Tell an adult about a peer problem instead of retaliating
When to use this goal
For students who hit back, throw things, or chase a peer after being teased, bumped, or provoked. Base the choice on the FBA. The student should already be able to describe the problem in a few words. Resolving the conflict itself belongs to the conflict-resolution skill.
- Baseline
- Review incident reports for the past month to see how provocations currently end. Observe 3 to 5 recess or passing periods and record each provocation and the first response: report, retaliation, or walking away without reporting. Practice the report format when calm to confirm the student can produce it.
- Tips
- Adults must act on reports every time (a neutral check-in with both students is enough) or reporting will stop. Keep the report format short so it is faster than retaliating. Score only provocations an adult saw. Pair with the reduction goal bh-rep-020 if aggression is tracked, and consider a conflict-resolution goal once reporting is stable.
- Limits
- Most provocations happen out of adult sight, so observed opportunities undercount the real rate; the role-play adds data but is not the same skill. Reporting every minor event can become its own problem; the plan should name what counts as a problem worth reporting.
Original IEP Atlas template based on general measurement principles; not copied from any goal bank. ID bh-rep-019.
Sign in to add this goal to a student.
Goal
By the annual IEP review date, when a peer teases, bumps, or takes something from the student during unstructured time, the student will walk to an adult and report the problem using the taught format (who, what happened, what they want) before touching the peer or their belongings independently in at least 4 of 5 opportunities, across 3 consecutive 2-week data summaries, as measured by direct observation collected each observed provocation plus 1 weekly role-play, summarized every 2 weeks.
Baseline: 1 of 5 opportunities.
- Condition
- Observable behavior
- Criterion
- Measurement method
Measurability check11 of 11 met
Met: Observable behavior. Stated as an action.
Met: Condition. Stated.
Met: Unit fits the behavior. Opportunities fits this behavior.
Met: Explicit criterion. Number and unit stated.
Met: Mastery rule and schedule. Both stated.
Met: Method produces the metric. Direct observation gives opportunities data.
Met: Review timeframe. Stated.
Met: Baseline and target compatible. Same unit, change in the right direction.
Met: Aligned with area of need. Still about Replacement Behaviors.
Met: Level of support. Defined.
Met: Blanks filled in. Nothing left to fill in.
Checks structure and wording only. Whether the goal fits the student is the team's call.
Short-term objectives (optional)
When are objectives required?Required for students on alternate assessments (34 CFR §300.320(a)(2)(ii)); some states require them for everyone.
Paste into your IEP system
Most district systems have a separate box for each part of a goal. Copy them one at a time, or all at once as labeled text.
- Area of need
- Behavior & Classroom Expectations - Replacement Behaviors
- Baseline
- 1 of 5 opportunities.
- Annual goal495 characters
- By the annual IEP review date, when a peer teases, bumps, or takes something from the student during unstructured time, the student will walk to an adult and report the problem using the taught format (who, what happened, what they want) before touching the peer or their belongings independently in at least 4 of 5 opportunities, across 3 consecutive 2-week data summaries, as measured by direct observation collected each observed provocation plus 1 weekly role-play, summarized every 2 weeks.
- Timeframe
- By the annual IEP review date
- Condition
- When a peer teases, bumps, or takes something from the student during unstructured time
- Behavior
- The student will walk to an adult and report the problem using the taught format (who, what happened, what they want) before touching the peer or their belongings independently
- Criteria
- In at least 4 of 5 opportunities, across 3 consecutive 2-week data summaries
- Evaluation method
- Direct observation
- Schedule
- Each observed provocation plus 1 weekly role-play, summarized every 2 weeks
Copied as plain text, with straight quotes and plain dashes.
Matching data sheet
Opportunity tracker. One box per opportunity in each session.
Opportunity tracker
Opportunities- Student label:
- Target:
- in at least 4 of 5 opportunities
- Mastery rule:
- across 3 consecutive 2-week data summaries
- Collection schedule:
- each observed provocation plus 1 weekly role-play, summarized every 2 weeks
- Method:
- Direct observation
- Data collector:
Goal: By the annual IEP review date, when a peer teases, bumps, or takes something from the student during unstructured time, the student will walk to an adult and report the problem using the taught format (who, what happened, what they want) before touching the peer or their belongings independently in at least 4 of 5 opportunities, across 3 consecutive 2-week data summaries, as measured by direct observation collected each observed provocation plus 1 weekly role-play, summarized every 2 weeks.
Key: + demonstrated independently · P demonstrated with a prompt (note type) · − not demonstrated · NA no opportunity occurred
| Date | Activity / context | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | # + (of 5) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Preview shows 4 of 12 rows.
- Record up to 5 opportunities per session, matching the goal's denominator.
- Define in advance what counts as an opportunity so every data collector records the same thing.
- Count only + marks toward the criterion unless the goal specifies prompted responses.
The CSV opens in Excel or Google Sheets, with formulas. Sheets print blank; no student data is stored.