Elissa worked with a teacher in a 7th grade classroom using the Resource Room and Inclusion Model of special education service delivery for students with learning disabilities and students with emotional handicaps. Frequency of contact was three times a week

Brief Description of Learner: "Jeff" was a teen with learning disabilities who is very social ,to the point of disruption, creative with spelling, a low ability reader, low hygiene.

Academic Behavior: Jeff turned in unfinished, sloppy work; did not self-check; plays with toys in school instead of doing work; did assignments briefly with low quality.

Monitoring System: The frequency of turning in unfinished work was tallied and self-monitoring check list was used by Jeff.

Instructional System (antecedents and consequences of the academic behavior): When seated with peers, he accomplished incomplete assignments, poor quality, low grades

Error Correction Procedure(s) Mastery learning, modeling, peer tutoring, and Fred Jones system of Praise work done, Prompt the next step, Leave within a brief period of time (and return to repeat the Praise-Prompt-Leave cycle)

Intervention System (any changes in antecedents and consequences or error correction procedures): See above error correction procedures. In addition, a change in antecedents for the writing process will be explored (specifically, asking Jeff to write about real-life situations).

Summary: Jeff's frequencies did not show any change at the time of the end of the semester. Thus the interventions had not yet proven to be profitable, but I believe with persistence they will. I think having Jeff write for real-life situations will improve his attitude about the writing process (that is, he communicated to me that spelling correctly is not very important to him right now).

Recommendations: I recommend holding Jeff more accountable for his work by not accepting low quality papers (that is, implementing the mastery learning process of returning the work with suggestions for corrections and having him re-submit the rewritten work).

Overall Reflection of Progress in Implementing Effective Teaching Practices and Instructional Management Systems: This situation gave me much more practice in problem solving and in monitoring. I am not "upset" that my interventions had not shown improved performance for Jeff because I learned from them (i.e., I learned they didn't work yet for Jeff), and I am sure, somehow, Jeff did too. (For example, he may have learned that teachers can be responsive to his particular learning challenges!)