ARD reflection #1

Artifact: ARD Agenda

Describe:

I attended an initial ARD for a 2nd grade student. The student was referred by his second grade teachers
and parent for a special education evaluation. He is unable to focus long enough to get directions and/or
explanation of the assignments. He also has difficulty recognizing all of the alphabet which in turn makes
it difficult for him to read grade level or below grade level vocabulary words. He becomes frustrated and
exhibits negative behavior such as throwing the work or throwing items at classmate or teacher. Teachers
also observed that the student lacks concentration to learn objectives. He is working at the kindergarten
to first grade level in math. Based on this information, the campus referral committee recommended a
full and individual evaluation to determine if the student meets criteria as a student with a Specific
Learning Disability and Other Health Impairment. This is a initial ARD to review assessment and
determine if the student qualifies for special education services. Members in attendance were the
general education teacher (Reading/Language Arts), Special education teacher, diagnostician,
principal, school nurse and the parent. The ARD was chaired by the special education dept.
chairperson.

Analyze:

a. Importance of findings: This ARD helped me to see the roles of each member of the ARD. I
was able to observe the diagnostician articulate her findings to the committee. It was evident
that each member valued their roles and participated to ensure that the child's needs were met.
For example, the diagnostician, parent, general education and special education teachers work
together to develop IEPs. The principal also gave suggestion on how campus resources could be
used to help the student meet his annual goals.

b. Connections to 5 year goals/desired position: As a future diagnostician I found this ARD to
be very informative. It was great to see how the team works together to develop the best plan for
the success of one child. The parent was very receptive to feedback and ideas of the committee.
It was obvious that she was an active participant in her child's education.
c. Compare/contrast findings to experience: I have been a member of many ARDs and I must
admit that collaboration among all the members of the committee is not always present. There
have been numerous occasions were interactions between parents and teachers are not positive
which many times have a negative effect on the child. The parent was very thankful to the
school staff for helping her daughter have a successful school year and teachers were eager to
use the findings of the FIE to develop the most effective individualized IEP.

Appraise:

I feel the ARD was a success. This ARD was clearly an example of how when members of the
committee work together for the best interest of the child, the goal of the ARD can and will be
achieved.

Transform:

a. As a future diagnostician, I would like to work collaboratively with members of the IEP
committee to develop the best program for the child.

b. As a future diagnostician I want to interpret and communicate the results of the assessment to
the committee in a way that is understandable to everyone.

ARD Reflection #2
Artifact:

Agenda from ARD

Describe:

I attended an initial ARD for a 3rd grade student. The student was referred by his third grade teachers and
for a special education evaluation. He is repeating third grade and has a history of below grade level
performance in reading and math. Interventions were provided in reading and math; however, the student
still struggles in these subject areas. Based on this information, the campus referral committee
recommended a full and individual evaluation to determine if he meets criteria as a student with a
Specific Learning Disability. Members in attendance were the general education teachers
(Reading/Language Arts and Math), special education teacher/dept. chairperson, diagnostician,
principal, school nurse and the parent. The ARD was chaired by the special education dept.
chairperson.

Analyze:

a. Importance of findings: In order to effectively serve students with disabilities, the districts
strive to establish and maintain a full educational partnership with parents/adult students. To
accomplish this goal, it is imperative to clearly and effectively communicate to parents the
purpose of each action taken on behalf of their children in the ARD meeings. This ARD helped
me to see the importance of ensuring that parents understand the IEP process and that results
from the assessment are accurately relayed to parents in an understandable manner. The parent
appeared to be very apprehensive and overwhelmed at the beginning of the ARD meeting.

b. Connections to 5 year goals/desired position: As a future diagnostician I found this ARD to
be very helpful when dealing with an apprehensive parent. My goal is to be a diagnostician who
can effectively communicate to parents, teacher and other assessment personnel.

c. Compare/contrast findings to experience: I have been in ARDs where I didn't feel that the
diagnostician was successful in explaining the results of the assessment and the parent left
feeling confused and overwhelmed. This was definitely not the case at this ARD. Although the
parent was apprehensive at the beginning of the ARD, by the end of the ARD she had a different
demeanor. The department chair along with other members of the committee were able to
explain the IEP process. In addition, the diagnostician was able to articulate results of the
assessment to the parent in a way that was understandable.

Appraise:

This ARD could have ended completely different and could have resulted in the parent refusing
services. Communication is the key to a successful ARD! The professionalism and patience of
the department chairperson, teachers, diagnostician and administrator helped the parent feel at
ease and comfortable during the ARD meeting. The committee was able to develop a plan of
action to meet the needs of the child through special education services.


Transform:

a. As a future diagnostician, I would like to work collaboratively with members of the IEP
committee to develop the best program for the child.

b. As a future diagnostician I want to interpret and communicate the results of the assessment to
the committee in a way that is understandable to everyone.