IEP Goal AreaAACASHA School-Based

AAC IEP Goals

SMART augmentative and alternative communication IEP goal templates, symbol-level baselines, and progress-monitoring cadence for school-based SLPs.

Overview

Augmentative and alternative communication goals serve students who cannot rely on speech as their primary means of communication — students using dedicated speech-generating devices, iPad-based apps like LAMP or TouchChat, picture exchange communication, sign language, or any combination of those modalities. The goal area sits at the intersection of assistive technology, expressive language, and pragmatics, and the goals must be written in a way that respects multimodality — a student may communicate one thought with a sign, the next with a device symbol, and the next with vocal approximation. IDEA and the 2004 reauthorisation explicitly include AAC as a related service and an assistive technology consideration, and every IEP must address whether the student needs AAC whether or not a diagnosis of speech impairment applies. Goals in this area are almost always written at the symbol or core-word level rather than at the standard morpheme or MLU level.

Every IEP goal on this page is written in the SMART format required by IDEA 34 CFR §300.320(a)(2) — Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound. Clinicians must adapt templates to the individual student's baseline, classroom context, and state-level IDEA implementation regulations before dropping them into an IEP.

Baseline measurement protocol

Every defensible aac IEP goal starts with a documented baseline. Follow this protocol before you open the goal generator.

  1. Confirm the AAC system is appropriately calibrated — the goal cannot be written against an unreliable system.
  2. Collect a 15-minute sample in a motivating context (preferred activity, familiar partner).
  3. Hand-transcribe every AAC symbol, vocal approximation, sign, and gesture with a timestamp.
  4. Compute the number of different core words produced and the number of two-symbol combinations.
  5. Administer the Dynamic AAC Goals Grid (DAGG-2) to establish the current level on the four scoring dimensions.
  6. Report baseline verbatim: "On a 15-minute snack-time sample, the student produced X different core words and Y two-symbol combinations; DAGG-2 scores = Z."

How language sample analysis informs aac goals

Language sample analysis for AAC users is a specialised subfield — the sampling protocol has to account for the slower rate of AAC production, the multimodal nature of the utterance, and the scaffolding the communication partner provides. The Communication Matrix and the Dynamic AAC Goals Grid (DAGG) are the most widely used sampling frameworks, but a clinician can also transcribe an AAC sample into SALT or a similar convention with an AAC augmentation. The primary metric is the number of different core words produced in a 15-minute sample, not MLU. ConductSpeech does not currently process AAC samples directly, but the transcription approach is the same as for spoken samples — hand-transcribe the symbols with timestamps and compute NDW on core vocabulary. Pair the sample with a DAGG administration for a complete baseline.

The number of core words an AAC user produces in 15 minutes is the single most informative baseline on the IEP. It goes up when the environment changes, the partner trains up, or the device layout improves — and it stays flat when none of those things happen.
Core words per 15 minutes

SMART aac IEP goal templates

Five ready-to-paste templates. Replace the bracketed placeholders with the student's name, the annual review date, and your target number from the baseline protocol above.

1

Use core vocabulary independently

By {annual review date}, during a 15-minute preferred activity, {Student} will independently activate at least {target count} different core words on the AAC system across two consecutive samples as measured by SLP tally.

Typical baseline
2-8 different core words per 15 minutes
Typical annual target
15-25 different core words per 15 minutes
2

Combine two symbols to express a message

By {annual review date}, during a 15-minute preferred activity, {Student} will produce at least 5 two-symbol combinations per sample (e.g., "want + juice") across two consecutive samples as measured by SLP tally.

Typical baseline
0-2 two-symbol combinations per sample
Typical annual target
5+ two-symbol combinations per sample
3

Request a preferred item or activity using AAC

By {annual review date}, given access to the AAC system and a preferred activity, {Student} will independently request the item or activity in 8 of 10 opportunities (80%) across three consecutive probe sessions as measured by SLP observation.

Typical baseline
2-4 of 10 independent requests (20-40%)
Typical annual target
8 of 10 independent requests (80%)
4

Respond to a partner question using AAC

By {annual review date}, when asked a yes/no or multiple-choice question by a familiar partner, {Student} will respond using the AAC system in 8 of 10 trials (80%) across three consecutive probe sessions as measured by SLP observation.

Typical baseline
3-5 of 10 responses (30-50%)
Typical annual target
8 of 10 responses (80%)
5

Initiate a social greeting using AAC

By {annual review date}, when entering a classroom or encountering a familiar adult, {Student} will initiate a greeting using the AAC system in 4 of 5 opportunities (80%) across three consecutive probe sessions as measured by SLP observation.

Typical baseline
0-1 of 5 initiations (0-20%)
Typical annual target
4 of 5 initiations (80%)

Progress monitoring cadence

  1. Collect matched 15-minute samples every 4-6 weeks in the same context.
  2. Track core words and two-symbol combinations on a weekly or biweekly chart.
  3. Re-administer the DAGG-2 once per semester.
  4. If core-word count is flat, check device positioning, symbol layout, and partner responsiveness — the barrier is usually environmental, not child-internal.
  5. Summarise baseline, mid-year, and end-of-year data in the annual review.

Common pitfalls in aac IEP goals

  • Writing a speech-production target for an AAC user as the primary expressive goal — the goal must reflect the multimodal nature of communication.
  • Ignoring partner training — AAC systems fail when the communication partners are not trained, not when the student cannot use the symbols.
  • Setting a target for a device that is not yet funded or trialled — write the goal against the current system, not the wishlist system.
  • Counting prompted productions as independent at baseline — separate prompted and independent trials clearly.
  • Failing to reassess the core vocabulary — if the student has mastered the current symbol set, the device layout needs expansion, not more drill.

Free tools for aac IEP work

IEP Goal Generator

Free interactive IEP (Individualised Education Programme) goal generator for school-based speech-language pathologists, special-education teachers, and IEP teams. Pick the goal area (one of the eight ASHA School-Based Service Delivery areas: articulation, expressive language, receptive language, fluency, voice, pragmatics / social communication, AAC, literacy), pick the target skill from the curated bank of 30+ starter skills, enter the baseline percent and the target percent, set the consecutive-sessions mastery criterion and the annual-review deadline, and the tool drafts a SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) IEP goal sentence ready to paste into the IEP. Includes a SMART self-check rubric, a customisable condition clause, a copy-to-clipboard button, and suggested baseline / target ranges that match published school-age SLP intervention practice. Mobile-friendly, client-side, no sign-up.

Open tool

Language Sample Worksheet

Free printable and fillable language sample analysis worksheet for speech-language pathologists. Five columns (utterance #, transcription, morpheme count, grammatical Y/N, notes), configurable row count up to 100 utterances, browser print produces a clean PDF, and an inline running summary tracks total utterances, total morphemes, and rolling MLU as you fill it in.

Open tool

Caseload Workload Calculator

Free interactive caseload workload calculator for school-based speech-language pathologists implementing the ASHA Workload Approach (ASHA 2002 Workload Analysis Technical Report; ASHA 2024 School-Based Service Delivery Practice Portal). Enter the number of students on your caseload by service intensity tier (consult, mild 30-60 min/week, moderate 60-90, severe 90-150, profound 120-240), plus annual counts of initial, triennial, and dismissal evaluations, IEP / IFSP / 504 meetings, parent conferences, and weekly travel, supervision, and professional-development minutes, and the calculator returns the total weekly workload in hours, a breakdown across seven ASHA workload categories (direct service, indirect documentation, evaluations, meetings, travel, supervision, PD), and a capacity flag (under, ok, at-capacity, over) against the 37.5-hour FTE baseline. Built for school SLPs, special-education coordinators, district SLP leads, CF-SLPs, and state school SLP association advocacy. Mobile-friendly, client-side, no sign-up.

Open tool

Speech-Language Milestones Checker

Free interactive speech-language milestones checker for children from birth to 72 months (6 years). Enter the child's age in months and tick the receptive (understanding) and expressive (use) communication milestones they have met. The tool classifies the current age band as on track, monitor, or refer for evaluation against the ASHA communication milestones (2024), the CDC "Learn the Signs. Act Early." revised milestones (Zubler et al. 2022 Pediatrics), the Bright Futures 4th ed. well-child developmental surveillance schedule, and the Ages & Stages Questionnaires 3rd ed. Built for paediatricians, early interventionists, school-based SLPs, developmental paediatricians, Head Start teachers, and parents. Mobile-friendly, client-side, no sign-up.

Open tool

References

  1. ASHA (2024). Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC). Practice Portal. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
  2. IDEA, 34 CFR §300.105 — Assistive technology.
  3. Beukelman, D. R., & Light, J. C. (2020). Augmentative and Alternative Communication: Supporting Children and Adults with Complex Communication Needs (5th ed.). Paul H. Brookes.
  4. Dynamic AAC Goals Grid-2 (DAGG-2). (2014). Tobii Dynavox.