Tell what a first-person narrator could not know
When to use this goal
For students who treat a first-person narrator's account as the whole truth and miss that the narrator cannot see into others' minds or events they were not present for. Present levels in inference and comprehension, not grade, decide fit.
- Baseline
- Give two probes from different texts and note whether errors cluster on other characters' thoughts or on events away from the narrator. Chance is half on the two-way mark, so weigh the cited sentence when judging growth.
- Tips
- Pairs well with a class novel told in first person. Talk about narrators who guess wrong about others; this leads into unreliable narrators in high school. Count an item correct only when the mark and the citation both fit.
- Limits
- Statements must be written with care so the answer is clear from the text. This goal does not cover how point of view creates suspense or humor.
Original IEP Atlas template based on general measurement principles; not copied from any goal bank. ID rd-lit-007.
Sign in to add this goal to a student.
Goal
By the annual IEP review date, after reading a first-person story or chapter, given 10 statements about events and characters' thoughts, the student will mark each statement as something the narrator could know or could not know and cite the sentence that shows it independently with at least 85% accuracy on narrator knowledge statements, on 3 of 4 consecutive biweekly probes, as measured by work-sample analysis collected every two weeks.
Baseline: 50% accuracy.
- 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. Percent accuracy fits this behavior.
Met: Explicit criterion. Number and unit stated.
Met: Mastery rule and schedule. Both stated.
Met: Method produces the metric. Work-sample analysis gives percent accuracy 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 Literary Analysis & Author's Craft.
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 - Literary Analysis & Author's Craft
- Baseline
- 50% accuracy.
- Annual goal441 characters
- By the annual IEP review date, after reading a first-person story or chapter, given 10 statements about events and characters' thoughts, the student will mark each statement as something the narrator could know or could not know and cite the sentence that shows it independently with at least 85% accuracy on narrator knowledge statements, on 3 of 4 consecutive biweekly probes, as measured by work-sample analysis collected every two weeks.
- Timeframe
- By the annual IEP review date
- Condition
- After reading a first-person story or chapter, given 10 statements about events and characters' thoughts
- Behavior
- The student will mark each statement as something the narrator could know or could not know and cite the sentence that shows it independently
- Criteria
- With at least 85% accuracy on narrator knowledge statements, on 3 of 4 consecutive biweekly probes
- Evaluation method
- Work-sample analysis
- Schedule
- Every two weeks
Copied as plain text, with straight quotes and plain dashes.
Matching data sheet
Accuracy tracker. Records number correct and number attempted.
Accuracy tracker
Percent accuracy- Student label:
- Target:
- with at least 85% accuracy on narrator knowledge statements
- Mastery rule:
- on 3 of 4 consecutive biweekly probes
- Collection schedule:
- every two weeks
- Method:
- Work-sample analysis
- Data collector:
Goal: By the annual IEP review date, after reading a first-person story or chapter, given 10 statements about events and characters' thoughts, the student will mark each statement as something the narrator could know or could not know and cite the sentence that shows it independently with at least 85% accuracy on narrator knowledge statements, on 3 of 4 consecutive biweekly probes, as measured by work-sample analysis collected every two weeks.
| Date | Task / materials | # correct | # attempted | % accuracycorrect ÷ attempted × 100 | Support levele.g., independent, 1 verbal prompt | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Preview shows 4 of 12 rows.
- Score only items the student attempted unless the goal defines a fixed set of items. Use the same denominator every session.
- Percent = numerator ÷ denominator × 100. Round to one decimal place.
- Record the support actually provided, even if the goal is independent performance.
The CSV opens in Excel or Google Sheets, with formulas. Sheets print blank; no student data is stored.