Skip to content
IEP Atlas
Menu

Reading Comprehension IEP goals

Comprehension goals describe what a student does to show they made sense of a text: answer questions, retell, state the main idea, or explain an inference with evidence. Because comprehension cannot be observed directly, the goal must name the task, the text, and how responses will be scored. Check decoding and language first so the goal targets the real barrier.

6 templates · Not yet educator-reviewed · How we write and review goals

Sample reading comprehension goals

Numbers are illustrative. Set targets from the student's own baseline data.

  • Unreviewed draftK-2, 3-5Percent accuracy

    Answer literal questions about a passage

    Literal questions

    By the annual IEP review date, after reading an unpracticed instructional-level passage and given 10 literal questions about it, with the passage available for look-backs, the student will answer who, what, where, when, and why questions about details stated in the passage independently with at least 80% accuracy on literal comprehension questions, on 3 of 4 consecutive weekly passages, as measured by work-sample analysis collected weekly.

    Customize this goalAccuracy tracker
  • Unreviewed draftK-2, 3-5Rubric score

    Retell a story with key elements

    Narrative retell

    By the annual IEP review date, after reading an unpracticed instructional-level narrative passage, the student will retell the story orally in sequence, including the characters, setting, problem, key events, and resolution without looking back at the text, earning a score of at least 8 out of 10 on a 5-element story retell rubric scored 0–2 per element, on 3 of 4 consecutive scored retells, as measured by a defined scoring rubric collected every two weeks.

    Customize this goalRubric tracker
  • Unreviewed draft3-5, 6-8Percent accuracy

    Identify the main idea of informational text

    Main idea and details

    By the annual IEP review date, given 5 unpracticed informational paragraphs at the student's instructional level in which the main idea is not directly stated, the student will state or write the main idea of each paragraph in a sentence and name one supporting detail independently with at least 80% accuracy on main idea and supporting detail responses, on 3 of 4 consecutive weekly probes, as measured by work-sample analysis collected weekly.

    Customize this goalAccuracy tracker
  • Unreviewed draft3-5, 6-8Rubric score

    Make inferences supported by text evidence

    Inference with text evidence

    By the annual IEP review date, after reading an unpracticed instructional-level passage and given 3 inferential questions, the student will answer each question with an inference and a quoted or paraphrased piece of text evidence that supports it independently, earning a score of at least 9 out of 12 on an inference-and-evidence rubric (3 questions, each scored 0–2 for the inference and 0–2 for the evidence), on 3 of 4 consecutive scored probes, as measured by a defined scoring rubric collected every two weeks.

    Customize this goalRubric tracker
  • Unreviewed draft3-5, 6-8Opportunities

    Paraphrase sections at planned stopping points

    Comprehension monitoring and paraphrasing

    By the annual IEP review date, while reading an instructional-level informational text with 5 marked stopping points, the student will stop at each marked point and paraphrase the section's main idea and one detail in their own words independently in at least 4 of 5 opportunities, across 3 consecutive sessions, as measured by opportunity-by-opportunity data collected weekly.

    Customize this goalOpportunity tracker
  • Unreviewed draft3-5, 6-8Percent accuracy

    Answer questions about grade-level text heard aloud

    Comprehension of grade-level text with access supports

    By the annual IEP review date, given a grade-level text presented through text-to-speech or read aloud by an adult, followed by 10 literal and inferential questions, the student will answer each question orally or in writing independently with at least 80% accuracy on comprehension questions, on 3 of 4 consecutive probes, as measured by work-sample analysis collected every two weeks.

    Customize this goalAccuracy tracker

Reading · Reading Comprehension

Customize a goal

Student reference

Use a generic label rather than a student's name. Review goals within your school's approved IEP system.

Current baseline

Sample numbers are illustrative. Set the baseline and target from the student's own assessment data and team judgment.

Condition

Setting, materials, or situation, such as a passage level or a work period.

Observable behavior

Something an adult can see, count, or time. Avoid “understand,” “improve,” or “know.”

Level of support

Say exactly what support counts, such as “with one verbal prompt.” Leave “independently” if none.

Criterion

Percent of attempted items answered correctly.

Measurement method

Scoring completed student work (permanent products) against a defined answer key or checklist.

Mastery rule
Timeframe and monitoring

You can type a date, such as “By May 15, 2027”.

Match the schedule to the skill. Fluency often uses weekly probes. Writing rubrics may be scored every few weeks.

Live goal preview

By the annual IEP review date, after reading an unpracticed instructional-level passage and given 10 literal questions about it, with the passage available for look-backs, the student will answer who, what, where, when, and why questions about details stated in the passage independently with at least 80% accuracy on literal comprehension questions, on 3 of 4 consecutive weekly passages, as measured by work-sample analysis collected weekly.

Baseline: 50% accuracy.

  • Condition
  • Observable behavior
  • Criterion
  • Measurement method
Add objectivesMatching data sheet

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. Percent accuracy 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. Work-sample analysis can produce percent accuracy 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 Reading Comprehension.

  • 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.

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.

Build objectives by

Matching data sheet

Accuracy tracker. Your goal is scored as percent correct, so the sheet records number correct and number attempted.

Accuracy tracker

Percent accuracy
Student label:
 
Target:
with at least 80% accuracy on literal comprehension questions
Mastery rule:
on 3 of 4 consecutive weekly passages
Collection schedule:
weekly
Method:
Work-sample analysis
Data collector:
 

Goal: By the annual IEP review date, after reading an unpracticed instructional-level passage and given 10 literal questions about it, with the passage available for look-backs, the student will answer who, what, where, when, and why questions about details stated in the passage independently with at least 80% accuracy on literal comprehension questions, on 3 of 4 consecutive weekly passages, as measured by work-sample analysis collected weekly.

Accuracy tracker
DateTask / materials# correct# attempted% accuracycorrect ÷ attempted × 100Support levele.g., independent, 1 verbal promptNotes

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 for the calculated columns. Sheets are blank: IEP Atlas doesn't store student data.

Prefer more room? Open this template in the full builder.

skill_page

What reading comprehension involves

  • Answering questions about stated details
  • Retelling a story in order with its key elements
  • Stating the main idea of informational text with supporting details
  • Making inferences and supporting them with text evidence
  • Checking understanding while reading and paraphrasing sections

Baseline and measurement considerations

  • Define the text (level, genre, length) and whether it is read independently or heard aloud.
  • State whether the student may look back at the text, since this changes what is measured.
  • Use rubrics with anchor examples for retell and inference so scoring is consistent.
  • Score question types separately at baseline to see where difficulty lies.
  • Consider whether oral or written responses best show the skill without being limited by writing.

Progress-monitoring methods used in these templates

  • Work-sample analysis: Scoring completed student work (permanent products) against a defined answer key or checklist.
  • Rubric scoring: Work or performance is scored against written criteria with defined score levels.
  • Opportunity (trial) recording: Each planned or naturally occurring opportunity is recorded as correct/independent, prompted, or not demonstrated.

Matching data sheets

Each template links to a blank sheet built for its measure. You can also download these sheets on their own:

  • Accuracy tracker: Number correct out of number attempted, with percent accuracy and support level.
  • Rubric tracker: Scores each rubric criterion and totals the score for each sample.
  • Opportunity tracker: Records each opportunity as independent, prompted, or not demonstrated.

Common mistakes when writing reading comprehension goals

  • Using "will comprehend" or "will understand" instead of an observable task.
  • Measuring comprehension with text the student cannot decode.
  • Writing a percent accuracy goal without saying how many questions or what kind.
  • Changing text difficulty from probe to probe, which makes the trend meaningless.

Frequently asked questions

Can a comprehension goal use text read aloud to the student?

Yes, when the purpose is to measure comprehension separately from decoding or to provide access to grade-level content. State this in the condition, and keep a separate goal for the student's own reading skills if decoding is also a need.

Should I use a rubric or percent correct?

Percent correct works for questions with clear right answers. Rubrics work better for open responses such as retells and inferences with evidence, where partial credit matters.

How can I tell whether the problem is comprehension or language?

Compare listening and reading comprehension, and review language assessment data with the speech-language pathologist. If the student struggles with the same content when it is heard, oral language may be a key part of the need.

Do I need short-term objectives or benchmarks for this goal?

Under federal regulations, short-term objectives or benchmarks are required for students who take alternate assessments aligned to alternate academic achievement standards (34 CFR §300.320(a)(2)(ii)). Many states and districts require them for more students, so check your local policy. When you use them, the progression steps in these templates can serve as a starting point.

References

IEP Atlas is a drafting aid. Every goal is a starting point that needs to be individualized from assessment data and reviewed by the IEP team. It does not determine compliance or appropriateness for any student.