Author Topic: Some examles of vague annual goals  (Read 1030 times)

bkidd

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 573
    • View Profile
    • Email
Some examles of vague annual goals
« on: September 12, 2009, 07:03:12 AM »
These are examples of vague annual goals written for my son over the years.  Most of these were written back in my Diane Conner days when I depended on the special education department to do a good job (thoroughly evaluate my son, provide objective measures of present level of performance, write measurable benchmarks/annual goals, and provide effective therapy services) and we were more focused on private therapy services and not paying much attention to school-based therapy services.  No matter if your child is receiving private therapy services of just school-based therapy services, it is important to remember that you want the most effective therapy services possible and it is your job to try and get those services.  Whether private therapy services or school-based therapy services, do what you can to make the time and effort count.

So, let's look at some vague annual goals over the years.  These are in chronological order.

IEP ONE

1.  Student will develop articulation skills that are commensurate with his chronological age with 80% accuracy.

Comment:  At the time this goal was written, a single word articulation evaluation showed 62 errors and intelligibility was poor to fair.

2.  Student will improve expressive and receptive language skills to correlate with age level criteria with 80% accuracy.

IEP TWO

1.  Student will improve intelligibility in general oral communication in a structured setting, school, and at home 80% of the time.

Comment:  While they are working on improving intelligibility to 80%, they have yet to measure intelligibility.  

2.  Student will improve his gross motor function in the school environment in order for him to enhance his ability to receive an education.

IEP THREE

1.  Student will increase his overall speech intelligibility in a structured setting to 75%.

Comment:  An intelligibility measure is finally obtained.  The Apraxia Profile is administered.  Intelligibility of language sample is 28%.  This is the only objective intelligibility measure ever obtained by the school.  Given such a low number, I'm not sure why they only dropped the goal to 75% and not something more reasonable like 30 or 35%.

2.  Student will be able to improve academic readiness skills in the area of general knowledge and comprehension with 80% accuracy.

3.  Student will be able to improve math readiness skills in the area of general knowledge and comprehension with 80% accuracy.

4.  Student will improve his fine motor skills.

IEP FOUR

1.  To improve speech intelligibility in the classroom through sound discrimination and sound production practice.

2.  Student will improve Gross Motor Skills for improved school participation.

FROM LATER IEPs

1.  Student will demonstrate increased fine motor coordination skills as measured by mastery of benchmarks.

Benchmark 1:  Student will demonstrate the ability to form lower case letters appropriately for cursive handwriting with 80% accuracy.

Benchmark 2:  Student will demonstrate the ability to convert 3-5 letter printed words samples to cursive with 80% accuracy.

Benchmark 3:  Student will demonstrate the ability to write a sentence in cursive with 80% accuracy.

Comment:  With regards to these kinds of general 80% goals, I did provide a report to the Alabama State Department of Education suggesting that it makes more sense to identify what letters the student can't write accurately and teach the student how to make those letters.  It seemed to me that cursive handwriting that is only 80% accurate is cursive handwriting that is 20% inaccurate.

2.  Student will be able to determine and read at appropriate reading rates for different literary texts by stating the purpose and intended audience for a passage, demonstrate proper use of prosody to include intonation (punctuation), expression, and phrasing by maintaining a 3 on prosody rating scale, while maintaining accuracy at 90% throughout reading (ALCOS:  R.5.3; R.6.6; R.6.7).

Comment:  The above goal was modified at the end of the 2008-09 school year to clarify appropriate reading rates.  The goal was modified to read:

Student will be able to determine and read at appropriate reading rates averaging from 110-120 words per minute for different literary texts ...

The reading rates are measurable and tie back to the objectively measured reading rates under Present Level of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance (PAAFP).  Objective PAAFP reading measures were obtained from the Woodcock Johnson-III, GORT-4, DIBELS assessments, and Reading Fluency Indicator.

« Last Edit: May 17, 2010, 06:20:32 AM by bkidd »