateaued over the past
semester. Recent DIBELS 8th Edition data show Maya reading at approximately 45 words
correct per minute (WCPM) on grade-level passages, well below the third-grade benchmark of
90 WCPM. Her most recent Fountas & Pinnell assessment places her at a Level I (early second
grade). Maya's classroom teacher, Ms. Rivera, reports that Maya is increasingly reluctant to
participate in reading aloud and has begun avoiding written assignments. Mrs. Chen has
requested a full IEP review meeting, stating she is "not sure the school is doing enough" and
has heard about "new dyslexia laws" that might require additional services.
The annual IEP review is scheduled for next week. The IEP team will include Ms. Rivera
(general education teacher), Mr. Patel (special education case manager), the school
psychologist, an ESL/bilingual specialist, Maya's parents, and Maya (for portions of the meeting,
per her age-appropriate participation rights). The district has recently adopted a new universal
dyslexia screening protocol for K-3 students and has updated its assistive technology inventory
to include AI-powered reading supports and augmented communication tools.
Section A: Legal & Procedural Understanding
Q1: Under IDEA 2004 (as currently enforced through 2026), list the three specific components
that must be included in Maya's IEP to ensure FAPE is being provided. Explain why each
component is legally required.
Correct Answer: **[CORRECT]** (1) Measurable annual goals (including academic and
functional goals) designed to meet Maya's needs resulting from her disability and enable her to
, ake progress in the general education curriculum; (2) A description of how Maya's progress
m
toward meeting the annual goals will be measured, and when periodic progress reports will be
provided; (3) A statement of the special education and related services, supplementary aids and
services, and program modifications based on peer-reviewed research to the extent practicable,
that will be provided to enable Maya to advance appropriately toward attaining her annual goals
and be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum.
Rationale: These three components are explicitly mandated under 20 U.S.C.
§1414(d)(1)(A)(i)-(iii) and 34 C.F.R. §300.320(a). The measurable goals requirement ensures
that FAPE is not merely a promise but an accountable plan with defined outcomes. The
progress monitoring provision protects parental rights to timely information about their child's
educational progress. The services and supports specification ensures that the IEP is truly
individualized and not a generic template, which is the cornerstone of IDEA's FAPE guarantee.
Q2: Maya's parents have heard about "new dyslexia laws." Explain the relationship between
state-level dyslexia screening requirements and IDEA Child Find obligations. Under what
circumstance must a school district move from dyslexia screening to a comprehensive special
education evaluation?
Correct Answer: **[CORRECT]** State-level dyslexia screening laws (such as universal K-3
screeners) operate alongside but do not replace IDEA Child Find obligations. A school district
must move from screening to a comprehensive special education evaluation when: (a)
screening data and classroom performance indicate the student is at risk and continues to
struggle despite evidence-based intervention; (b) the Student Support Team (SST) or equivalent
team determines that available data suggest the student may have characteristics of dyslexia or
another disorder; and/or (c) a parent formally requests an evaluation at any time. Parental
consent is required for individualized assessments beyond universal screening.
Rationale: The 2025-2026 Georgia Dyslexia Handbook model clarifies that universal screeners
are administrative tools for all students and do not require parental consent, but individualized
assessments do. Importantly, a parent may request a Section 504 referral or special education
evaluation at any time, and the district cannot use the screening process to delay an appropriate
evaluation—this aligns with IDEA's Child Find mandate that requires districts to identify, locate,
and evaluate all children with suspected disabilities without delay.
Q3: Maya's IEP team must conduct a manifestation determination review if she were to receive
a disciplinary suspension exceeding 10 consecutive school days. List the two specific questions
the team must answer during this review, and identify the one procedural safeguard that must
be provided to Maya's parents regardless of the determination outcome.
Correct Answer: **[CORRECT]** The two questions are: (1) Was the conduct in question
caused by, or did it have a direct and substantial relationship to, Maya's disability? (2) Was the
conduct in question the direct result of the LEA's failure to implement the IEP? The procedural
safeguard that must be provided regardless of outcome is: Prior Written Notice (PWN) of any
decision regarding disciplinary change of placement, including the basis for the decision and the
parents' right to appeal.
Rationale: These two questions are established under 34 C.F.R. §300.530(e) and remain
current through 2026. The manifestation determination is a critical procedural protection to
prevent students with disabilities from being disproportionately punished for behaviors stemming
from their disability. Prior Written Notice is a fundamental procedural safeguard under IDEA
S
Complete Solutions | Lamar University |
Special Education Assessment | Pass
Guaranteed - A+ Graded
ase Study: Maya Chen
C
Background
Maya Chen is a 9-year-old third-grade student at Lincoln Elementary School in a mid-sized
suburban district. Maya was born in the United States to parents who immigrated from China
when Maya was an infant. Mandarin is the primary language spoken at home, though Maya is
conversationally fluent in English. Maya was identified with a Specific Learning Disability (SLD)
in reading (primarily in decoding and word recognition, consistent with dyslexia characteristics)
in first grade and has received special education services under an IEP since that time. Her
current IEP includes 45 minutes daily of pull-out reading intervention, extended time on all
assessments, and text-to-speech software for grade-level reading passages.
Maya also has a medical diagnosis of ADHD (Other Health Impaired) managed with a low-dose
stimulant medication prescribed by her pediatrician. Her parents, Mrs. and Mr. Chen, have
expressed increasing concern that Maya's reading progress has plateaued over the past
semester. Recent DIBELS 8th Edition data show Maya reading at approximately 45 words
correct per minute (WCPM) on grade-level passages, well below the third-grade benchmark of
90 WCPM. Her most recent Fountas & Pinnell assessment places her at a Level I (early second
grade). Maya's classroom teacher, Ms. Rivera, reports that Maya is increasingly reluctant to
participate in reading aloud and has begun avoiding written assignments. Mrs. Chen has
requested a full IEP review meeting, stating she is "not sure the school is doing enough" and
has heard about "new dyslexia laws" that might require additional services.
The annual IEP review is scheduled for next week. The IEP team will include Ms. Rivera
(general education teacher), Mr. Patel (special education case manager), the school
psychologist, an ESL/bilingual specialist, Maya's parents, and Maya (for portions of the meeting,
per her age-appropriate participation rights). The district has recently adopted a new universal
dyslexia screening protocol for K-3 students and has updated its assistive technology inventory
to include AI-powered reading supports and augmented communication tools.
Section A: Legal & Procedural Understanding
Q1: Under IDEA 2004 (as currently enforced through 2026), list the three specific components
that must be included in Maya's IEP to ensure FAPE is being provided. Explain why each
component is legally required.
Correct Answer: **[CORRECT]** (1) Measurable annual goals (including academic and
functional goals) designed to meet Maya's needs resulting from her disability and enable her to
, ake progress in the general education curriculum; (2) A description of how Maya's progress
m
toward meeting the annual goals will be measured, and when periodic progress reports will be
provided; (3) A statement of the special education and related services, supplementary aids and
services, and program modifications based on peer-reviewed research to the extent practicable,
that will be provided to enable Maya to advance appropriately toward attaining her annual goals
and be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum.
Rationale: These three components are explicitly mandated under 20 U.S.C.
§1414(d)(1)(A)(i)-(iii) and 34 C.F.R. §300.320(a). The measurable goals requirement ensures
that FAPE is not merely a promise but an accountable plan with defined outcomes. The
progress monitoring provision protects parental rights to timely information about their child's
educational progress. The services and supports specification ensures that the IEP is truly
individualized and not a generic template, which is the cornerstone of IDEA's FAPE guarantee.
Q2: Maya's parents have heard about "new dyslexia laws." Explain the relationship between
state-level dyslexia screening requirements and IDEA Child Find obligations. Under what
circumstance must a school district move from dyslexia screening to a comprehensive special
education evaluation?
Correct Answer: **[CORRECT]** State-level dyslexia screening laws (such as universal K-3
screeners) operate alongside but do not replace IDEA Child Find obligations. A school district
must move from screening to a comprehensive special education evaluation when: (a)
screening data and classroom performance indicate the student is at risk and continues to
struggle despite evidence-based intervention; (b) the Student Support Team (SST) or equivalent
team determines that available data suggest the student may have characteristics of dyslexia or
another disorder; and/or (c) a parent formally requests an evaluation at any time. Parental
consent is required for individualized assessments beyond universal screening.
Rationale: The 2025-2026 Georgia Dyslexia Handbook model clarifies that universal screeners
are administrative tools for all students and do not require parental consent, but individualized
assessments do. Importantly, a parent may request a Section 504 referral or special education
evaluation at any time, and the district cannot use the screening process to delay an appropriate
evaluation—this aligns with IDEA's Child Find mandate that requires districts to identify, locate,
and evaluate all children with suspected disabilities without delay.
Q3: Maya's IEP team must conduct a manifestation determination review if she were to receive
a disciplinary suspension exceeding 10 consecutive school days. List the two specific questions
the team must answer during this review, and identify the one procedural safeguard that must
be provided to Maya's parents regardless of the determination outcome.
Correct Answer: **[CORRECT]** The two questions are: (1) Was the conduct in question
caused by, or did it have a direct and substantial relationship to, Maya's disability? (2) Was the
conduct in question the direct result of the LEA's failure to implement the IEP? The procedural
safeguard that must be provided regardless of outcome is: Prior Written Notice (PWN) of any
decision regarding disciplinary change of placement, including the basis for the decision and the
parents' right to appeal.
Rationale: These two questions are established under 34 C.F.R. §300.530(e) and remain
current through 2026. The manifestation determination is a critical procedural protection to
prevent students with disabilities from being disproportionately punished for behaviors stemming
from their disability. Prior Written Notice is a fundamental procedural safeguard under IDEA
