(2) Screening procedures used by a teacher or specialist to determine appropriate instructional strategies for curriculum implementation shall not be considered an evaluation.
(3) Domain means an aspect of a child’s functioning or performance that must be considered in the course of designing a case study evaluation. The domains to be considered are health, vision, hearing, social emotional status, functional performance, general intelligence, academic performance, communication status and motor abilities.
(2) Designate the persons to whom a request may be made;
(3) Identify the information that must be provided;
(4) Provide any assistance that may be necessary to enable persons making requests to meet any related requirements established by the School District; and
(5) Identify the process for providing the parents with notice of their rights with respect to procedural safeguards.
(2) To determine whether the child requires an evaluation, the School District may utilize screening data and conduct preliminary procedures such as observation of the child, assessment for instructional purposes, consultation with the teacher or other individual making the request, and a conference with the child.
(3) Within 14 school days after receiving a request for an evaluation, the School District shall determine whether an evaluation is warranted.
(4) If the School District determines not to conduct an evaluation, it shall provide written notice to the parents as required by State and federal law.
(5) If an evaluation is to be conducted:
(2) The following procedures shall be used for an evaluation:
ii. Current classroom-based assessments and observations;
iii. Observations by teachers and providers of related services;
iv. Information, if any, provided by the child; and
v. Information from specialized evaluations such as those performed by independent evaluators, medical evaluators, behavioral intervention specialists, bilingual specialists, etc.
(3) After review of the information described above, the IEP Team members shall determine whether additional evaluation data is needed in any relevant domain and from what source(s) to determine:
(2) The content of the child’s IEP.
(2) If documented efforts to locate and secure the services of a qualified bilingual specialist are unsuccessful, the School District shall use an individual who possesses the professional credentials required under 23 111. Admin. Code 5 226.840 to complete the specific components of the evaluation. This qualified specialist shall be assisted by a certificated School District employee or other individual who has demonstrated competencies in the language of the child.
(3) If documented efforts to locate and secure the services of a qualified bilingual specialist or a qualified specialist assisted by another individual are unsuccessful, the School District shall conduct assessment procedures which do not depend upon language. Any special education resulting from such alternative procedures shall be reviewed annually until the student’s proficiency is determined no longer to be limited pursuant to 23 111. Admin. Code 5 228.
(4) Tests given to a child whose primary language is other than English shall be relevant, to the maximum extent possible, to his/her culture.
(5) Determination of the child’s mode of communication shall be made by assessing the extent to which the child uses verbal expressive language and the use he or she makes of other modes of communication (e.g., gestures, signing, unstructured sounds) as a substitute for verbal expressive language.
(6) If the child’s receptive and/or expressive communication skills are impaired due to hearing and/or language deficits, the School District shall utilize test instruments and procedures that do not stress spoken language and one of the following:
(7) The child’s language use pattern, proficiency in English, mode of communication, and general cultural identification shall be noted in the child’s temporary student record, and this information shall be used in the evaluation and in the development and implementation of the individualized education program.
(2) A) The child does not make sufficient progress to meet age or State- approved grade-level standards in one or more of the areas identified above when using a process based on the child’s response to scientific, researched-based intervention; or
B) The child exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or both, relative to age, State-approved grade-level standards, or intellectual development, that is determined by the group to be relevant to the identification of a specific learning disability, using appropriate assessments; and
The group determines that its findings above are not primarily the result of:
- A visual, hearing, or motor disability;
- Cognitive disability;
- Emotional disability;
- Cultural factors;
- Environmental or economic disadvantage; or
- Limited English proficiency.
(3)To ensure that underachievement in a child suspected of having a specific learning disability is not due to lack of appropriate instruction in reading or math, the group must consider, as part of the evaluation:
- Data that demonstrate that prior to, or as a part of, the referral process, the child was provided appropriate instruction in regular education settings, delivered by qualified personnel; and
- Data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal assessment of student progress during instruction, which was provided to the child’s parent(s).
(4) The public agency must promptly request parental informed written consent to evaluate the child to determine if the child needs special education and related services, and must adhere to the timeframes, unless extended by mutual written agreement of the child’s parent(s) and a group of qualified profesionals:
- (a) If, prior to a referral, a child has not made adequate progress afteran appropriate period of time when provided instruction, as described above; and
- Whenever a child is referred for an evaluation.
(2) Have at least one member of the group conduct an observation of the child’s academic performance in the regular classroom after the child has been referred for an evaluation and parental informed written consent is received.
(2) The basis for making the determination, including assurance that the determination has been made in accordance with Section 3, C (3) (a & b);
(3) The relevant behavior, if any, noted during the observation of the child and the relationship of that behavior to the child’s academic functioning;
(4) The educationally relevant medical findings, if any;
(1) The determination of the group concerning the effects of a visual, hearing, or motor disability; cognitive disability; emotional disability; cultural factors; environmental or economic disadvantage; or limited English proficiency on the child’s achievement level; and
(2) If the child has participated in a process that assesses the child’s response to scientific, research-based intervention:
ii. Strategies for increasing the child’s rate of learning; and
iii. The parent(s)’ right to request an evaluation.
20 U.S.C. Â§Â§ 1412 (State eligibility), 14,12(a)(3), 1413 (local educational agency eligibility), 1413(a)(l), 1413(a)(3).
34 C.F.R. Â§Â§ 300.122, 300.201,300.301- 300.311.
23 Ill. Admin.Code Â§Â§ 226.110, 226.120, 226.130, 226.135, 226.140, 226.150, 226.180