17 Sep It is important to note that the first reaction most principals have to situations such as the one described in the case study is to deflect blame towards the school district. Althoug
It is important to note that the first reaction most principals have to situations such as the one described in the case study is to deflect blame towards the school district. Although never easy, being a professional means working with what you have and making decisions with the resources available. Metaphorically, throwing your hands in the air and lamenting that the school district is to blame does nothing to address the issues. Successful school leaders develop a holistic perspective that sees the bigger picture.
The purpose of this assignment is to address how site administrators can strive to accommodate all stakeholders while taking responsibility for what happens on the school campus.
Part 1: Case Analysis
Respond to the case study by addressing the following :
- Brief summary of the case
- Identify the issues to be resolved
- Stakeholders involved in the issues
- One or two existing laws or court rulings that relate to the issues
- District policies that relate to the issues
- Possible solutions to the issues
- The solutions chosen to resolve the issues
- Action steps (2-5) for implementing each solution, including a timeline for each step
- Potential moral and legal consequences of each solution
Part 2: Rationale
Support the case analysis with a 250-500 word rationale explaining the solutions you chose and how each solution:
- Reflects professional ethics, integrity, and fairness.
- Promotes social justice and ensures that individual student needs inform all aspects of schooling.
- Promotes collaboration, trust, learning, and high expectations.
Cite the case and any other source documents as appropriate.
If possible, share your analysis with your principal mentor and make revisions based on his or her feedback before submitting with Part 1.
While APA style format is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and any source documents should be referenced using APA documentation guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
Case Study: Special Education
You are the assistant principal overseeing the counseling and special education departments of a large, K-8 elementary school. The counseling department documents students on 504 plans, and the special education staff monitors students with IEPs. There are 4.5 counselors, four special education resource teachers, and 79 regular education teachers assigned to the school. There are two additional educators assigned to the special education department in addition to the resource teachers.
In a school of 2,400 students, 100 students have 504 plans and 180 students have IEPs. The accommodations for both range from copies of notes to preferential seating to test taking. For test taking, the accommodations can include verbal tests, scribes, chunked questions, alternate testing site (testing center), and use of notes. Currently, both types of students are served in the classroom or the testing center. The classroom accommodations are the responsibility of the student and teacher and the testing center accommodations are the responsibility of the student and the testing center coordinator.
At the end of the last school year, staffing was cut. Special education support staff was reduced by one employee, the testing center coordinator. Special education teachers will continue to accommodate their students through their programs and with their current staff. Special education class sizes are 17 or lower.
The issue for regular classroom teachers is how to provide the testing accommodation for the 504 students. Regular classroom teachers can have 40 students in a class and total contacts that do not exceed 185. They are also responsible for English as a second language learners and their ILLPs. They can have multiple students with 504s, IEPs for inclusion, ILLPs, and gifted students. They are responsible for all levels of learning in their classroom. Many do this through differentiated learning, cooperative groups, project-based learning, and peer work. These do not address the alternate testing site for 504 students.
Teachers are upset because they feel they cannot meet everyone’s needs. They are uncomfortable with students sitting in the halls to take a test. Parents are not happy with the change in the testing center and want an employee assigned to monitor the testing center. They do not understand why the district would cut this very important position. Special education teachers feel bad they cannot continue to help. Students are frustrated because the routines they have had established for so long are changing. They feel deserted and are now worried about their success.
© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
image1.jpeg
,
Case Study: Special Education – Rubric
Case Analysis 1-3 5 points
Criteria Description
Case Analysis 1-3
5. Target 5 points
Analysis skillfully and convincingly summarizes the case, identifies the issues to be
resolved, and identifies the stakeholders involved in the issues.
4. Acceptable 4.35 points
Analysis accurately summarizes the case, identifies the issues to be resolved, and
identifies the stakeholders involved in the issues.
3. Approaching 3.7 points
Analysis minimally summarizes the case, identifies the issues to be resolved, and
identifies the stakeholders involved in the issues.
2. Insufficient 3.45 points
Analysis inadequately summarizes the case, identifies the issues to be resolved, and
identifies the stakeholders involved in the issues.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Case Analysis 4-5 5 points
Criteria Description
Case Analysis 4-5
5. Target 5 points
Identifies compelling existing laws or court rulings and district policies related to
the issues.
4. Acceptable 4.35 points
Clearly identifies existing laws or court rulings and district policies related to the
issues.
Collapse All
3. Approaching 3.7 points
Vaguely identifies existing laws or court rulings and district policies related to the
issues.
2. Insufficient 3.45 points
Ineffectively identifies existing laws or court rulings and district policies related to
the issues.
Case Analysis 6-8 10 points
Criteria Description
Case Analysis 6-8
5. Target 10 points
Identifies exceptional possible solutions to the issues and insightfully selects ideal
solutions for resolving the issues. Action steps and timeline are thoughtful and
realistic.
4. Acceptable 8.7 points
Identifies possible solutions to the issues and ambiguously selects solutions for
resolving the issues. Action steps and timeline are weak.
3. Approaching 7.4 points
Identifies logical possible solutions to the issues and appropriately selects
competent solutions for resolving the issues. Action steps and timeline are suitable.
2. Insufficient 6.9 points
Identifies incomprehensible solutions to the issues and selects poor solutions for
resolving the issues. Action steps and timeline are irrelevant.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Case Analysis 9 5 points
Criteria Description
Case Analysis 9
5. Target 5 points
Moral and legal consequences of proposed solutions are thorough and proficiently
explained.
4. Acceptable 4.35 points
Moral and legal consequences of proposed solutions are properly explained.
3. Approaching 3.7 points
Moral and legal consequences of proposed solutions are missing key details.
2. Insufficient 3.45 points
Moral and legal consequences of proposed solutions are incorrectly explained.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed
Rationale 15 points
Criteria Description
Rationale
5. Target 15 points
Rationale compellingly explains how the proposed solutions: reflects professional
ethics, integrity, and fairness; promote social justice and ensure that individual
student needs inform all aspects of schooling; and promote collaboration, trust,
learning, and high expectations.
4. Acceptable 13.05 points
Rationale reasonably explains how the proposed solutions: reflect professional
ethics, integrity, and fairness; promote social justice and ensures that individual
student needs inform all aspect of schooling; and promote collaboration, trust,
learning, and high expectations.
3. Approaching 11.1 points
Rationale inexplicitly explains how the proposed solutions: reflect professional
ethics, integrity, and fairness; promote social justice and ensure that individual
student needs inform all aspects of schooling; and promote collaboration, trust,
learning, and high expectations.
2. Insufficient 10.35 points
Rationale inadequately explains how the proposed solutions: reflect professional
ethics, integrity, and fairness; promote social justice and ensure that individual
student needs inform all aspects of schooling; and promote collaboration, trust,
learning, and high expectations.
Organization 2.5 points
Criteria Description
Organization
5. Target 2.5 points
The content is well-organized and logical. There is a sequential progression of ideas
that relate to each other. The content is presented as a cohesive unit and provides
the audience with a clear sense of the main idea.
4. Acceptable 2.18 points
The content is logically organized. The ideas presented relate to each other. The
content provides the audience with a clear sense of the main idea.
3. Approaching 1.85 points
The content may not be adequately organized even though it provides the audience
with a sense of the main idea.
2. Insufficient 1.72 points
An attempt is made to organize the content, but the sequence is indiscernible. The
ideas presented are compartmentalized and may not relate to each other.
1. No Submission 0 points
Documentation of Sources 2.5 points
Criteria Description
citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and
style
5. Target 2.5 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment
and style, and format is free of error.
4. Acceptable 2.18 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is
mostly correct.
3. Approaching 1.85 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although several
minor formatting errors are present.
2. Insufficient 1.72 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
Mechanics of Writing 5 points
Criteria Description
includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use
5. Target 5 points
Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice reflects well-
developed use of practice and content-related language. Sentence structures are
varied and engaging.
4. Acceptable 4.35 points
Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not hinder
comprehension. A variety of effective sentence structures are used, as well as some
practice and content-related language.
3. Approaching 3.7 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in
language choice (register) and/or word choice are present.
2. Insufficient 3.45 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.
Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction are used.
1. No Submission 0 points
Total 50 points
