Analyze a conflict scenario and choose a workable solution
Live goal preview
By the annual IEP review date, given a written, video, or comic-strip scenario of a common peer conflict, the student will describe the conflict, list possible solutions, and choose a solution with a reason independently, earning a score of at least 6 out of 8 on a 4-row social problem-solving rubric scored 0–2 per row, on 3 of 4 consecutive biweekly probes, as measured by a defined scoring rubric collected every two weeks.
Baseline: 3 out of 8 rubric points.
- Condition
- Observable behavior
- Criterion
- Measurement method
Measurability check10 of 10 met
All structural checks are met.
Met: Observable behavior. The behavior is stated as an action.
Met: Condition. The goal states when or under what conditions the behavior occurs.
Met: Unit fits the behavior. Rubric score is a reasonable way to quantify this behavior.
Met: Explicit criterion. The success criterion is stated with a number and unit.
Met: Mastery rule and schedule. Mastery rule and collection schedule are stated.
Met: Method produces the metric. Rubric scoring can produce rubric score data.
Met: Review timeframe. The goal includes a timeframe.
Met: Baseline and target compatible. Baseline and target use the same unit and show change in the intended direction.
Met: Aligned with area of need. The wording still relates to Conflict Resolution.
Met: Level of support. The level of support is defined.
What this checks: the goal's structure and wording, using fixed rules: observable behavior, condition, criterion, method, mastery rule, timeframe, baseline/target consistency, and support. It can't judge whether the goal is appropriate, ambitious enough, or legally sufficient for a particular student. That requires assessment data and the IEP team.
About this template
- Level guidance
- For students who tend to see one option in a conflict (often giving up or escalating) and benefit from practice generating alternatives. Present levels and responses to scenario probes, not grade, decide fit. Present scenarios in the student's strongest mode (read aloud, video, comic strip).
- Baseline considerations
- Present 2 or 3 unfamiliar scenarios and score each with the rubric. Note whether the student has trouble with the language demand or with the problem solving itself. Compare scenarios involving the student directly with those about others.
- Usage notes
- Use new scenarios at each probe so the student isn't recalling previous answers. Score each row 0 (absent), 1 (partial), or 2 (complete). Accept any reasonable perspective; the rubric scores reasoning, not a single right answer. Responses can be spoken, written, drawn, or given on a device.
- Known limitations
- Scenario performance shows reasoning, not real-time use during conflict; pair with se-cr-001 or se-cr-005 to measure use in real situations. Perspective-taking items can disadvantage students who interpret others differently; score what the student says, not whether it matches typical interpretations.
- Source
- Original IEP Atlas draft (AI-assisted) based on general measurement principles; not copied from any goal bank. Template ID
se-cr-003.
Short-term objectives (optional)
When are objectives required?Federal IDEA regulations require benchmarks or short-term objectives only for students who take alternate assessments aligned to alternate academic achievement standards (34 CFR §300.320(a)(2)(ii)). Your state or district may require them more broadly.
Matching data sheet
Rubric tracker. Your goal is a rubric score, so the sheet scores each rubric criterion and totals them.
Rubric tracker
Rubric score- Student label:
- Target:
- earning a score of at least 6 out of 8 on a 4-row social problem-solving rubric scored 0–2 per row
- Mastery rule:
- on 3 of 4 consecutive biweekly probes
- Collection schedule:
- every two weeks
- Method:
- Rubric scoring
- Data collector:
Goal: By the annual IEP review date, given a written, video, or comic-strip scenario of a common peer conflict, the student will describe the conflict, list possible solutions, and choose a solution with a reason independently, earning a score of at least 6 out of 8 on a 4-row social problem-solving rubric scored 0–2 per row, on 3 of 4 consecutive biweekly probes, as measured by a defined scoring rubric collected every two weeks.
| Date | Task / sample | Describes the problem in neutral terms | Describes the other person's point of view | Lists two or more different, workable solutions | Chooses a solution and gives a reason based on fairness or likely outcome | Total (of 8) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Preview shows 4 of 12 rows.
- Score each sample with a 4-row social problem-solving rubric scored 0–2 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 for the calculated columns. Sheets are blank: IEP Atlas doesn't store student data.