The Autism Society Event and Education Recordings Archive

Use this site to access recordings and presentations from National Conferences

Autism Society records most keynote and concurrent sessions at their annual conferences. You can see and hear those recordings by purchasing full online access, or individual recordings.



5029 Developing Meaningful IEP Objectives: Evaluation to Implementation


Thursday, July 8, 2010: 3:15 PM-4:30 PM
Reunion H (Hyatt Regency Dallas)
Handout

Registered attendees have free access, please select the button above for the file you would like to access.

Purchase Access
The IEP objective is the pathway to success for students with special needs. When the IEP objectives fall short of addressing all areas of need, the stakeholders suffer. Development of poor IEPs results in missed opportunities for students and places districts in peril of legal recourse. Developing targeted IEP objectives requires quality evaluation and collaboration. This presentation reviews steps for avoiding common pitfalls of IEP objective planning, including “canned” and ignored programming goals and objectives.
The IEP objective is the pathway to student success for individuals with special needs. Developing meaningful IEP goals can be a challenge with many pitfalls. The IEP objective is only the start. Strategies necessary to accomplish the IEP objectives must be developed and implemented in the classroom. This presentation will address common pitfalls to the development of meaningful IEP objectives, and discuss how to accomplish these objectives with the development and implementation of a comprehensive intervention plan. There are many common pitfalls in the development of quality IEP objectives.

First, evaluation data are often not fully considered when developing IEP objectives. This results in objectives that fail to target all of the critical areas related to the disability. For example, educational plans for students with ASD often only include goals that address “academic” areas and fail to adequately address other areas of need, such as social and communication skills. In reality, for students with ASD, the majority of the IEP objectives should target underlying needs in the areas of social understanding/functioning and communication. In fact, the law requires consideration of factors beyond academics in the development of IEPs (i.e., developmental and functional needs of the child). Failure to address all areas of need places districts in peril of legal recourse.

Next, there is an over-reliance on databases to “develop” IEP objectives. While these tools can be helpful, professionals still need to individualize the objectives to address the needs of a student in a given setting. Failing to adapt the IEP objectives results in “canned” goals that are not individualized. At times, objectives will address the key areas of concern, but miss the target by focusing on the wrong developmental level—failing to recognize necessary increments to long-term objectives. Setting the target behavior beyond reach defeats both staff and student. Data collection can be an obstacle. When IEP objectives are specific and measurable, they facilitate meaningful data collection. The objective itself may guide the method of data collection. For example, one student's IEP objective was to use a checklist to complete morning activities. The teacher kept the checklists as a means to collect data. Meaningful IEP objectives are based on the concerns of the parents, evaluation results and the strengths of the child. Further, the IEP team must consider the academic, developmental and functional needs of the child. This requires a process for evaluating needs, selecting priorities and developing meaningful individualized objectives.

This presentation will introduce tools for informal evaluation: the Underlying Characteristics Checklist and Individual Strengths and Skills Inventory. The Underlying Characteristics Checklist (UCC) provides a snapshot of how autism is expressed in an individual while the Individual Strengths and Skills Inventory (ISSI) helps to identify strengths and skills. This information provides a foundation for a collaborative team, including parents, to set meaningful goals and objectives. Once quality IEP objectives are developed, intervention and implementation are key concerns. Simply having IEP objectives does not mean that they will be accomplished. Schools are accountable for student progress, or lack of progress, on IEP objectives. While the IEP objective provides a goal to attain, it does not define the necessary strategies. Therefore, schools are also required to identify the supports and services necessary to implement the IEP objectives and to collect data to demonstrate that the strategies in use are effective. The Ziggurat Model aids in this process. Using the five levels of the Intervention Ziggurat, comprehensive intervention strategies are identified to attain the IEP objectives. These strategies are then incorporated into the framework of a student's daily schedule utilizing the Comprehensive Autism Planning System. CAPS is the tool that helps to ensure that needed interventions are being implemented throughout a student's day in order to help the student to achieve the IEP objectives.

Participants of this workshop will be able to:

• Name two pitfalls to developing quality IEP objectives

• List key IDEA requirements for the development of IEP objectives

• Describe two tools that facilitate the development of meaningful objectives

• Describe the process for selecting strategies and implementing them during a student's day


Learning Objectives:

  • Name two pitfalls to developing quality IEP objectives
  • List key IDEA requirements for the development of IEP objective
  • Describe two tools that facilitate the development of meaningful objectives
  • Describe the process for selecting strategies and implementing them during a student’s day

Content Area: Education

Presenters:

Ruth Aspy, Ph.D.
The Ziggurat Group

Ruth Aspy, Ph.D., is a licensed psychologist and author. She specializes in assessment and intervention for individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Dr. Aspy is co-creator of the Ziggurat Model and speaks internationally on this and other topics. She has experience in both clinical and school settings.

Barry G. Grossman, Ph.D.
Licensed Psychologist
The Ziggurat Group

Barry G. Grossman, Ph.D., is a licensed psychologist who specializes in assessment and intervention for individuals with ASD. He provides assessment and consultation services, is an author and speaks internationally, and co-created the Ziggurat Model. He is also a winner of the 2008 Autism Society Literary Work of the Year award.

Susan Jamieson, M.Ed.
Registered Educational Diagnostician
The Ziggurat Group

Susan Jamieson is a Registered Professional Educational Diagnostician who has worked in special education in the state of Texas for 35 years. She served as a special education administrator and special education teacher. She has experience with team evaluations specializing in autism spectrum disorders.