Present levels examples for speech and language

Speech and language present levels often lean on standard scores: "Receptive language standard score 74, expressive 71." Those numbers belong in the evaluation summary, but they do not tell a teacher what to expect in class or give a goal a starting point. The therapy data does.

The 20 examples below cover articulation and phonology, receptive and expressive language, social communication, fluency, voice and AAC. Each has a weak version, a strong rewrite, the data behind it and a note on what makes it strong. The students and numbers are invented to show the format. They are not norms or targets.

For the four parts of a present levels statement, see the pillar guide on present levels of performance. The /r/ example there covers initial /r/ in words, so the articulation examples below start at other levels.

Choosing the right speech and language data

Present levels must say how the disability affects the student's involvement and progress in the general curriculum.^[1] For communication, that means describing how the student understands and is understood in class, not only in the therapy room.

A language sample gives several baselines at once: mean length of utterance, grammar errors and the types of sentences the student uses.

Articulation and phonology

ASHA separates articulation errors, which are about producing a sound, from phonological patterns, which affect whole groups of sounds.^[3] The examples below report the two differently for that reason.

Example 1: Vocalic /r/ in conversation, grade 5

Weak: "Logan has an /r/ distortion."

Strong: "Logan produces vocalic /r/ (as in 'car,' 'her,' 'fire') correctly in 92% of single words and 85% of sentences on structured probes in October. In three 5-minute conversation samples, he produced it correctly in 31 of 80 attempts (39%). He self-corrects when cued with a hand signal. Classmates understand him, but he avoids reading aloud and says he 'sounds like a little kid.' Logan needs to use correct vocalic /r/ in conversation in and out of therapy."

Data behind it: structured probes plus conversation tallies of 9 of 25, 11 of 28 and 11 of 27.

Why it works: It names the level where accuracy drops (conversation), which tells the team the goal is carryover. See produce the target sound in conversation.

Example 2: /s/ in sentences, grade 2

Weak: "Paige has a lisp."

Strong: "Paige produces /s/ with her tongue between her teeth (an interdental lisp). On three 20-item probes in September, she produced /s/ correctly in a median of 17 of 20 words and 8 of 20 sentences. She produces it correctly in isolation and syllables without cues. Her speech is understood, but peers have commented on it. Paige needs to produce /s/ correctly in sentences."

Data behind it: words 16, 17 and 18 of 20; sentences 7, 8 and 10 of 20.

Why it works: It describes the error type and the level where it breaks down. See produce the target sound in phrases and sentences.

Example 3: Final consonant deletion, age 4

Weak: "Ruben's speech is hard to understand."

Strong: "In a 100-word speech sample in October, Ruben deleted final consonants in 38 of 52 words that end in a consonant (73%), saying 'ca' for 'cat' and 'bu' for 'bus.' He produces the same sounds at the start of words. Familiar adults understand about half of what he says in context, and preschool peers often walk away when he tries to join play. Ruben needs to produce final consonants in single words, then in short phrases."

Data behind it: one 100-word sample, checked against two 20-word probes with similar results.

Why it works: It names the phonological process and its rate, which is the baseline for a final consonant goal. The impact on play shows why it matters for a preschooler.

Example 4: Fronting, kindergarten

Weak: "Nina substitutes sounds."

Strong: "On three 20-word probes in September, Nina produced /k/ and /g/ correctly in a median of 5 of 20 words. She replaces them with /t/ and /d/, so 'cake' becomes 'tate' and 'go' becomes 'doe.' She produces /k/ in isolation when the SLP holds down the front of her tongue. Her teacher understands her in context but not when she talks about new topics. Nina needs to produce /k/ and /g/ in words without fronting."

Data behind it: 4, 5 and 7 of 20.

Why it works: Stimulability (she can produce /k/ with a cue) is reported, which shapes the starting step. See produce /k/ and /g/ without fronting.

Example 5: Intelligibility with a motor speech disorder, age 5

Weak: "Evan is mostly unintelligible."

Strong: "Evan has a diagnosis of childhood apraxia of speech. In October, two unfamiliar listeners understood a median of 34% of words in a 50-word conversational sample. His productions of the same word vary from try to try. He uses about 60 signs and gestures and points to pictures to repair messages. He gets frustrated and stops talking when he is not understood. Evan needs to produce two-syllable words consistently and use his picture board when he is not understood."

Data behind it: word-by-word transcription by two listeners; 32% and 36%.

Why it works: Intelligibility is measured with listeners, not guessed. The statement also reports what he uses to communicate now. See the motor speech goals.

Receptive language

Example 6: Directions with basic concepts, kindergarten

Weak: "Sophia has trouble following directions."

Strong: "On three 10-item probes in October, Sophia followed one-step directions with spatial and quantity concepts (behind, under, first, last, some, all) correctly on a median of 4. She follows routine directions in class by watching peers. She does not follow novel directions with these concepts, such as 'Put your name under the picture.' Sophia needs to follow directions that use basic spatial, time and quantity concepts."

Data behind it: 3, 4 and 5 of 10.

Why it works: It lists the concepts tested and notes that peer modeling may hide the gap. See follow directions with basic concepts.

Example 7: Wh questions about a story, grade 1

Weak: "Jack doesn't answer questions appropriately."

Strong: "After hearing three short grade 1 stories read aloud in September, Jack answered a median of 5 of 10 wh questions correctly. He answers who and what questions correctly most of the time. For where, when and why, he repeats a word from the question or answers a different question. During read-alouds in class, he answers 'yes' to most questions. Jack needs to answer where, when and why questions about a story."

Data behind it: 4, 5 and 6 of 10.

Why it works: It breaks results down by question type, so the goal can target the right ones. See answer wh questions about a passage.

Example 8: Curriculum vocabulary, grade 4

Weak: "Layla has a vocabulary deficit."

Strong: "On a 20-word probe of taught grade 4 science vocabulary in November, Layla defined 6 words correctly and identified the correct picture for 13. Her definitions use 'it's like a thing that...' without naming a category or features. She learns new words when taught with pictures and repeated use. On science quizzes she scores below her class on vocabulary items. Layla needs to define taught curriculum words with a category and two features."

Data behind it: 20 words; 6 defined, 13 identified.

Why it works: It separates recognition from definition, and sets a scoring rule (category plus features). See identify and define curriculum vocabulary.

Example 9: Figurative language, grade 6

Weak: "Gavin takes things literally."

Strong: "On three sets of 8 idioms and metaphors in grade 6 texts in October, Gavin explained the meaning correctly for a median of 2. He explains literal meanings accurately. When context clues are pointed out, he explains 5 of 8. He misreads teacher comments such as 'hit the books' and 'you're on thin ice.' Gavin needs to use context to explain figurative language in texts and conversation."

Data behind it: 1, 2 and 3 of 8.

Why it works: It records how much a cue helps and gives classroom examples. See explain figurative language in context.

Expressive language

Example 10: Past tense -ed, grade 1

Weak: "Olivia uses poor grammar."

Strong: "In a 75-utterance language sample in October, Olivia used regular past tense -ed correctly in 6 of 25 required contexts (24%). She says 'Yesterday I walk to the park.' She uses present progressive -ing correctly in 90% of contexts. Her teacher reports her journal sentences show the same pattern. Olivia needs to use regular past tense -ed in sentences."

Data behind it: one language sample with 25 obligatory contexts.

Why it works: "Required contexts" makes the percent meaningful. It counts only times past tense was needed. See use a target grammatical morpheme.

Example 11: Sentence length, age 4

Weak: "Marcus speaks in short sentences."

Strong: "In a 50-utterance play sample in September, Marcus had a mean length of utterance of 2.1 morphemes. Most utterances are two words, such as 'more juice' and 'car go.' He uses 150 or more single words and imitates three-word phrases. He joins play by bringing toys to adults rather than talking to peers. Marcus needs to combine three to four words into sentences during play."

Data behind it: 50 utterances, 105 morphemes.

Why it works: MLU from a sample is a standard, repeatable measure. The play setting matches where the goal will be measured. See say a three- to four-word sentence.

Example 12: Story retell, grade 3

Weak: "Chloe's retells are disorganized."

Strong: "On three retells of grade 3 stories in October, Chloe scored a median of 5 of 14 on the story grammar rubric. She includes the characters and a list of events. She leaves out the problem, the characters' feelings and the resolution. With a story map, she scores 9 of 14. Her written book reports show the same gaps. Chloe needs to retell a story with the main story grammar elements."

Data behind it: rubric scores of 4, 5 and 7; one supported retell of 9.

Why it works: The rubric shows which story parts are missing, and the supported score shows the next step. See retell a story with story grammar elements.

Example 13: Word finding, grade 5

Weak: "Isaiah has word-retrieval issues."

Strong: "During three 10-minute structured conversations in October, Isaiah had a median of 9 word-finding pauses, using 'thing' or 'you know' or stopping mid-sentence. He used a taught strategy (describing the word or saying its first sound) on 2 of 27 pauses across the three samples. He knows the words when given a choice of two. In class discussions he often stops answering partway. Isaiah needs to use a word-finding strategy when he cannot retrieve a word."

Data behind it: pauses counted in each sample; strategy use of 2 of 27.

Why it works: It measures strategy use, which is what the goal will target. See use a word-finding strategy.

Example 14: Complex sentences, grade 7

Weak: "Alana's expressive language is below age level."

Strong: "In a 60-utterance expository sample about a science topic in October, 5 of 60 utterances (8%) were complex sentences. She uses 'and' and 'then' to join ideas, and rarely uses 'because,' 'although' or 'if.' On a sentence formulation probe with a given conjunction, she wrote 4 of 10 correct sentences. Her science explanations are accurate but hard to follow. Alana needs to formulate complex sentences with conjunctions that show cause and contrast."

Data behind it: expository sample plus a 10-item formulation probe.

Why it works: An expository sample matches middle school demands better than a story retell. See formulate sentences with a given conjunction.

Social communication

Example 15: Asking for clarification, grade 4

Weak: "Hunter doesn't ask for help when he's confused."

Strong: "Across 12 planned unclear or incomplete directions in therapy and class in October, Hunter asked for clarification 2 times. The other 10 times he started the wrong task or waited. When given a visual of three clarifying questions, he used one 7 of 10 times. He asks questions readily about topics he likes. Hunter needs to ask for clarification when a message is unclear."

Data behind it: 12 planned opportunities, scored yes or no.

Why it works: Planned opportunities make a social skill countable. See ask for clarification.

Example 16: Building on a peer's comment, grade 8

Weak: "Kendra has poor conversation skills."

Strong: "During three 15-minute small-group discussions in October, Kendra made a median of 8 comments, of which 1 built on what a peer had just said. The rest started a new topic, usually her interest in marine biology. She answers direct questions on topic. Peers in her science group have started to talk over her. Kendra needs to build on a peer's comment before adding her own idea."

Data behind it: comment tallies coded as on-topic build or new topic.

Why it works: It codes each comment, so progress is a change in a ratio. See build on a peer's comment.

Example 17: Reading social situations, grade 6

Weak: "Miles lacks perspective-taking."

Strong: "On three sets of 6 short video clips of school situations in September, Miles explained what a speaker likely meant or felt for a median of 2. He describes what happened accurately. He misses sarcasm and polite refusals, such as 'Maybe another time.' He has had three conflicts this year after taking a peer's joke as a threat. Miles needs to explain what a speaker likely means using words, tone and the situation."

Data behind it: 2, 2 and 3 of 6.

Why it works: The task is concrete, and the impact names real events. See explain what a speaker likely means.

Fluency, voice and AAC

ASHA publishes practice guidance on fluency, voice and AAC, including attention to how the student feels about communicating.^[4][5][6]

Example 18: Stuttering, grade 9

Weak: "Andre stutters severely."

Strong: "In three 5-minute speaking samples in October, Andre stuttered on a median of 9% of syllables, mostly blocks on the first word of a turn. He used his easy-onset strategy on 3 of 20 stuttered moments in therapy and none in class. He rates his speaking worry as 8 of 10 in classes and 3 of 10 with friends. He avoids volunteering and has asked to skip oral presentations. Andre needs to use a strategy during class speaking turns and reduce avoidance of speaking."

Data behind it: percent syllables stuttered from three samples; a 10-point self-rating.

Why it works: It reports frequency, strategy use and the student's own rating. Avoidance often costs more than the stutter itself. See use a speech strategy during class speaking turns.

Example 19: Voice, grade 3

Weak: "Sara's voice is hoarse."

Strong: "An ENT evaluation in August found vocal nodules and cleared Sara for voice therapy. In three 10-minute classroom observations in September, she used a loud or strained voice in a median of 14 of 20 speaking turns. At recess she yells during most games. She uses an easy, relaxed voice in 8 of 10 structured sentences in therapy. By the afternoon her voice is often too weak to be heard in class. Sara needs to use her easy voice during class speaking and limit yelling at recess."

Data behind it: speaking turns coded easy or strained across three observations.

Why it works: It records the medical clearance and measures voice use in class, where the strain happens. See use the target voice during class speaking.

Example 20: AAC requests, grade 2

Weak: "Zion is nonverbal."

Strong: "Zion communicates with vocalizations, gestures and a speech-generating device with 40 core and 60 fringe words. Across 30 planned requesting chances at snack, play and centers in October, he requested with his device 11 times without a prompt and 24 times after a point prompt. He uses 'more' and 'stop' on his own. He does not yet use 'help' or 'go.' Zion needs to request items, actions and help on his device across activities without prompts."

Data behind it: 30 opportunities scored by prompt level.

Why it works: "Nonverbal" is replaced by what Zion uses and how often. The team must consider whether a student needs assistive technology devices and services, and this data supports that decision.^[2] See request with a speech-generating device.

How to measure progress on speech and language goals

Probe at the level the goal targets, in the same way as the baseline. A goal for conversation needs conversation samples, not word lists.

• Articulation: a 20-item probe every two weeks at the goal's level, plus a short conversation sample monthly.
• Language: repeat the same probe type every two to four weeks; take a new language sample each grading period.
• Pragmatics, fluency, voice and AAC: count opportunities in natural settings, with teachers or aides collecting some of the data.

The opportunity and trial data sheet works for most of these. Find goal wording on the speech and language goals hub and the SLP role page.

Adapting speech and language present levels by grade

Printable quick reference

All 20 examples on one page. Free to copy and print, no email needed.

Check each goal you draft with the goal checker. If behavior is tied to communication, the behavior present levels examples show how to report both. Academic versions are in the writing examples and the math examples.

Frequently asked questions

Use it in IEP Atlas

• Speech language IEP goals
• Goals for the SLP role
• Articulation goals
• Opportunity and trial data sheet
• Language sample in the IEP glossary
• IEP goal checker

Related guides

• Present levels of performance (PLAAFP): what to include, with examples
• Present levels examples for math
• Present levels examples for writing
• Present levels examples for behavior
• Impact statement examples: how the disability affects learning

Sources

1. 34 CFR §300.320: Definition of individualized education program, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
2. 34 CFR §300.324: Development, review, and revision of IEP, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
3. Speech Sound Disorders: Articulation and Phonology, ASHA
4. Stuttering, Cluttering, and Fluency, ASHA
5. Voice Disorders, ASHA
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.