Matrix Parents Presents: SMART Goals

Matrix Parent Network and the Marin Center for Independent Living funded and supported the production of this podcast. 

S.M.A.R.T. Goals (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Reasonable, Time Bound, are the basis of a good IEP.  Everything either leads to the creation of goals or lead from it in the form or services and placement.

Research indicates there is a direct relationship between parental knowledge and their satisfaction with their children’s special education programs.  In this case, knowledge truly is power.

The most effective way to increase your ability to communicate with your IEP team, and thus avoid conflict, is to learn and use knowledge of the special education process to help your child succeed.

Thanks to  soundimage.org for the free access to the AI generated music used in this podcast (https://soundimage.org/) 

Transcript

To help you increase your knowledge of the IEP process, today I’m going to talk about SMART goals (S.M.A.R.T). The acronym stands for specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time bound. 

The reason this topic has to do with communication skills and conflict resolution is that research indicates the number one factor in parents’ ability to enhance their effectiveness as an IEP team member, and thus avoid conflict, is knowledge of how the IEP process works.  There is a direct relationship between parental knowledge and their satisfaction with their children’s special education programs.  In this case, knowledge truly is power.

Goals are at the heart of the IEP process.  Where a student is, the present levels on an IEP, lead directly to the goals and then to the services, accommodations and/or modifications to curriculum lead directly from the goals.  Goals are at the heart of the whole, everything either leads directly to them or from them.

Goals give school staff working with students a specific roadmap of what the IEP team wants to them to achieve over the year.  Goals are the focus of the services the school special education practitioners use to guide instruction.

The accommodations and/or modifications that are on the IEP provide direction to those teaching in the general education environment as to what the student needs to access the curriculum to the same extent as their typical peers.

And if the student is involved in their own IEP process (which they should be by middle school) goals give them something to reach for.  

Goal-setting theory suggests that people with specific, measurable goals perform better than those with vague goals such as "do your best" or specific easy goals. Further, the theory states that a goal is a standard for assessing one's satisfaction.

What makes writing SMART goals so important in an IEP?  The importance lies in the definitions of the terms in the acronym.

Again, SMART stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time Bound.

Let’s briefly look at each letter.

Specific means the goal clearly states what is expected, so anyone reading it can understand.  Think of the simple term “what does it look like” to guide your judgment if the goal is specific enough.

Measurable goals must be quantifiable with data that clearly shows the desired outcome has been achieved. 

Achievable This part of goal setting ensures that while the goal is challenging, it’s still achievable. Attainable goals strike a balance between being too easy and unrealistically ambitious.  The IEP team needs to balance this but keeping in mind high expectations should be encouraged.

Relevant goals meet the standards of relating to the general education curriculum or to skills related to accessing it.  Learning problems based on deficient academic skills and things like social emotional issues are both relevant areas for goals.

Time Bound  IEP goals are usually written for one year.  This puts a natural time limit on which to measure progress on the goal.  In addition, school districts must report on goals at the same time they provide things like report cards or progress reports for typical students.

Making sure the SMART goals guide applies to all of your child’s IEP goals and will ensure you are able to get accurate data on progress.

Let’s look at 2 goals and see how we can write them as SMART.

The first goal has to do with behavior, and for that we’ll go back to an old friend, John. If you've listened to previous podcasts about behavior, you'll recognize him, but if not, here he is… 

In John’s 3rd grade classroom, his teacher invites participation by students by being called on after raising their hands quietly. John will call out with an answer, comment or other verbalization (ex. Me! Me!) with a moderately loud voice in 7 of 10 opportunities while raising his hand, not raising his hand, or partially raising it. 

What John does is pretty easy thing to imagine so let’s write a goal that will help John comply more often with the classroom rule about answering questions.

We’ll take it apart after reading to make sure it meets the definition.

One year from now, in a general education classroom setting, when his teacher asks the class to answer a question or make a comment by being called on after raising their hands quietly, John will do so four of five opportunities with 80% accuracy.

Let’s go back to the components of a SMART goal.  First, it needs to be specific.  As mentioned previously, a good way to determine if a goal is specific is to envision it being implemented in a classroom.  Can you recognize the situations that take place that are in the goal?

In this case, the answer is yes.  The concise definition of the action we want to see is clear because what students are supposed to do is obvious, raise their hands quietly. 

Second, is it measurable?  Again, the answer is yes.  It is a relatively simple matter to take data on this goal to measure progress.

The measurement is based on the opportunities and accuracy, which are four of five opportunities with 80% accuracy.  

The four of five opportunities are simple to measure, it’s just the number of times John raises his hand and calls out, and the times he does it without calling out.

The 80% part is more complicated and needs to be defined by the IEP team to collect accurate data.

What does 80% look like?  This is related to something called “approximating success”.  It was mentioned that John raises his hand while calling out sometimes, but other times he does not, or does so only partially.

When John partially or fully raises his hand it’s an example of approximating success, he is doing it sort of correctly.  His partial success needs to be recorded and reinforced, it’s not an all or nothing thing, and partial successes can be built on.  

Data collection is, of course, at the heart of measurement.  There are data collection methods like frequency and rate measurement (how many times does John both raise his hand appropriately and how many inappropriately in a specific period of time and how many partial successes?).

Third, is it achievable?  The answer, if the teaching and reinforcement needed are applied properly, there is no reason that John can’t meet the goal.  However, he can’t do it on his own, he will need support to learn and internalize the new behavior.

Fourth, is it relevant?  It is.  For the classroom to function efficiently, John needs to follow the rules all the other students follow.  His interruptions decrease learning for other students as well as his own.

And fifth, is it time bound?  This goal (and most other goals) is written for a period of one year, so it does meet this requirement.  

Best practice is that goals always be written for a one-year period.  If the goal is written mid-way into the IEP period, the team can review progress and keep or update the goal at the next annual IEP meeting.

The second goal is an academic one. Our sample student, Marie, is in the 4th grade and in the first month of the year.  She has a current oral reading level of 80 words per minute at the 4.1 reading level .  

The grade level standard for the end of 4th grade is 120 words per minute of grade level text.  The 3rd grade standard is 90 words per minute.

We know that studies indicate students with reading issues like Marie can potentially increase their skills, but the team needs to know why oral reading is slow.

It gets a bit complicated at this point because reading and fluency is a complicated issue that involves looking at IQ, academic, motor and other assessment areas.

The goal we will use seems simple on its face.  However, depending on what the core issue is, the teaching and accommodations may vary widely.  

For instance, if the issue centers around something called orthographic processing, or if it is a result of inefficient processing of input and/or output language changes what the student needs.

Orthographic processing is the area that controls how easily the student can memorize words, both sight (or irregular) and phonemically regular.  Having good skills is why most of us can read text without sounding out every regular word and recalling from memory sight words.  Most of us simply skim text pretty effortlessly.

Slow processing, on the other hand, needs to be primarily accommodated.  While processing speed can increase, it is primarily a by-product of other reading instruction.  Therefore, we would not write a goal to increase processing speed, but rather a goal that addresses a remediable skill area, like increasing reading words per minute.  

So a SMART goal in this area can read like the following:

One year from now, when reading orally in a 1-1 setting with an assessor, Marie will be able to read 100 words per minute of grade level text with fluency and comprehension 4 of 5 opportunities with 80% accuracy.

This goal meets the same SMART goal standards as the previous one.  I won’t go over the details again.

Fluency and comprehension are both affected as someone with an orthographic processing deficit may be able to read words fluently, but without actually comprehending the text. The student is working so hard on the decoding and remembering sight words, that comprehension goes out the window.

As to the opportunities and accuracy that are noted in each goal, there are good reasons for them being there.

When a goal reads 4 of 5 opportunities, or any other combination, this is a recognition that a student (or anyone else for that matter) is not 100% engaged every time they are assessed.  If we used every assessment as equal, and if the student is not 100% trying each time, that would depress the actual skill level the student has achieved, they are being penalized for mood rather than skill.

As to accuracy, 80% is considered mastery in most cases in special education, particularly in academic areas.  This measure would not make sense for a goal having to do with crossing the street safely, obviously, so it used when appropriate.

That’s our very short look at SMART goals and I hope this has lent some clarity to way special education goals should be written.