Isolation in Hardy’s poems ‘Nobody Comes’ and ‘The Darkling Thrush’ Essay

In the poems â€Å"The Darkling Thrush† [‘TDT’] and â€Å"Nobody Comes† [‘NC’], Hardy presents two similar images of isolation. In both poems, the personae are isolated from human company, whilst Hardy explores this using imagery of ghosts and the supernatural in both also. However, individually there are differences in tone; although NC ends upon as dire a note as it begins, Hardy engineers an optimistic outlook in TDT and suggests that the persona’s isolation may not Hardy ensures that the persona of ‘TDT’ is isolated from any other human presence or, until the poem’s third stanza, any living organism. Whilst leaning against â€Å"a coppice gate†, he notes that â€Å"all mankind†¦ had sought their household fires†. Although this is an indication of the low temperature, it is noticeable that the rest of humanity are seeking light in an otherwise dark environment; reciprocally, the persona is deprived of both warmth and living company. To further this point, Hardy personifies non-human entities, such as frost and winter – â€Å"Winter’s dregs†, for example. In this way, Hardy makes the reader personal not with living creatures but with inanimate entities, isolating the animate persona even more. Indeed, Hardy makes such a division more striking by picturing the persona’s surroundings as very extreme. Surrounded by deathly imagery, the persona imagines the landscape as â€Å"the Century’s corpse/ His crypt the canopy,/ The wind his death lament†. Even Hardy’s animate entities seem ghostly; â€Å"Frost was spectre-gray† and â€Å"mankind†¦ haunted nigh†. Such is the state of decay that even â€Å"the ancient pulse of germ and birth was shrunken† – the regenerative power of life has itself died, leaving the persona as the sole animate existence. A similar loneliness can be seen in ‘NC’, especially towards the end of the poem. In the aftermath of the car passing, the persona observes, â€Å"mute by the gate†, that he â€Å"stand[s] again alone.† The sudden silence and soft, finite ‘t’ sound of â€Å"mute† – in contrast to the onomatopoeic â€Å"whangs† – amplifies the persona’s loneliness; as does the empty assonance in the repeated ‘a’ sound, in â€Å"alone† and â€Å"again†. Equally, the present tense verb â€Å"stands† and â€Å"again† emphasizes that this is an ongoing and repeated state of isolation. However, the persona in ‘Nobody Comes’ is not simply isolated in terms of being physically alone or the sole living creature – he is also isolated from modernity. Hardy again uses ‘supernatural’ imagery to explore this. The persona notes that â€Å"The telegraph wire†¦ intones†¦ like a spectral lyre/ Swept by a spectral hand†. Rather than see the telegraph wire as a means of communication, the persona rejects it in presenting an image of disassociation; the vagueness of the verb â€Å"intones† summons an image of faceless voices. He also creates negative supernatural connotations; there is an innate ghostliness about the archaic lyre – juxtaposed to contrast with the innate modernity of the telegraph wire – which is reinforced by the wraithlike â€Å"spectral†. Hardy repeats this for emphasis in â€Å"spectral hand†. In this phrase, he also creates an incongruity between the concrete verb â€Å"swept† and noun â€Å"hand† and the abstract concept of â€Å"ghostliness† – the ‘hand’ does not exist. Its invisible presence and visible effects are unnerving, making the modern telegraph wire an unpleasant image. The persona’s rejection of modernity can be seen also in the depiction of â€Å"a car com[ing] up†. Having shone its aggressive lamps at â€Å"full glare† – which Hardy emphasizes by placing at the end of the line –the persona states that â€Å"it has nothing to do with me†. This maxim, in being so blunt, is very powerful. It operates to present a rift between the persona and the modern world and, given the unusually colloquial verb â€Å"whangs†, it indicates that the car is viewed as a callous representation of modern life from which the persona wishes to isolate himself. It leaves â€Å"leaving a blacker air†, which may indicate either a corruption of nature (in terms of polluting the otherwise fresh air) or a darkening in the persona’s emotions. Indeed, the poem concludes with the same negativity, with the word â€Å"nobody† in both the title and the last line. The persona is left â€Å"again alone† and isolated, prompting a large amount of sympathy from the reader. By contrast, ‘TDT’ concludes with a hopeful note. At the appearance of the thrush, in the third stanza, the reader notes that the bird is similarly isolated and surrounded by death. In truth, the reader’s initial reaction to the â€Å"aged†¦ frail, gaunt and small† thrush is to question whether the creature will survive the bleak conditions. There is a sense of desperation present â€Å"fling[ing its] soul/ Upon the growing gloom.† However, the persona notices â€Å"some blessed Hope† in the bird’s â€Å"happy good-night air†. Although â€Å"unaware† of why this may be – such â€Å"joy illimited† is unintelligible to the persona – this leads the poem to end in an optimistic fashion. Although both the persona and the thrush remain isolated from any other company (the persona fails to deeply associate with the bird) and the anxiety about the future lingers, Hardy does much to suggest that such deep rooted â€Å"fervourlessness† may change in TDT’s persona, as opposed to the ongoing isolation present in NC.

Northern Victory in the Civil War Essay

This essay will analyze the varied factor that led to Northern victory in the Civil War between 1861-1864. The central reasons for this Union success can be categorized in economic, political, and military factors; some of these elements would include the southern focus on cotton monoculture, the union naval blockade, the confederate doctrine of State’s Rights, and the strength of union generals and their military tactics, between others. Overall, the north achieved dominance due to a combination of these reasons. Economic factors led to Northern victory as although both sides had great military potential, neither side had few methods to actually realize that potential. According to the Millennial edition of The Historical Statistics of the united states, during the time of the civil war the Union owned 71% of all the rail roads of the USA while the CSA only had a 29%. Also the Union had 90% of the manufactured items and a 97% of the firearms produced, while the CSA only had a 70% of the exports. Regarding the rail roads, this were of main importance, as the Union transported weapons, soldiers, ammo, and raw materials through this, so the fact that the northern states owned 21. 788 miles of rail roads didn’t only mean that they could transport all the machinery across the country but also, that the south was terribly limited in their transport, therefore the CSA had the disadvantage that the Union controlled rail roads across the country meaning, that they weren’t able to use their full potential on industry (cotton etc. or militarily as most of railroads were used for the moving of troops, while the north kept their industry stable and was able to move troops across the territory. More over, coming back to the production, and exports facts, although the southern states had most of the exports before the war (selling enormous amounts of cotton), as soon the war started their relations with Britain (who bought cotton to the south) broke out, so they had no econom ic strength behind their forces, as all their economy was based on agriculture, and had no industries. On the other side the Union had a totally industrialized economy where they were able to auto-sustain their states, therefore their economy before and during the war never changed, meaning that they were in perfect conditions as firearm production was extremely overwhelming over the one of the CSA and, they had money enough to go over a war and support their army with food, clothes, and weapons. In this way the North was highly superior to the south as they were financial base strong, so they could borrow internationally and purchase weapons and supplies abroad. Finally the fact that the Union had a population of 22. 000. 000 and the CSA of 9. 000. 000, which 5. 500. 000 of them were slaves, was also important because the north had enough people, so that factories never stop working, and still they had lots of soldiers and a big army, on the other side the south with a little population did not had enough for both activities, therefore some people had to stop working for going to the war. Between the southern statistics, we can find that the economic ones, are ridiculously overwhelmed by the ones of the Union, and this was mainly because their focus on monoculture, therefore if the cotton declined, then the confederate economy would be devastated, as they had a closed market, were almost most of their work was dedicated to one product. Unfortunately for the confederate states cotton trade rapidly declined during the civil war as many southerner believed that without the south’s cotton exports, Britain’s textile industry would collapse, causing terrible problems for the British Empire, and as a result England would join the war to fight the Union, however it did not work, and Britain started to buy cotton to other nations. As a result, the confederacy suffered crucially from under–industrialization as its only manufacturing plant The Tredegar Ironworks at Richmond, while the North had innumerable factories of the kind. This meant that the Confederates States weren’t able to maintain their railways, armies, and troops in the frontier, therefore the north had and advantage as southerners soldiers were unprepared for fighting and there railroads where in terrible conditions, so their little possession of railroads became even smaller, while the northern states were perfect due to their economic stability. In a civil war control of the oceans and rivers is often a critical point. The union had grater naval end industrial facilities, and decided to blockade the south to strangle its trade and wealth. The idea came from a commanding general, called Winfield Scott who designed this plan to win the war with as little violence as possible. The plan consisted in closing the main confederate ports; so in May 1861 when the blockade started the south was cut from almost all international trade. Therefore, the CSA’s economy was even worse than it was before, southern economy was now basically based in one factory, which was not even near to the production needed by the southerners to fight a war, and as a result the confederacy’s wealth didn’t resisted much war, so lines wouldn’t hold for much longer, and finally the northern forces would overthrow them one way or another, as southerners’’ railroads where getting each time worst, they had almost no weapons or fighting equipment as there trade was cut off, and they only had one factory so provide with ammo, weapons, clothes for all of the south. Overall, we can see clearly that the war totally destroyed the Confederacy’s economy. Firstly, cotton production was dripping quickly as the south tried to force Britain to join the war, this was devastating to the south as they almost had no income, and they where in the middle of a war. As a result that cotton production was not needed any more, the slaves had now much less work to do, and this meant that there were also men who had to look after them, as they were â€Å"dangerous†, therefore, there where less soldiers to fight against the north. At the same time, the war had a direct effect on the plantations as â€Å"It did not seem to matter whether a Union or confederate army crossed a plantation, either way the result was devastation, crops were trampled down, stock was stolen [†¦]†[1], this clearly shows the state of desperation of the south army, and the situation they were in. also the fact that some planters escaped from war-zone with their slaves, brought disruption, as the bad news of defeat was spread by planters and slaves into new areas. Therefore, planters had to run away because their property was being destroyed, this provoked even more decay in their production, agricultural farms, that could be used for feeding soldiers, weren’t worked any more by their owners, therefore the south had no way of getting food, as they couldn’t buy to any other country due to the blockade, and the local productions was getting destroy rapidly by the war, giving in this way a great advantage to the north, as southerners soldiers conditions were in some cases deplorable. Concluding, the fact that the south bet to a future, which slavery was supposed to guarantee, after the breaking of relations with the exterior, slavery was a thing of the past after only a year of war. Therefore, the confederacy who had spent a lot of money in bringing them from Africa and buying them, making slaves the column of their economy, was just a waste of time and money as they were useless, as they couldent fight, because if they were given a weapon the would use it to kill their owners and free themselves, and they were also a waste of soldiers as it required many whites to control them. Therefore, slaves who were the future of the CSA, ended up being a weight in the shoulders of southerners, as they created deficit, and this affected also, the confederacy’s economy. However, while economic reasons were clearly important in the northern victory, political factors, also played a mayor role. Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America, faced two challenges; one was to fight a war against the north and the second, to create a new nation. Therefore the south itself saw themselfeves in a bad position for fighting a war, because they had to care about to important things at the same time, and also they weren’t prepared to fight a war with another country like USA. Therefore, the lack of political organization, from the south, regarding to powers, was also an important issue, as the north was enormously superior, and had a better, and more organized political structure. As a result, the north fought a corporate war, while the south still had problems internally. Also confederate doctrine of state’s rights weakened the south as it created political disunity in the Confederacy. President Jefferson Davis, had to struggle with states governors, like Joe Brown, from Georgia or Zebulon Vance, from North Carolina, to get conscription approved, and even for basic military supplies. This disunity meant that the eastern and western fronts fought for resources, as most went to the east while the war was lost in the west. Firstly, this shows that states from the south did no believe they were going to win the war, as they started to withheld supplies to defend their own area, and this lead to Union victory, as they were separated, therefore, this didn’t just meant that they where more vulnerable as they were disunity, but also that they were weaker as states did not work together, each other to fight the north. Therefore the Union, saw the isolation of the southern states, and took advantage of it by attacking from different points, specially the west, and finally penetrating in this way through the North/south frontier, into the confederacy’s heart. Moreover, the role of foreign powers during the war was of main importance. Since the very beginning of the war, the Union made it clear that recognition of the Confederacy meant war to the Unites States. As a result, no nation appointed any diplomat officially to the confederacy; this meant that they received no diplomatic recognition. This was crucial, and one of the main aims of the North, because recognition to the south meant, a lot of income due to the cotton industry, and also weapons and machines to fight the war. Although the Union relied on its blockade to ensure victory, if the confederacy achieved recognition from Britain and France, this would have been much more difficult. Therefore, the fact that the CSA was not a recognized country before war, made things much more easier to the Union, as this meat no international support, and they were now isolated, clearly showing that they had no chances of wining the war without external help. Therefore this created conditions for the Union to win the war, as the fact that cotton trade was going down, and the only had one factory in the whole confederacy, made it clear that, they weren’t able to make it on their own, so the north clearly overwhelmed the south, as they had many factories to produce weapons, clothes etc. and also the support of European forces who sell weapons and machines to them; that’s why, it is so important that the CSA did not had a government, and a reason, of why they were so hurried up to become a nation. From the start of the war that Lincoln had a problem, which was how to unite the North sufficiently to make them want to fight and keep fighting. He needed an initiative, something that would give the northerners a reason to fight for. One way of doing this was through attacking slavery , and if we go back, some years before the war we could see that these really moved people (Uncle’s Tom Cabin), and although the civil war began over the secession of the South, and not over slavery, it was a fact which grew tensions between the Union and CSA before the war. Lincoln had to wait until Northern opinion was ready for the announcement of emancipation, where slaves would be set free. In 1862 the Atlantic slave trade was banned by the congress, but still people wanted more progress towards slavery destruction. Lincoln’s main reasons for this where: slavery had been already an important spark in the causes for the civil war, so to make sure war did not happen again. Free black were trying to enlist the Union’s army, and internationally the North would gain much support from the rest of the world, especially Europe, if the promised to crush slavery, and finally, in the same way the Declaration of Independence said, he thought that â€Å"all men are equal†. However, Lincoln suffered a resistance from his own cabinet, as they said that were private property, and under the constitution, it was not correct to do that. However, in July 1862, finally Lincoln’s cabinet agreed, and after the win of Antietam, the 17th of September, Lincoln decide that it was the right moment, son the 22nd of September of 1862 the preliminary proclamation was announced. It said that all slave owner who refused to make peace, all slaves in that territory would be freed on 1st of January 1863. Then, in January 1863 Lincoln put forward plans for gradual, compensated emancipation. After these, celebrations started all over the north. Rapidly runaway slaves joined the Union armies fighting the south, carrying wood, making roads and bridges between other things. On the other hand the confederacy tried to suppress all knowledge of the proclamation, but word spread around the south. Therefore, the proclamation strengthened the north as, people were encourage to fight, and were more enthusiastic, taking more participation and a major role in the war. Also, the fact that the Union was against slavery made international relations much easier to them, as other countries started to sympathize with the northerner’s actions, giving as a result a positive effect on the Unions economy. Also, the fact that slaves joined the army (178. 975, actually the 12. 5% of the whole army) was also of major help to the Northerners as they also started working at factories or scouting and searching for confederates or spying in the south. Therefore this led to Northern victory, as a huge amount of soldiers joined the army, internationals relations grew up, meaning more weapons and machines to fight the war, and finally, soldiers and people from the north had found the motivation to keep fighting. On the other hand, the proclamation weakened the Confederacy, slaves stop working at their plantations, or farms, therefore the had no workers, and that place was to be replace by the white, meaning in this way less men to fight the war. Slaves started rescuing Union soldier in the south, so they even started working against the confederacy, and as a result weakening their forces. Also, south’s international picture was terribly affected, as although eople already new the Southern states of the USA, worked a lot with slaves, with the proclamations, the Union was rapidly portrayed as heroes while the south became the villains of the story, and in this affected directly to the south’s relations with exterior, especially Europe. Therefore we can say that the effects of this proclamation led to northern victory, as 178. 975 new soldiers entered to the United States army to fight against the Confederacy. After proclamation, the North’s international view grew up in a positive way, while the southern one didn’t. This meant more exports and imports to the Union, which as a direct result made a huge significance in their trade and economy, and on the other side the Confederacy was left more isolated than it was before, meaning no weapons at all, and almost no income. The north had had found, an incentive to fight the war and give a quick finish to it, and the proclamation was the right push. Furthermore, workers were needed in the south to replace the place of the slaves, this meant less soldiers and less production for the confederacy.

Alcohol and Literature Essay

Throughout America’s history we have seen men drinking for the sake of drinking, solely because it is a thing that men are accustomed to do. In every town there are saloons, taverns, and every other sort of gathering place for men to come soak their very souls in alcohol. This ideology is not uniquely American, nor is it an exclusively masculine tradition, but it has become so intertwined with the idea of a romantic working-class American vision that only the deaf, dumb, and blind could not see it reflected in the great American novel. And the great American novel that I will discuss: John Barleycorn. One of Jack London’s late works, actually written three years before his death by suicide (he would have died from alcohol poisoning within the year). The book is practically an autobiography, although London never admitted it, and it details his life throughout his ages and phases and shows how easily one who is not suffering from a predisposition to alcohol can become so dependant upon it. Jack London did not become an alcoholic until the last leg of his life and he would often say so: It is the accessibility of alcohol that has given me my taste for alcohol. I did not care for it; I used to laugh at it, yet here I am at the last possessed with the drinker’s desire. It took twenty years to implant that desire; and for ten years more that desire has grown. (33) Jack London was not born into a wealthy family and he did not lead a pampered life, maybe this is what made him a great writer, or maybe it was all the amazing things he saw in his time prospecting in the Yukon, pirating oysters around the Pacific coast, or hunting for seals in the Bering Sea (Teacher xi). All these things sound great and wondrous now but at the turn of the century these were chores left to the working class, not to aspiring novelists. London was in love with a romanticized idea of America, he loved the idea of adventure and it is reflected in almost every one of his books and so is his game of chess against alcohol. London’s earliest works such as Call of the Wild and Sea Wolf show the two conflicting personalities within London. In Sea Wolf a young man ,with a striking resemblance to a younger London, is washed out to sea and rescued by a sealing boat on it’s way to the hunting grounds. The captain is a massive self-educated man named Wolf Larsen and he refuses to return the young lad (to whom he refers as â€Å"Hump†) to land and offers him a job on board as a sailor. The conflict between the two main characters of the story seems to represent a conflict within London himself, one present in most of his novels. The young educated man is clearly a representation of a younger and more idealistic London, what he envisioned for himself when he was a young man (and he did not drink). An example of the similarities between London and his characters can be seen in a line from Sea Wolf regarding the young man named â€Å"Hump†; â€Å"he kept a summer cottage†¦and read Nietzsche and Schonpenhauer to rest his brain† (Teacher 837). We know London was a very avid philosopher and Nietzsche was one of his favorites which is evident in John Barleycorn, the book was influenced by Nietzsche even if he never named him directly; â€Å"a pessimistic German Philosopher† (London 11). The older self-educated man known as Wolf Larsen in Sea Wolf represents what London envisioned himself becoming later in life; a hard man who finally realized life is given to those who want it the most, regardless of how worthless or trivial it may be. The conflict between these two characters is the basis of the story, they become uneasy friends in their nightly discussions of life and all that encompasses it and every night Wolf Larsen is victorious in their arguments. He is not a man who values life or love, money or recognition; he values his life and his life alone. This lack of â€Å"morality† goes against everything the younger â€Å"hump† has been taught yet in the end he comes to see it as true, although he retains some of his more solid values. This is the unavoidable pessimism that we see in all of Jack London’s later stories, the death of his younger idealistic side, drowned in alcohol, and the ascension of his â€Å"realist† side. As London progressed in his writing the conflict lessened and the â€Å"White Logic† took over almost completely (London 192). The White Logic is the primary suffering of any true dipsomaniac; it is the loss of faith in mankind and oneself, it takes pessimism and turns it into realism, it is the constant knowledge that we shall all come to pass (London 193). Although Jack London coined the term â€Å"White Logic†, the ailment has always been present, at least in American novelists’ reality. It is a weighty sense of sadness that makes one feel that life is a lie and that there is no real purpose but to grow old and die. It’s a sad thing to know and it must be far worse to have this constantly on ones mind, which is exactly what happened to Jack London and many other American writers. Ernest Hemingway sank deep into his own form of the â€Å"White logic† in his last years with us as can be seen in Across the River and Into the Trees, his last two novels which the author could never finish because of the morbid babbling they contained. A depressing majority of American writers have had their careers in literature cut short by their affairs with John Barleycorn; Ernest Hemingway shot himself because he could not take the constant whispers of death John Barleycorn would made in his ear, maybe if Truman Capote could have put down his glass maybe he would have finished Answered Prayers, Hart Crane might have written poetry into middle age if alcohol did not exist (Waldron 2). Upton Sinclair wrote about Sinclair Lewis’s drinking in The Cup of Fury; â€Å"Through a miracle of physical stamina Lewis made it to 66, more tragic than any shortage of years was the loss of productivity and the absence of joy.† (Waldron 2). Why is it that these great people, whom many of us admire and revere in the highest sense, have had their lives mired in an alcoholic binge? Is it a wise career move to drink when one is a writer? Does it give a better understanding of fiction and life in general? The answer to the above questions is obvious, no, alcohol is a lie and all that is learned through it is also a lie, although it may make the truth clear at times by loosening the tongue, this may seem like contradiction but what in life isn’t? Despite this bit of common knowledge an overwhelming number of people drink and continue to drink as well as encourage others to drink with them. It’s practically impossible to escape the lures of fermented grain; it’s a part of human history (Crowley 35). In truth we are all predispositioned to drink because we are human, this gives us a proclivity to soak our spirits with spirits and our minds with margaritas. Hundreds of years before America was discovered writers were altering their minds with whatever was at their disposal; Poe was a poppy popper (opium), Shakespeare may have been a stoner (Hashish), Nietzsche was drunk off of his ego, and Plato and Socrates were just drunks. All these people, who helped shape the intellectual progress of man, were by today’s standards drug addicts and alcoholics. They lived and died by their choice of poison (Socrates did so literarily) and it greatly influenced their writings, which brings another question to mind. If alcohol is responsible for the deaths of many great writers and their careers then it must be considered a faux pas and banished from the civilized world right? True the world might be better off without alcohol but then again could anyone say that the great literary works would have been made better by taking the morbid realities out of them. Would War and Peace have been better if it had a happy ending (maybe if they had prozac back then)? Would A Farewell to Arms have been more meaningful if Hemingway wasn’t soused while writing it? Everyone would have probably loved Romeo and Juliet if the lovers in question did not die, and John Barleycorn would have never been written in a perfect world without alcohol. It seems that in literature our faults and weaknesses are great, they help depict a real person and allow readers to relate directly to the characters or ideas in the story, without depression there is nothing to compare happiness too. What makes literature interesting is the positively maladjusted people who write it, if they were to be normal upstanding citizens they would have nothing to write about. To say that alcohol is directly responsible for the end of Jack London’s writing career is just as folly as saying Robert Frost could have benefited from alcoholism, yet it is undeniable that it had something to do with the loss of his life and maybe even the spawn of his career. One cannot determine the validity of statements through statistics, it does not matter how many writers were alcoholics or how many more were not. They were people just the same and they were prone to the same temptations as the rest of us. Many choose to drink and revel in John Barleycorn’s false but alluring friendship and many more choose not to do so, in the end it matters not because such is life. Although it matters to us it does not matter on the grand scheme, life is really a little game we play and it’s depressing to think about how inconsequential we are. Knowing this why would anyone want to make life and death a constant thought in their minds like the great authors of old? Why were their manically depressed words so inspiring? Simply because to find beauty in all that is bleak is beautiful, and it is in those moments of clarity that we all shine.

Workbook Summary for Individualized Education Programs Coursework - 1

Workbook Summary for Individualized Education Programs - Coursework Example The level of disability must be able to influence the learning ability. The eligibility test requires the statement on the current academic performance of the child indicating the effect of the disability on the learning 0progress of the child. IDEA 2002 emphasizes on the need for education providers to develop an IEP that conforms to the needs of every student who has specific needs  within  the eligibility tests and regulations of the state with regard to disability (Weishaar, 2001). All areas of suspected disability are evaluated by the school to see if they meet the threshold under the IDEA guidelines. After the evaluation, the school meets the respective parents to undertake the review of the collected disability results and influence the students’ learning. It is the collective responsibility of the school, and parents to determine whether the student requires significant education services. Thereafter, a team is constituted to develop the IEP plan. The team will use the results obtained in the evaluation stage to draft a relevant IEP that responds to the needs (Weishaar, 2001) of the  intended  students. The team developing the IEP should be made up of the student’s parents or guardians, case manager or exceptional education teacher, the student. In addition, at least of the regular education teachers, a person with knowledge about the availability of the school resources can support the intended learning (Weishaar, 2001). The team then drafts the plan by initially identifying the student’s personal information. The team then uses the full individual evaluation (FIE), in order to establish the current level of the student’s academic performance and specific academic services needed by the student. The evaluation information is significant in identifying the academic strength of the student. The functional needs of the student must be