Evaluate how well an argument supports its claim
When to use this goal
For high school students who can find a claim and its reasons but accept any evidence as good evidence. Evaluating whether evidence is relevant and sufficient is central to high school reading. Present levels decide the text level.
- Baseline
- Use arguments with a mix of strong and weak evidence. Note whether the student agrees or disagrees with the claim instead of judging the support.
- Tips
- Builds on the middle school claim and relevance templates. Choose topics from many viewpoints.
- Limits
- Personal views on the topic can affect judgments; teach students to separate them.
Original IEP Atlas template based on general measurement principles; not copied from any goal bank. ID rd-comp-079.
Sign in to add this goal to a student.
Goal
By the annual IEP review date, after reading an unpracticed instructional-level argument essay or op-ed, the student will state the claim, judge whether the evidence is relevant and enough, and explain one strength and one weakness independently, earning a score of at least 9 out of 12 on a 4-row argument evaluation rubric scored 0 to 3 per row, on 3 of 4 consecutive scored responses, as measured by a defined scoring rubric collected every two weeks.
Baseline: 4 out of 12 rubric points.
- 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. Rubric score fits this behavior.
Met: Explicit criterion. Number and unit stated.
Met: Mastery rule and schedule. Both stated.
Met: Method produces the metric. Rubric scoring gives rubric score 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 Reading Comprehension.
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
- Reading - Reading Comprehension
- Baseline
- 4 out of 12 rubric points.
- Annual goal454 characters
- By the annual IEP review date, after reading an unpracticed instructional-level argument essay or op-ed, the student will state the claim, judge whether the evidence is relevant and enough, and explain one strength and one weakness independently, earning a score of at least 9 out of 12 on a 4-row argument evaluation rubric scored 0 to 3 per row, on 3 of 4 consecutive scored responses, as measured by a defined scoring rubric collected every two weeks.
- Timeframe
- By the annual IEP review date
- Condition
- After reading an unpracticed instructional-level argument essay or op-ed
- Behavior
- The student will state the claim, judge whether the evidence is relevant and enough, and explain one strength and one weakness independently
- Criteria
- Earning a score of at least 9 out of 12 on a 4-row argument evaluation rubric scored 0 to 3 per row, on 3 of 4 consecutive scored responses
- Evaluation method
- A defined scoring rubric
- Schedule
- Every two weeks
Copied as plain text, with straight quotes and plain dashes.
Matching data sheet
Rubric tracker. Scores each rubric criterion and totals them.
Rubric tracker
Rubric score- Student label:
- Target:
- earning a score of at least 9 out of 12 on a 4-row argument evaluation rubric scored 0 to 3 per row
- Mastery rule:
- on 3 of 4 consecutive scored responses
- Collection schedule:
- every two weeks
- Method:
- Rubric scoring
- Data collector:
Goal: By the annual IEP review date, after reading an unpracticed instructional-level argument essay or op-ed, the student will state the claim, judge whether the evidence is relevant and enough, and explain one strength and one weakness independently, earning a score of at least 9 out of 12 on a 4-row argument evaluation rubric scored 0 to 3 per row, on 3 of 4 consecutive scored responses, as measured by a defined scoring rubric collected every two weeks.
| Date | Task / sample | Claim stated accurately (0 to 3) | Relevance of evidence judged with a reason (0 to 3) | Sufficiency of evidence judged with a reason (0 to 3) | One strength and one weakness explained (0 to 3) | Total (of 12) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Preview shows 4 of 12 rows.
- Score each sample with a 4-row argument evaluation rubric scored 0 to 3 per row. Attach or reference the rubric's score descriptors.
- Use the same prompt type and conditions for each scored sample.
- If two people score, check agreement on a few samples before relying on the data.
The CSV opens in Excel or Google Sheets, with formulas. Sheets print blank; no student data is stored.