State the relationship behind an analogy
When to use this goal
For students who complete simple verbal analogies but guess on harder ones, and who need to name the relationship (synonym, antonym, part to whole, tool to user, degree) before choosing. Naming the link supports test items and class reasoning. Present levels and vocabulary data, not grade, decide fit.
- Baseline
- Give 5 analogies and score each response on the rubric, then average. Note whether errors come from not knowing a word or from missing the relationship; word gaps need vocabulary work first. Record which relationship types are hardest.
- Tips
- Score each item on the rubric and average across the probe. Use words from current units so the practice also builds class vocabulary. Teach a short set of relationship names and keep them consistent with the classroom teacher. The original-pair row shows flexible use; it can be dropped for students who are early in this skill.
- Limits
- Unknown words lower scores without showing reasoning gaps, so pick words the student knows. Analogy formats on tests vary; practice items may not match the test exactly. The template does not measure broader verbal reasoning or reading comprehension.
Original IEP Atlas template based on general measurement principles; not copied from any goal bank. ID sl-sem-050.
Sign in to add this goal to a student.
Goal
By the annual IEP review date, given 5 written verbal analogies using class vocabulary, each with 4 answer choices, the student will name the relationship in the first pair, choose or give the word that completes the second pair, and explain how it matches independently, earning a score of at least 6 out of 8 on an 8-point analogy reasoning rubric, 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 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 Vocabulary & Semantics.
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 - Vocabulary & Semantics
- Baseline
- 3 out of 8 rubric points.
- Annual goal456 characters
- By the annual IEP review date, given 5 written verbal analogies using class vocabulary, each with 4 answer choices, the student will name the relationship in the first pair, choose or give the word that completes the second pair, and explain how it matches independently, earning a score of at least 6 out of 8 on an 8-point analogy reasoning rubric, on 3 of 4 consecutive biweekly probes, as measured by a defined scoring rubric collected every two weeks.
- Timeframe
- By the annual IEP review date
- Condition
- Given 5 written verbal analogies using class vocabulary, each with 4 answer choices
- Behavior
- The student will name the relationship in the first pair, choose or give the word that completes the second pair, and explain how it matches independently
- Criteria
- Earning a score of at least 6 out of 8 on an 8-point analogy reasoning rubric, on 3 of 4 consecutive biweekly probes
- 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 6 out of 8 on an 8-point analogy reasoning rubric
- 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 5 written verbal analogies using class vocabulary, each with 4 answer choices, the student will name the relationship in the first pair, choose or give the word that completes the second pair, and explain how it matches independently, earning a score of at least 6 out of 8 on an 8-point analogy reasoning rubric, on 3 of 4 consecutive biweekly probes, as measured by a defined scoring rubric collected every two weeks.
| Date | Task / sample | Names the relationship type in the first pair (0 to 2) | Completes the second pair with a fitting word (0 to 2) | Explains how the second pair matches the relationship (0 to 2) | Creates an original pair with the same relationship (0 to 2) | Total (of 8) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Preview shows 4 of 12 rows.
- Score each sample with an 8-point analogy reasoning rubric. 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.