The SETT framework for AT decisions

Teams that start with a device usually end up with a device in a drawer. SETT reverses the order. You describe the student, where they spend the day and what they need to do there, and only then ask which tools would help. It works for low-tech choices like a slant board as well as for a speech-generating device. It is a thinking structure, not a test, and it fits the IEP team's duty to consider whether a student needs AT devices and services.^[1]

For the yes-or-no consideration that every IEP needs, start with the assistive technology consideration checklist. Use SETT when the answer is "maybe" or "yes, but which tool?"

What you need before you start

• A team: the SLP or OT, the classroom teacher, the case manager, the family and, when possible, the student. Add an AT specialist if the district has one.
• One or two tasks the student cannot do yet, with a number for each.
• About 45 minutes for the first meeting, and a shared page with four headings: Student, Environments, Tasks, Tools.
• A plan to come back to the page. SETT is meant to be revisited as the student changes.

The steps

Step 1: Student

Describe the student in terms of what they can do now, not their diagnosis. Ask: What does the student need to do that is hard right now? What are their current abilities in the areas that matter for the task: motor, vision, hearing, language, attention? What do they like and what motivates them? What has been tried, and what happened?

Example entry: "Reads grade 3 text aloud at 92 words correct per minute. Handwriting is slow and tiring because of weak hand strength: 5 legible words per minute on copying. Types 9 words per minute with two fingers. Likes using the class tablet."

Step 2: Environments

List every place the task happens and what is there. Ask: What is the room like? Who is there to help, and how much? What equipment is already available? Is there Wi-Fi, a power outlet, a quiet corner? What are the attitudes toward technology in that class?

Example entry: "General education 3rd grade, 26 students, one teacher, para 30 minutes a day. Chromebooks for all students. Science lab with standing tables. Writing at home with a parent at the kitchen table."

Step 3: Tasks

Name the specific things the student must do in those settings to make progress. Be concrete: "write a 5-sentence science summary," not "writing." Ask which parts of the task are essential and which could be done another way.

Example entry: "Daily journal of 3 to 5 sentences. Weekly science summary of 5 sentences. Spelling test of 15 words on Fridays. Filling in math worksheets."

Step 4: Tools

Now list tool options that match the student, the settings and the tasks. Include no-tech and low-tech options, not only devices, and include the services needed: training, setup and support. Then pick one or two to trial.

Example entry: "Options: pencil grip and slanted surface (low-tech); word prediction on the Chromebook; speech-to-text; a scribe for spelling tests. Trial: word prediction for journals and science; speech-to-text as a backup for longer pieces."

Step 5: Trial with data

Set the trial length, the measure and the success rule before you start. Four to six weeks is enough for most tools. Use the same measure as the baseline. Record whether the student used the tool, not only the score.

Step 6: Decide and write it into the IEP

If the trial worked, add the tool to the IEP as an accommodation, a supplementary aid or a part of a goal, and list the AT services. An assistive technology service includes training for the student, staff and family.^[2] If it did not work, go back to the Tools step with what you learned.

Worked example: Nora, start to finish

Nora is a fictional 3rd grader with a physical disability that affects hand strength. She reads and understands at grade level. Her writing output is far below her ideas.

Baseline, three probes in September: 5, 4 and 6 legible words per minute on a 5-minute journal task. Median: 5 words per minute. Her teacher notes she often stops after 2 sentences.

SETT meeting, September 24: the team fills in the four areas as in the examples above. The OT notes that typing with two fingers is faster than handwriting but still slow, and that her grip tires after 8 minutes. The SLP notes that her spoken sentences are complex, so a tool that captures speech may get her ideas down.

Trial plan:

Results:

The median of the last 4 probes is 13 words per minute, more than double the baseline of 5. Nora used the tool in all of the last 10 writing blocks. Speech-to-text helped for the weekly science summary but was hard in the busy classroom, so the team kept it for the hallway desk and home.

IEP changes, November 12: word prediction added as an accommodation for all written work over 1 sentence. Speech-to-text added for longer pieces in a quiet space. A writing goal now reads: "Using word prediction, Nora will write a 5-sentence paragraph at 15 correct words per minute in 4 of 5 weekly probes." The OT provides 30 minutes a month of AT consultation. The team will revisit SETT in March.

Common mistakes, with better versions

• Weak: "Let's try an iPad." Better: "What task do we want her to do more independently, and in which class?"
• Weak: Filling in the Tools section first and working backward. Better: Leave Tools blank until Student, Environments and Tasks are filled.
• Weak: Writing "writing" as the task. Better: "Write a 5-sentence science summary in 20 minutes."
• Weak: A trial with no baseline or success rule. Better: Take 3 baseline probes and agree on the success rule before the trial.
• Weak: Training only the student. Better: Train the teacher, the para and the family too, and write it as an AT service.
• Weak: Doing SETT once. Better: Revisit when the student, the setting or the tasks change, such as a move to middle school.

Templates and next steps

For goal wording that names a tool, see assistive technology goals and keyboarding goals. For communication devices, the AAC baseline and AAC data collection guides cover measurement. To take and graph trial data, the percent accuracy and rate per minute pages explain the measures. The AEM Center has guidance when the need is accessible materials rather than a device,^[5] and ASHA's AAC practice portal covers communication tools.^[6] For the wider rules on AT in the IEP, see IEP special factors and what an IEP is.

Frequently asked questions

Use it in IEP Atlas

• Assistive technology goals (access skills)
• Assistive technology device in the IEP glossary
• Assistive technology service in the IEP glossary
• Goals for the AT specialist role
• Rate per minute measurement

Related guides

• What is an IEP? A plain guide to the plan and what is in it
• Assistive technology consideration checklist
• IEP special factors explained
• IEP vs 504 plan: differences, examples and how to choose
• What is a 504 plan? Eligibility, contents and an example

Sources

1. 34 CFR §300.324: Development, review, and revision of IEP, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
2. 34 CFR §300.6: Assistive technology service, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
3. 34 CFR §300.5: Assistive technology device, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
4. 34 CFR §300.105: Assistive technology, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
5. The National Center on Accessible Educational Materials for Learning, CAST
6. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC), ASHA

Written and checked by the IEP Atlas editorial team under our editorial policy. This guide describes general practice and federal rules. It is not legal advice; your state may add requirements, and the IEP team makes the decisions for each student.