Tell what another person knows or feels in a situation
When to use this goal
For students who assume others know what they know or feel what they feel, which leads to confusing explanations and surprises in social situations. Base the choice on the SLP's assessment and the student's goals. For inferring speaker intent, see sl-prag-003. Different ways of reading people are not deficits; the goal gives information and options.
- Baseline
- Present 10 scenarios of each type (knowledge differences, feeling differences) and record whether the student states the other person's view, states their own view instead, or is unsure. Ask the student for examples of times someone reacted in a way they did not expect; those make the best teaching scenarios.
- Tips
- Score correct when the student states a perspective the SLP and a second scorer agree fits the scenario and names a supporting clue. Accept reasonable alternatives; many situations have more than one plausible reading. Use scenarios from the student's life when possible. Do not score the student's own emotional expression.
- Limits
- Scenario tasks are simpler than real time; the goal does not measure real-world perspective taking, which the student and family can report on. Cultural background affects how feelings are shown and read. Scoring needs two raters to be reliable.
Original IEP Atlas template based on general measurement principles; not copied from any goal bank. ID sl-prag-014.
Sign in to add this goal to a student.
Goal
By the annual IEP review date, given 10 short scenarios (spoken, written, or video) in which a character knows less than the student or feels differently, the student will state what the other person knows or does not know, or name the emotion they are likely having, and name the clue that shows it independently with at least 80% accuracy on perspective scenarios, across 3 consecutive therapy sessions, as measured by opportunity-by-opportunity data collected during each therapy session.
Baseline: 30% 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. Opportunity (trial) recording 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 Pragmatic Language.
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
- Speech & Language - Pragmatic Language
- Baseline
- 30% accuracy.
- Annual goal491 characters
- By the annual IEP review date, given 10 short scenarios (spoken, written, or video) in which a character knows less than the student or feels differently, the student will state what the other person knows or does not know, or name the emotion they are likely having, and name the clue that shows it independently with at least 80% accuracy on perspective scenarios, across 3 consecutive therapy sessions, as measured by opportunity-by-opportunity data collected during each therapy session.
- Timeframe
- By the annual IEP review date
- Condition
- Given 10 short scenarios (spoken, written, or video) in which a character knows less than the student or feels differently
- Behavior
- The student will state what the other person knows or does not know, or name the emotion they are likely having, and name the clue that shows it independently
- Criteria
- With at least 80% accuracy on perspective scenarios, across 3 consecutive therapy sessions
- Evaluation method
- Opportunity-by-opportunity data
- Schedule
- During each therapy session
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 80% accuracy on perspective scenarios
- Mastery rule:
- across 3 consecutive therapy sessions
- Collection schedule:
- during each therapy session
- Method:
- Opportunity (trial) recording
- Data collector:
Goal: By the annual IEP review date, given 10 short scenarios (spoken, written, or video) in which a character knows less than the student or feels differently, the student will state what the other person knows or does not know, or name the emotion they are likely having, and name the clue that shows it independently with at least 80% accuracy on perspective scenarios, across 3 consecutive therapy sessions, as measured by opportunity-by-opportunity data collected during each therapy session.
| 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.