Use your browser's print dialog and choose "Save as PDF" to keep a PDF copy.

Fictional example — no real student data.

Meeting packet: Student A (grade 8)

Created: October 21, 2026
Grade: Grade 8
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Plan status: Draft generated
Made with: Rules plus AI interpretation confirmed by the adult
Content version: 2026.10.21-draft1 (draft pending educational review)

Prepared with the Learning Support Planner. This packet is planning support for a discussion. It is not a diagnosis, an eligibility decision, or an official IEP or 504 plan.

1. Meeting brief

Identification history: Reported identification: Dyslexia. First identified: Grade 7. Labels reported: Dyslexia. Reported by the adult. This tool has not seen the evaluation and does not confirm or rule out any condition.

Later identification: The student was first identified in Grade 7. Later identification does not make the need less urgent.

Strengths

He explains science ideas really well and loves talking about space and how machines work. (Reported by adult)
Interests: Science, space, and building things (Reported by adult)
Strong vocabulary when talking about science. (Reported by adult)
Explains ideas well when speaking: “He explains science ideas really well” (AI interpretation, confirmed by adult)
An interest the student cares about: “loves talking about space and how machines work” (AI interpretation, confirmed by adult)

Reported barriers

Mathematics: Gets in the way of schoolwork: a little (Reported by adult)
Reading: Gets in the way of schoolwork: a lot (Reported by adult)
Reading: Which reading tasks: Reading words accurately; Reading speed (Reported by adult)
Mathematics: Which math tasks: Word problems (Reported by adult)
Reading: Difficulty reading unfamiliar words accurately: “reads unfamiliar words slowly” (AI interpretation, confirmed by adult)
Reading: Understands better when material is read aloud: “He knows the answer when someone reads it” (AI interpretation, confirmed by adult)
Mathematics: Difficulty with math word problems: “Dense math word problems are the hardest part of math homework” (AI interpretation, confirmed by adult)

Top actions to discuss

Discuss whether a full evaluation is needed (Requests professional evaluation)
Gather the learning history (Gathers evidence)
Include the student's view (Student participation)
Discuss assessment of word reading and fluency (Requests professional evaluation)
Discuss explicit instruction in word reading (Develops a skill)

Unresolved questions

What reading instruction or intervention has been tried, for how long and how often, and what changed
Which math supports have been tried and what measures show the response
How many intervention sessions were planned and how many actually happened
The name, schedule, and target skill of the current intervention
Progress-monitoring data from the intervention
A copy of the earlier evaluation report
Screening and progress-monitoring results the school has
The student's own view: what feels hardest, what helps, and what goal matters to them
Two or three recent work samples, with dates and notes on how much help was given

2. Action plan

Possible next steps to discuss — not actions the school has agreed to take.

1. Discuss whether a full evaluation is needed

Discuss first · Requests professional evaluation · General · Based on reported observations

Ask the school, in writing, whether a full and individual evaluation is warranted for the areas of concern you described. Name the skill areas and give examples. In Illinois, a parent can ask the school to evaluate at any time, whatever stage the child is at in MTSS, and putting the request in writing is recommended. Within 14 school days of a request, the district decides whether an evaluation is warranted; a decision not to evaluate must be explained to you in writing. If the district evaluates, eligibility is decided and the IEP is completed within 60 school days of your written consent (or before the next school year starts, if fewer than 60 school days are left in the year). Support or intervention can continue while this is discussed.

Why: You reported a current concern in at least one skill area and no current IEP. Support and an evaluation discussion can proceed together. Good grades, strengths, multilingual status, or a missing diagnosis do not rule out an evaluation discussion.

Based on:

I01 Reading impact: A lot (Reported by adult)
I02 Math impact: A little (Reported by adult)
I03 Writing impact: Not at all (Reported by adult)
I04 Spoken language impact: Not at all (Reported by adult)

Suggested role: Special education coordinator, school psychologist, or case manager
Evidence to collect: A copy of your written request and the date you sent it; The school's written response; Examples of the difficulty, such as work samples or teacher comments
Review: Check that you received the school's written decision and know the next step.
Limits: Asking for an evaluation does not mean the student has a disability. A qualified team decides what the full record means.
Sources: S26 (Same answer, second sentence); S21 (Chapter 3, "When the Data Lead to a Suspicion of a Disability...", p.25); S07 (Chapter 3, "Referral", p.21) (Chapter 2, "The Role of Parents in an MTSS Process", p.19) (Chapter 3, "Referral", p.21 (Appendix B p.151 repeats this wording; S06 p.53 has similar wording using "not warranted")); S27 (Section 226.110(c)(3)) (Section 226.110(d)) (Section 226.110(d), second sentence); S29 (Section 226.130(b)); S08 (Body paragraph 6, sentence 2); S18 (PDF (linked from https://sites.ed.gov/idea/idea-files/osep-dear-colleague-letter-on-ideaiep-terms/): Page 2, first paragraph (continues from page 1))
Rules: EVAL01 v1

2. Gather the learning history

Discuss first · Gathers evidence · General · Needs clarification

Write down earlier signs of difficulty, what may have hidden them (such as strong memory or extra adult help), and what changed as work got harder. Later recognition does not lower the priority of these needs. Early screening windows are not an upper age limit for recognizing reading needs.

Based on:

P02 Current grade: Grade 8 (Reported by adult)
H01 Identified before: Yes (Reported by adult)
H04 Grade at identification: Grade 7 (Reported by adult)

Suggested role: Parent, with input from past teachers if possible
Evidence to collect: Earlier report cards or teacher comments; Notes on earlier help at home or from tutors
Review: Share the history at the meeting and ask that it be considered alongside current information.
Sources: S25 (p. 43 (printed page footer; equals PDF page index), 'Support for Adolescent Students' (first paragraph)); S21 (Chapter 2, Part D, "Best Practices in Progress Monitoring", p.22) (Chapter 2, Part D, p.22); S06 (Chapter 5, "Screening for Older Students", p.65)
Rules: LATE01 v1

3. Include the student's view

Discuss first · Student participation · General · Based on reported observations

Ask the student what feels hardest, what helps, what teachers should understand, and what goal matters to them. Bring these words to the meeting. If accounts differ, keep both for discussion.

Why: Needs were recognized in grade 7 or later, or a secondary student has unresolved concerns without identification. Instructional history, workload changes, earlier support, and the student's own view are added. This does not lower the priority because early screening windows have passed. The student's own view of what is hard, what helps, and what goal matters belongs in the plan. If accounts differ, both are kept for discussion. The student's own answers have not been recorded yet.

Based on:

P02 Current grade: Grade 8 (Reported by adult)
H01 Identified before: Yes (Reported by adult)
H04 Grade at identification: Grade 7 (Reported by adult)
I01 Reading impact: A lot (Reported by adult)
I02 Math impact: A little (Reported by adult)
I03 Writing impact: Not at all (Reported by adult)
I04 Spoken language impact: Not at all (Reported by adult)

Suggested role: Parent and case manager
Evidence to collect: The student's answers in their own words
Review: Check that the student's view is part of the meeting record.
Sources: None yet: product design choice, pending specialist review.
Rules: LATE01 v1, VOICE01 v1, VOICE02 v1

4. Discuss assessment of word reading and fluency

Discuss first · Requests professional evaluation · Reading · Based on reported observations

Ask the team to look at accurate word reading, reading of longer words, and reading fluency. You reported difficulties that identify skills worth examining; the questionnaire cannot determine their cause.

Why: You reported difficulty reading unfamiliar or longer words. These observations identify skills worth examining; the questionnaire cannot determine their cause. Better listening comprehension can add to the picture, but it is not required and is not used as an ability-discrepancy test. You reported slow or effortful reading. Fluency, meaning accurate reading at a comfortable speed, is worth examining together with word reading.

Based on:

R01 Unfamiliar words: Often (Reported by adult)
R03 Which reading tasks: Reading words accurately; Reading speed (Reported by adult)

From the description (confirmed by the adult):

“reads unfamiliar words slowly” — Difficulty reading unfamiliar words accurately (AI interpretation, confirmed by adult)

Suggested role: Reading specialist, school psychologist, or special education teacher
Evidence to collect: Recent reading screening or progress-monitoring results; Notes from the student reading aloud; Spelling samples
Review: Check that results are explained skill by skill (word reading, fluency, comprehension) rather than as one overall number.
Limits: A reading difficulty alone does not establish dyslexia or any other condition.
Sources: S25 (p. 26 (printed page footer; equals PDF page index), 'Purpose and Use of Intervention-based Assessments (Tier 2 Dyslexia Screening)'); S21 (Chapter 2, Part C, p.18); S07 (Chapter 5, "Overview", p.35); S28 (Section 226.125(a))
Rules: READ01 v1, READ04 v1

5. Discuss explicit instruction in word reading

Discuss first · Develops a skill · Reading · Based on reported observations

Ask whether the student receives explicit, systematic instruction in decoding, including longer words, matched to the skills the assessment shows. Ask how often it happens, who teaches it, and how progress is checked.

Based on:

R01 Unfamiliar words: Often (Reported by adult)
R03 Which reading tasks: Reading words accurately; Reading speed (Reported by adult)

From the description (confirmed by the adult):

“reads unfamiliar words slowly” — Difficulty reading unfamiliar words accurately (AI interpretation, confirmed by adult)

Suggested role: Reading specialist or interventionist
Evidence to collect: Name and focus of current reading instruction; Planned and actually delivered schedule; Progress-monitoring results
Review: Review progress on comparable measures at a date the team sets, and adjust if progress is not adequate.
Sources: S25 (p. 29 (printed page footer; equals PDF page index), 'Interpreting Assessment Results'); S03 (Subsection (7)(c)); S21 (Chapter 4, "Providers of Dyslexia Instruction", p.42 (components defined pp.39-40)) (Chapter 4, "Providers of Dyslexia Instruction", p.42 (delivery principles defined pp.40-41)); S06 (Chapter 6, "Components of Effective Literacy Instruction", p.84); S09 (Recommendations tab, rec 1; level = evidence icon alt text 'Strong Evidence' (matches Summary PDF p.1))
Rules: READ01 v1

6. Bring the evaluation report

Also discuss · Gathers evidence · General · Needs clarification

You reported an earlier identification. Bring the written report if you have it, and be ready to say who made it, what was evaluated, and what was recommended. In this plan the label stays as you reported it; the school team considers the full record.

Why: You reported an earlier identification or diagnosis. It stays recorded as reported by you. The written report, who made it, and what was evaluated help the team. An earlier identification was reported, but a copy of the report is not at hand. Asking for a copy is a data request.

Based on:

H01 Identified before: Yes (Reported by adult)
H06 Report copy: No (Reported by adult)

Suggested role: Parent
Evidence to collect: The written report; Who made the identification and when
Review: Check that the team has seen the report and discussed its recommendations.
Sources: S25 (p. 42 (printed page footer; equals PDF page index), 'Outside Clinical Diagnosis of Dyslexia'); S06 (Chapter 4, "Qualifying for Special Education and Related Services", p.55); S28 (Section 226.125(c)); S32 (Page 1, sentence beginning 'As we explained in our October 23, 2015 letter, while IDEA does not prohibit…')
Rules: DX01 v1, DX03 v1

7. Build on strengths and interests

Also discuss · Builds on strengths · General · Based on reported observations

Share the strengths and interests you described. Ask how they could support engagement and an achievable goal the student chooses. Interests can make work more engaging; they do not prescribe a learning style.

Why: Every plan builds on the student's strengths and interests. They can support engagement and a student-chosen goal; they do not prescribe a learning style.

Based on:

I01 Reading impact: A lot (Reported by adult)
I02 Math impact: A little (Reported by adult)
I03 Writing impact: Not at all (Reported by adult)
I04 Spoken language impact: Not at all (Reported by adult)
S01 Strengths: He explains science ideas really well and loves talking about space and how machines work. (Reported by adult)

Suggested role: Whole team, with the student
Evidence to collect: Examples of the student's strengths
Review: Check that the plan names at least one strength and one student-chosen goal.
Sources: None yet: product design choice, pending specialist review.
Rules: STR01 v1

8. Discuss purposeful fluency practice

Also discuss · Develops a skill · Reading · Based on reported observations

Ask whether the plan includes purposeful fluency-building activities that help the student read with less effort, and how the practice text is matched to the student's current skills.

Why: You reported slow or effortful reading. Fluency, meaning accurate reading at a comfortable speed, is worth examining together with word reading.

Based on:

R03 Which reading tasks: Reading words accurately; Reading speed (Reported by adult)

Suggested role: Reading specialist or interventionist
Evidence to collect: Current fluency measures and the conditions they were taken under; The texts used for practice
Review: Compare fluency on the same kind of measure, under the same conditions, at a review date the team sets.
Sources: S09 (Recommendations tab, rec 2; level = evidence icon alt text 'Strong Evidence' (matches Summary PDF p.1))
Rules: READ04 v1

9. Try accessible text or oral access for content tasks

Also discuss · Improves access to content · Reading · Based on reported observations

For science, social studies, and other content tasks, ask for a trial of accessible text (for example, text-to-speech or audiobooks) and note whether participation improves. Keep a separate check of reading skill whenever reading itself is what is being taught or measured.

Why: Understanding appears stronger when material is read aloud. A trial of accessible text can show whether participation in content tasks improves; reading skill still needs its own assessment and instruction.

Based on:

R02 Understanding when read aloud: Yes (Reported by adult)

From the description (confirmed by the adult):

“He knows the answer when someone reads it” — Understands better when material is read aloud (AI interpretation, confirmed by adult)

Suggested role: Classroom teachers with the case manager or reading specialist
Evidence to collect: Which tasks the trial covers; Notes on participation and understanding with and without the support
Review: After the trial period the team sets, compare participation with and without accessible text.
Limits: Accessible text improves access; it is not reading instruction.
Sources: None yet: product design choice, pending specialist review.
Rules: READ05 v1

10. Compare math with and without the reading load

Also discuss · Gathers evidence · Mathematics · Needs clarification

Ask the teacher to try some word problems read aloud with the language explained, and record which barrier changes. If difficulty remains once reading and language demands are reduced, ask for a math-specific assessment question too. Reading and math needs can exist together.

Why: Difficulty with word problems can come from reading and language demands, from math reasoning, or from both. Comparing performance with the language load reduced shows which barrier changes. Mixed needs are possible.

Based on:

M01 Which math tasks: Word problems (Reported by adult)

From the description (confirmed by the adult):

“Dense math word problems are the hardest part of math homework” — Difficulty with math word problems (AI interpretation, confirmed by adult)

Suggested role: Math teacher
Evidence to collect: A few word problems done with the language clarified; The same math in fewer words
Review: Review the comparison at the next meeting.
Sources: S10 (Recommendations tab, rec 5; level = evidence icon alt text 'Strong Evidence' (matches Full Guide Table 1, p.3))
Rules: MATH02 v1

11. Ask for recent hearing and vision results

Gather information · Gathers evidence · General · Needs clarification

Ask whether recent hearing and vision screening results are available, or how to get them. Results help interpret other information; they do not replace a discussion of the learning concern.

Why: Recent hearing and vision results are not available, or a concern was noted. Results help interpret other information; they do not replace a discussion of the learning concern.

Based on:

I01 Reading impact: A lot (Reported by adult)
I02 Math impact: A little (Reported by adult)
I03 Writing impact: Not at all (Reported by adult)
I04 Spoken language impact: Not at all (Reported by adult)
AX02 Hearing check: Not sure (Needs clarification)

Suggested role: School nurse
Evidence to collect: Dates and results of recent hearing and vision checks
Review: Check that results are on file before decisions are made.
Sources: S19 (§ 300.8(c)(10)(ii) Disorders not included)
Rules: HV01 v1

12. Ask for details of current and past support

Gather information · Gathers evidence · General · Needs clarification

Ask the school for the name of each intervention, its schedule, the skill it targets, how many sessions were actually delivered, and the progress data collected.

Why: Reading is an area of concern, but the instruction and intervention tried so far are not known. This is a data request, not a conclusion. Math is an area of concern, but the supports tried so far and their results are not known. This is a data request, not a conclusion. An intervention was provided, but its name is not known. Asking the school for the details is a data request, not a conclusion. An intervention was provided, but progress data have not been shared or are not known. Asking for them is a data request.

Based on:

I01 Reading impact: A lot (Reported by adult)
I02 Math impact: A little (Reported by adult)
SUP01 Intervention received: Yes (Reported by adult)
R05 Reading support tried: Not answered (Needs clarification)
M05 Math support tried: Not answered (Needs clarification)
SUP02 Intervention name: Not answered (Needs clarification)
SUP07 Progress data shared: Not sure (Needs clarification)

Suggested role: Interventionist or case manager
Evidence to collect: Program name; Schedule; Target skill; Delivery records; Progress data
Review: Check that you have these details before the team judges whether support is working.
Sources: S22 (Subsection (4)(c), items 2-3); S34 (§ 300.309(b) (lead-in; (b)(1)-(2) follow))
Rules: READ06 v1, MATH05 v1, SUPPORT03 v1, SUPPORT04 v1

13. Ask what screening and progress data exist

Gather information · Gathers evidence · General · Needs clarification

Ask the school what reading, math, or writing screening and progress-monitoring results it has for the student, and ask for copies.

Why: No screening or test results are on hand. The plan still works without scores; asking what data the school has is a data request.

Based on:

I01 Reading impact: A lot (Reported by adult)
I02 Math impact: A little (Reported by adult)
I03 Writing impact: Not at all (Reported by adult)
I04 Spoken language impact: Not at all (Reported by adult)
SUP08 Written results: No (Reported by adult)

Suggested role: Classroom teacher or case manager
Evidence to collect: Copies of screening and progress-monitoring results
Review: Check that you have the results before the next meeting.
Sources: S01 ('Communication with Families', third bullet); S21 (Chapter 2, Part C, "Screening Data Gathering", p.19); S06 (Chapter 4, "Screening, Assessment, and Evaluation", p.53); S31 (Section after the "Screening Measures by Grade Level" chart, p.2)
Rules: SCORES02 v1

14. Ask how many sessions actually happened

Gather information · Gathers evidence · General · Needs clarification

Ask for the planned schedule and a record of the sessions actually delivered. Missing delivery information is a gap to fill, not evidence that the intervention failed.

Why: It is not known whether intervention sessions happened as planned. Missing delivery information produces a data request, not a claim that the intervention failed.

Based on:

SUP01 Intervention received: Yes (Reported by adult)
SUP04 Sessions delivered: Not sure (Needs clarification)

Suggested role: Interventionist
Evidence to collect: Planned schedule; Record of delivered sessions
Review: Compare planned and delivered sessions before judging progress.
Sources: S34 (§ 300.309(b) (lead-in; (b)(1)-(2) follow))
Rules: SUPPORT02 v1

15. Bring recent work samples

Gather information · Gathers evidence · General · Needs clarification

Collect two or three recent examples that show the difficulty and one that shows a strength. Note the date, the task, and how much help was given.

Why: No recent work samples are on hand. Two or three dated examples make the concern concrete.

Based on:

I01 Reading impact: A lot (Reported by adult)
I02 Math impact: A little (Reported by adult)
I03 Writing impact: Not at all (Reported by adult)
I04 Spoken language impact: Not at all (Reported by adult)
I09 Work samples: No (Reported by adult)

Suggested role: Parent and teachers
Evidence to collect: Recent work samples with dates and notes on help given
Review: Bring the samples to the meeting.
Sources: S06 (Chapter 4, Table 6: Special Education Meeting Types (Domain Meeting row), p.56); S18 (PDF (linked from https://sites.ed.gov/idea/idea-files/osep-dear-colleague-letter-on-ideaiep-terms/): Page 2, second paragraph (begins 'In determining whether a child has a disability…'))
Rules: WORK01 v1

3. Assessment discussion checklist

General

Which skill areas would an evaluation look at?
Who would do each part, and what would each part measure?
How and when will the results be explained to us?
Can support continue while the evaluation question is decided?
What does the history show about when difficulties began?
How are current demands different from earlier ones?
How will the student take part in planning?
How does the school team use the earlier report?
Which recommendations are being followed?
How can the student's strengths be used in the plan?
When were hearing and vision last checked?
What is the intervention called, and what does it teach?
How often does it actually happen?
What screening and progress data does the school have?
How many sessions were planned, and how many happened?
What do recent work samples show?

Reading

How accurately does the student read unfamiliar and longer words?
How fluent is reading in grade-level text?
Will spelling be looked at too?
How does listening comprehension compare? This can add context; it is not an ability-discrepancy test.
Which decoding skills will be taught next?
How will progress be measured, and how often?
How is fluency measured, and under what conditions?
What text level is used for practice?
Which content tasks would use accessible text?
How will we check whether it helps?
How will reading skill still be taught and measured?

Mathematics

What happens when problems are read aloud?
What happens with the same math in fewer words?

4. Progress worksheet

The school team sets targets, frequency and amount of support from actual assessment data. Compare only like measures under like conditions.

Skill	Baseline	Measure	Frequency	Proposed target	Intervention delivery	Review date
Accurate word reading (decoding)
Student-selected goal
Reading fluency
Participation in content tasks with accessible text
Blank row
Blank row

5. School request draft

Draft only. It has not been sent. Edit before use.

[Date]

To: [Principal or special education coordinator]
[School name]

Subject: Request for a special education evaluation for [student's full name], grade 8

I am the parent or guardian of [student's full name], who is in grade 8. I am requesting a full and individual evaluation to find out whether [student's first name] needs special education and related services. I would like support to continue while the evaluation question is decided.

What I have noticed:
- Mathematics: Gets in the way of schoolwork: a little
- Reading: Gets in the way of schoolwork: a lot
- Reading: Which reading tasks: Reading words accurately; Reading speed
- Mathematics: Which math tasks: Word problems
- Reading: Difficulty reading unfamiliar words accurately: “reads unfamiliar words slowly”
- Reading: Understands better when material is read aloud: “He knows the answer when someone reads it”
- Mathematics: Difficulty with math word problems: “Dense math word problems are the hardest part of math homework”

Strengths the team should know about:
- He explains science ideas really well and loves talking about space and how machines work.
- Interests: Science, space, and building things
- Strong vocabulary when talking about science.
- Explains ideas well when speaking: “He explains science ideas really well”

What has been tried so far:
- Intervention received: Yes
- Written results: No

I would also like to discuss:
- Discuss whether a full evaluation is needed
- Gather the learning history
- Include the student's view
- Discuss assessment of word reading and fluency
- Discuss explicit instruction in word reading

Please tell me in writing whether the district will evaluate. If it will, please send the consent form so the evaluation can begin. If it will not, please explain the reasons in writing.

Illinois rules say that within 14 school days after receiving a request for an evaluation, the district shall determine whether an evaluation is warranted (23 Ill. Admin. Code 226.110(c)).

Thank you,
[Your name]
[Phone or email]

6. Answer appendix

Key: "Reported by adult" = answers the adult gave; "Student's own words" = recorded student responses; "AI interpretation confirmed by adult" = an AI suggestion the adult checked; "Changed by adult" = a suggestion the adult corrected; "Assessment result entered by adult" = results kept as entered and not interpreted. "Not sure" and "Prefer not to answer" are not "No".

Privacy and context

C01 What is your role in the student's life?: Parent or guardian
C02 In which state does the student go to school?: Illinois
C03 What kind of school does the student attend?: Public school
C04 Should AI help interpret the descriptions you write?: Yes, use AI to suggest observations from what I write
C05 Will the student contribute to this plan?: Yes, I will ask the student later

Student snapshot

P01 A nickname or label for this case: Student A — fictional example
P02 What grade is the student in now?: Grade 8
P03 Which age range fits the student?: 11 to 13
P04 Which languages does the student use for learning?: English only

Identification history

H01 Has a school team or a clinician ever identified or diagnosed a learning difference or disability?: Yes
H02 Which label or labels were given?: Dyslexia
H03 Who made the identification or diagnosis?: Not sure
H04 In what grade did the first identification or diagnosis happen?: Grade 7
H05 What was evaluated, and what did the report recommend?: Not answered
H06 Do you have a written copy of the evaluation report?: No
H07 Which plans or supports are in place now?: A school intervention plan, such as MTSS or RtI
H08 In what grade were concerns first noticed?: Not sure
H09 Has the student ever had a school reading screening?: Not sure
H11 Should the plan include questions for students whose needs were recognized later (grade 7 or after)?: Not answered

Concerns and strengths

I01 Right now, how much do reading difficulties get in the way of schoolwork?: A lot
I02 Right now, how much do math difficulties get in the way of schoolwork?: A little
I03 Right now, how much do writing difficulties (handwriting, spelling, or putting ideas on paper) get in the way of schoolwork?: Not at all
I04 Right now, how much do difficulties understanding or using spoken language (for example, following spoken directions or finding words) get in the way of schoolwork?: Not at all
I05 Right now, how much do difficulties organizing, starting, or finishing tasks get in the way of schoolwork?: Not sure
I06 In your own words, describe what you see. What is hard, when, and in which subjects?: He reads unfamiliar words slowly and often needs help sounding them out. Dense math word problems are the hardest part of math homework. He knows the answer when someone reads it. He needs a lot of help from us to finish homework most nights. His reading teacher works with him in a small group, but I don't know the name of the program.
I07 How long have these difficulties been noticeable?: Not sure
I08 Where do the difficulties show up?: Homework; Classwork
I09 Do you have recent work samples that show the difficulty, such as a writing assignment or a math test?: No
S01 What does the student enjoy or do well, and what evidence illustrates it? How could that strength help participation in the next learning goal?: He explains science ideas really well and loves talking about space and how machines work.
I10 What interests or activities does the student care about?: Science, space, and building things
I11 What is the most important goal for this school year, from your point of view?: Not answered

Later identification

L01 Looking back, were there signs of these difficulties in earlier grades?: Not answered
L03 What may have helped hide the difficulties earlier?: Not answered
L04 Were grades kept up through unusually high effort or a lot of adult help?: Not answered
L05 What changed as texts or workloads got harder?: Not answered
L06 Which supports work right now, and how do you know?: Not answered
L07 During earlier testing, did the student use accommodations such as extra time or read-aloud?: Not answered

Reading

R01 When reading unfamiliar words, how often does the student guess, skip, or need help?: Often
R02 Is understanding stronger when someone reads the same material aloud?: Yes
R08 Please give a recent example.: He knows the answer when someone reads it.
R03 Which reading tasks are difficult?: Reading words accurately; Reading speed
R04 How do vocabulary, background knowledge, and understanding spoken instructions compare with independent reading?: They are stronger than independent reading
R05 What reading instruction or intervention has been tried, for how long, how often, and with what observed change?: Not answered
R06 What reading-related strengths do you see?: Strong vocabulary when talking about science.

Mathematics

M01 Which math tasks cause difficulty?: Word problems
M02 Does difficulty remain when word problems are read aloud and their language is clarified?: This has not been tried
M03 Can the student explain a concept with objects or a drawing but struggle to record or calculate it?: Not sure
M04 Does a calculator improve access to the lesson?: Not answered
M05 Which previous math supports helped, and what measures show the response?: Not answered
M06 What math-related strengths do you see?: Not answered

Organization and task completion

E01 Where do tasks break down?: Not answered
E02 Is this similar across subjects and settings?: Not answered
E04 What helps the student start and finish tasks?: Not answered
E05 What strengths do you see in how the student works?: Not answered

School access and health checks

AX01 Has the student missed long stretches of school or changed schools often?: No
AX02 When was hearing last checked?: Not sure
AX03 When was vision last checked?: Within the last year
AX04 Did those checks note any concerns?: No concerns noted
AX05 Have school demands changed recently?: Not answered
AX06 Has the student had steady instruction in the skills of concern (for example, teaching of reading or math basics)?: Not sure

Support so far

SUP01 Has the student received a school intervention (extra, targeted teaching) for any of these concerns?: Yes
SUP02 What is the intervention or program called?: Not answered
SUP03 Which skills did it target?: Not sure
SUP05 How long and how often was it planned (for example, 30 minutes, three times a week, since January)?: Not answered
SUP04 Did sessions actually happen as planned?: Not sure
SUP06 What change have you seen?: Not sure
SUP07 Has the school shared progress data, such as graphs or scores from regular checks?: Not sure
ACC01 Which accommodations does the student use now?: Not sure
SUP08 Do you have written results from any screenings or tests, from school or outside?: No

Student voice

VR01 Who is recording the student's answers?: The student is not taking part right now
V01 What feels hardest at school? (Student's own words): Not answered
V02 What helps you most? (Student's own words): Not answered
V03 What would you like teachers to understand about you? (Student's own words): Not answered
V04 What goal matters to you this year? (Student's own words): Not answered

Results entered by the adult

No results entered.

AI interpretation

AI read the written description and proposed 6 observations; the adult confirmed 6 and rejected 0. Model: fictional example. AI proposed observations from the adult's written description. Only the ones the adult confirmed were used.

7. Source register

S01 Dyslexia Screening. Ohio Department of Education and Workforce, Last modified October 9, 2025 (as printed on the page). Ohio; agency guidance. https://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Learning-in-Ohio/Literacy/Dyslexia/Dyslexia-Screening
- 'Communication with Families', third bullet: “Results of the intervention-based diagnostic (tier 2 ) screener, along with information about reading development, the risk factors for dyslexia and a written explanation of the district or school's structured literacy program.”
S26 Dyslexia Intervention and Support Frequently Asked Questions. Ohio Department of Education and Workforce, Last modified March 9, 2025 (as printed on the page). Ohio; agency guidance. https://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Learning-in-Ohio/Literacy/Dyslexia/Dyslexia-Intervention-and-Support-Frequently-Asked
- Same answer, second sentence: “If a parent or guardian thinks his or her child may have a disability that is affecting the child’s education, a request can be made to the district to evaluate the child”
S25 Ohio's Dyslexia Guidebook. Ohio Department of Education and Workforce, October 2025 (as printed); its best practices are recommendations only. Ohio; agency guidance. https://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Learning-in-Ohio/Literacy/Dyslexia/Ohio_s-Dyslexia-Guidebook.pdf.aspx?lang=en-US
- p. 26 (printed page footer; equals PDF page index), 'Purpose and Use of Intervention-based Assessments (Tier 2 Dyslexia Screening)': “Intervention-based diagnostic assessments (tier 2 dyslexia screening) are administered to understand the specific skills a student needs instructional support with.”
- p. 29 (printed page footer; equals PDF page index), 'Interpreting Assessment Results': “An appropriate response to risk for dyslexia involves the immediate provision of structured literacy instruction and intervention, promotion of protective factors and ongoing monitoring of the student’s response to increasingly intensive instructional supports.”
- p. 42 (printed page footer; equals PDF page index), 'Outside Clinical Diagnosis of Dyslexia': “A diagnosis of dyslexia by an outside professional does not mean the school district must automatically identify the student as a student with a disability.”
- p. 43 (printed page footer; equals PDF page index), 'Support for Adolescent Students' (first paragraph): “Even with effective universal screening and classroom instruction, there will be students in older grades who will need intense intervention and/or accommodations for academic and social-emotional success.”
S03 Rule 6A-6.053, F.A.C., District Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan. Florida State Board of Education, Effective August 19, 2025 (as shown on flrules.org). Florida; law or rule. https://flrules.org/gateway/ruleno.asp?id=6A-6.053
- Subsection (7)(c): “Immediately following identification, students with characteristics of dyslexia must be provided dyslexia-specific interventions, such as structured literacy approaches, that are intensive, explicit, systematic, and multisensory, in accordance with s. 1008.25(5)(a), F.S.”
S22 Florida Statutes s. 1008.25, Public school student progression; student support; coordinated screening and progress monitoring. The Florida Legislature, The 2026 Florida Statutes (as printed). Florida; law or rule. https://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=1000-1099/1008/Sections/1008.25.html
- Subsection (4)(c), items 2-3: “2. Goals and benchmarks for student growth in reading or mathematics. 3. A description of the specific measures that will be used to evaluate and monitor the student’s reading or mathematics progress.”
S21 The Dyslexia Handbook: Procedures Concerning Dyslexia and Related Disorders. Texas Education Agency / Texas State Board of Education, 2024 Update, in effect as of June 30, 2024. Texas; law or rule (adopted into Texas Administrative Code 19 TAC 74.28). https://tea.texas.gov/special-populations-and-support/special-education/texas-dyslexia-handbook-3.pdf
- Chapter 2, Part C, "Screening Data Gathering", p.19: “Screening data should always be shared in writing with parents.”
- Chapter 2, Part C, p.18: “Screening, by definition, should never be the final determination of whether a student has dyslexia.”
- Chapter 3, "When the Data Lead to a Suspicion of a Disability...", p.25: “Parents/guardians always have the right to request a referral for a dyslexia evaluation at any time.”
- Chapter 4, "Providers of Dyslexia Instruction", p.42 (components defined pp.39-40): “This includes training in critical, evidence-based components of dyslexia instruction such as phonological awareness, sound-symbol association, syllabication, orthography, morphology, syntax, reading comprehension, and reading fluency.”
- Chapter 4, "Providers of Dyslexia Instruction", p.42 (delivery principles defined pp.40-41): “they must deliver multisensory instruction that simultaneously uses all learning pathways to the brain, is systematic and cumulative, is explicitly taught, uses diagnostic teaching to automaticity, and includes both analytic and synthetic approaches.”
- Chapter 2, Part D, "Best Practices in Progress Monitoring", p.22: “Schools should be aware that a student may have reached middle school or high school without ever being screened, evaluated, or identified; however, the student may have dyslexia or a related disorder.”
- Chapter 2, Part D, p.22: “Therefore, it is important to remember that a referral for a dyslexia evaluation can be considered at any time kindergarten–high school.”
S06 The Dyslexia Handbook: Information for Caregivers, Educators, and Students. Illinois State Board of Education, File currently posted is dated 2026 on its cover and describes itself as the revised edition of the 2024 handbook. Illinois; agency guidance (informational except where statutory requirements are stated). https://www.isbe.net/Documents/Dyslexia-Handbook.pdf
- Chapter 4, "Qualifying for Special Education and Related Services", p.55: “even an outside diagnosis of dyslexia (or other related condition) does not automatically result in a student being eligible for and entitled to special education services.”
- Chapter 4, "Screening, Assessment, and Evaluation", p.53: “Though the majority of schools do utilize some type of screener, there are schools who opt to collect data in other ways.”
- Chapter 5, "Screening for Older Students", p.65: “It is crucial for districts and schools to establish a comprehensive assessment plan aimed at identifying individuals who struggle with reading or may exhibit signs of dyslexia, especially if they were not identified during their earlier years.”
- Chapter 6, "Components of Effective Literacy Instruction", p.84: “as outlined in the Illinois Comprehensive Literacy Plan, educators should ensure literacy instruction includes evidence-based practices in oracy, phonological awareness, word recognition, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension, and writing.”
- Chapter 4, Table 6: Special Education Meeting Types (Domain Meeting row), p.56: “Share information and concerns related to health, academics, social and emotional skills and behavior, motor skills, expressive and receptive language; give written permission to collect additional information.”
S07 Educational Rights and Responsibilities: Understanding Special Education in Illinois. Illinois State Board of Education, January 2026 (as printed on the cover). Illinois; agency guidance. https://www.isbe.net/Documents/Parent-Guide-Special-Ed.pdf
- Chapter 3, "Referral", p.21: “Parents need to submit a request for evaluation to have their child considered eligible for special education services. It is best if the parent puts the request in writing.”
- Chapter 2, "The Role of Parents in an MTSS Process", p.19: “You can ask the school to evaluate your child at any time, regardless of where your child is at in the MTSS process.”
- Chapter 5, "Overview", p.35: “SLD may manifest itself in: • listening comprehension • oral expression • word reading • reading fluency • reading comprehension • written expression • mathematics problem-solving or calculations”
- Chapter 3, "Referral", p.21 (Appendix B p.151 repeats this wording; S06 p.53 has similar wording using "not warranted"): “If the district determines that the evaluation is not necessary, it must notify the parent in writing of the decision not to evaluate and the reasons for the decision.”
S27 23 Illinois Administrative Code 226.110, Evaluation Procedures. Illinois State Board of Education (rule published by the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules), Amended effective January 13, 2016 (source note on the page). Illinois; law or rule. https://www.ilga.gov/commission/jcar/admincode/023/023002260B01100R.html
- Section 226.110(c)(3): “Within 14 school days after receiving a request for an evaluation, the district shall determine whether an evaluation is warranted. If the district determines not to conduct an evaluation, it shall provide written notice to the parents in accordance with 34 CFR 300.503(b).”
- Section 226.110(d): “no later than 60 school days following the date the parent signs the written consent to perform the needed assessments, the determination of eligibility shall be made and the IEP meeting shall be completed.”
- Section 226.110(d), second sentence: “If fewer than 60 school days remain in a school year after the date of parental consent, the eligibility determination shall be made and the IEP meeting shall be completed prior to the first day of the following school year.”
S28 23 Illinois Administrative Code 226.125, Specific Learning Disability: Dyslexia. Illinois State Board of Education (rule published by the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules), Added effective January 13, 2016 (source note on the page). Illinois; law or rule. https://www.ilga.gov/commission/jcar/admincode/023/023002260B01250R.html
- Section 226.125(a): “dyslexia means a specific learning disability that is neurobiological in origin. It is characterized by difficulties with accurate and/or fluent word recognition and by poor spelling and decoding abilities.”
- Section 226.125(c): “Each child suspected of having dyslexia or identified as dyslexic shall be referred for an evaluation in accordance with the requirements of 34 CFR 300.304 through 300.311 and Subpart B of this Part.”
S29 23 Illinois Administrative Code 226.130, Additional Procedures for Students Suspected of or Having a Specific Learning Disability. Illinois State Board of Education (rule published by the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules), Amended effective March 2, 2021 (source note on the page). Illinois; law or rule. https://www.ilga.gov/commission/jcar/admincode/023/023002260B01300R.html
- Section 226.130(b): “When a district implements the use of a process of this type, the district shall not use any child's participation in the process as the basis for denying a parent's request for an evaluation.”
S31 Universal Early Literacy Screening Guidance. Illinois State Board of Education, April 2024 (as printed). Illinois; agency guidance. https://www.isbe.net/Documents/Universal-Early-Literacy-Screening-Guidance.pdf
- Section after the "Screening Measures by Grade Level" chart, p.2: “All students should participate in screening for foundational literacy skills three times annually—typically, at the beginning, middle, and end of the school year.”
S08 OSEP Memo 11-07: A Response to Intervention (RTI) Process Cannot Be Used to Delay-Deny an Evaluation for Eligibility under IDEA. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, January 21, 2011. United States (federal); agency guidance. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/idea-files/osep-memo-11-07-response-to-intervention-rti-memo/
- Body paragraph 6, sentence 2: “The use of RTI strategies cannot be used to delay or deny the provision of a full and individual evaluation, pursuant to 34 CFR §§300.304-300.311, to a child suspected of having a disability under 34 CFR §300.8.”
S18 Dear Colleague Letter on dyslexia, dyscalculia and dysgraphia in IDEA documents. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, October 23, 2015. United States (federal); agency guidance. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/files/idea/policy/speced/guid/idea/memosdcltrs/guidance-on-dyslexia-10-2015.pdf
- PDF (linked from https://sites.ed.gov/idea/idea-files/osep-dear-colleague-letter-on-ideaiep-terms/): Page 2, first paragraph (continues from page 1): “a parent may request an initial evaluation at any time to determine if a child is a child with a disability under IDEA (34 CFR §300.301(b))”
- PDF (linked from https://sites.ed.gov/idea/idea-files/osep-dear-colleague-letter-on-ideaiep-terms/): Page 2, second paragraph (begins 'In determining whether a child has a disability…'): “information about the child’s learning difficulties, including the presenting difficulties related to reading, mathematics, or writing, is important in determining the nature and extent of the child’s disability and educational needs.”
S32 Letter to Kelli Unnerstall (dyslexia). U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, April 25, 2016. United States (federal); agency guidance (informal, not legally binding). https://sites.ed.gov/idea/files/idea/policy/speced/guid/idea/memosdcltrs/oseplettertounnerstall4-25-16dyslexia.pdf
- Page 1, sentence beginning 'As we explained in our October 23, 2015 letter, while IDEA does not prohibit…': “there is no requirement under IDEA that a disability label or “diagnosis” be given to each student receiving special education and related services, so long as the child is regarded as having a disability and receives needed special education and related services.”
S19 34 CFR 300.8, Child with a disability. U.S. Department of Education (IDEA Part B regulations), eCFR, current as of October 19, 2026. United States (federal); law or rule. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-300.8
- § 300.8(c)(10)(ii) Disorders not included: “Specific learning disability does not include learning problems that are primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of intellectual disability, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.”
S34 34 CFR 300.309, Determining the existence of a specific learning disability. U.S. Department of Education (IDEA Part B regulations), eCFR, current as of October 19, 2026. United States (federal); law or rule. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-300.309
- § 300.309(b) (lead-in; (b)(1)-(2) follow): “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 described in §§ 300.304 through 300.306”
S09 Providing Reading Interventions for Students in Grades 4-9. Institute of Education Sciences, What Works Clearinghouse, March 2022. United States (federal); research evidence. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/PracticeGuide/29
- Recommendations tab, rec 1; level = evidence icon alt text 'Strong Evidence' (matches Summary PDF p.1): “Build students' decoding skills so they can read complex multisyllabic words”
- Recommendations tab, rec 2; level = evidence icon alt text 'Strong Evidence' (matches Summary PDF p.1): “Provide purposeful fluency-building activities to help students read effortlessly”
S10 Assisting Students Struggling with Mathematics: Intervention in the Elementary Grades. Institute of Education Sciences, What Works Clearinghouse, March 2021. United States (federal); research evidence. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/PracticeGuide/26
- Recommendations tab, rec 5; level = evidence icon alt text 'Strong Evidence' (matches Full Guide Table 1, p.3): “Word Problems: Provide deliberate instruction on word problems to deepen students’ mathematical understanding and support their capacity to apply mathematical ideas.”

Rules applied: EVAL01 v1, READ01 v1, READ04 v1, READ05 v1, READ06 v1, MATH02 v1, MATH05 v1, LATE01 v1, SUPPORT02 v1, SUPPORT03 v1, SUPPORT04 v1, DX01 v1, DX03 v1, SCORES02 v1, HV01 v1, STR01 v1, VOICE01 v1, VOICE02 v1, WORK01 v1.

8. Limitations

This tool does not diagnose any condition, give a validated screening test, decide eligibility, or write an IEP.
Each recommendation is a starting point for a school team discussion. It is based only on what the adult reported.
A diagnosis entered here is shown as reported by the adult. The tool has not seen the evaluation behind it.
Ohio, Florida and Texas materials are used as comparison sources for good practice. An Illinois school is not bound by another state's rules.
Support and an evaluation discussion can happen at the same time. A family does not have to wait for an intervention to finish before asking for an evaluation.
AI suggestions only enter a plan after the adult confirms them. The rules, not the AI, decide what the plan recommends.
The questions, rules and wording are a draft. An educational specialist has not reviewed them yet.