IEP Goals for Students with AAC Devices

P.Q. is a seventh grader with LAMP Words for Life on a district iPad. Science small group expects oral “turn and talk”; P.Q. composes a three-word message and the partner talks over the speech output. ELA marks participation low because P.Q. did not raise a hand—even though the IEP says AAC is primary expressive mode. The draft still says will improve communication with no log format and no baseline from the hallway between periods where P.Q. actually initiates. The SLP has pull-out data at 80%; gen-ed has “did not answer.” You are choosing annual goals that tell every teacher what to count, where, and on which system.

IEP goals for students with AAC devices are measurable annual goals under IDEA: condition, observable behavior, criteria, baseline tied to present levels—not “uses AAC,” not the AT inventory, and not goals that require spoken answers when the team documented a speech-generating device as primary mode. What changes across grades is setting complexity (centers vs seven periods vs CTE), not the compliance bar. Federal rules sit in 34 CFR §300.320(a)(2). Clinical context: ASHA — augmentative and alternative communication. AT funding and loan rules vary—confirm with your LEA.

This guide is for case managers, SLPs, and classroom teachers who share P.Q. It focuses on goal selection and criteria when AAC is in present levels—not full IEP drafting. See IEP writing for students with AAC devices for PLAAFP and services, how to write measurable IEP goals for the skeleton, and the communication goal bank for frames after baseline is set.

“Uses AAC” on the cover sheet is not an annual goal

Teams sometimes treat non-verbal, AAC user, or a device model listed in assistive technology as if they were measurable targets. They are not. The IEP team writes goals for skills and behaviors that limit educational access: initiating a functional message, responding in a discussion with the speech-generating device, directing a peer during a lab, repairing a breakdown when staff talk over output, or navigating vocabulary for grade-level tasks.

Short answer for busy readers: Strong IEP goals for students with AAC devices name mode (SGD, app, core board, sign plus device), setting, what P.Q. will do that an adult can score, how you score it, and baseline data from the same tool you will use in quarterly reports.

If present levels only describe traits (“limited verbal,” “does not participate”) without dated logs or trials, pause and collect baseline before signatures. Oral speech may still be a separate annual goal when evaluation and family input support it; when AAC is primary, do not hide an oral requirement inside a “communication” goal measured only by hand-raising.

How AAC goals shift by grade level

Where the student communicates changes the condition line more than IDEA’s definition does. K–2 goals often target initiation on a core set during centers and carpet. Grades 3–5 add fringe vocabulary and ELA responses in stations. Middle school—P.Q.’s lane—needs period-to-period settings, peer-directed messages, and discussion participation, not only speech-room probes. High school and transition add self-advocacy, longer tasks, and CTE or presentation blocks.

Pick settings P.Q. attends this year—one measurable column per annual goal. Pair with IEP goals for seventh grade students when other domains share the schedule. Overlapping needs may also pull from IEP goals for autism spectrum disorder or IEP goals for multiple disabilities.

Start with present levels you can defend

Before you draft goals in the LEA portal, write PLAAFP in the same units your charts will use:

• System — app or device, language level, home/school match, last vocabulary update date.
• Access — direct select, keyguard, switch, eye gaze; fatigue or positioning if documented.
• Baseline — percent of blocks with initiation, messages per lesson, rubric score on participation.
• Setting gaps — where staff accept gestures only, where device stays in the backpack.
• Impact — missed discussions, behavior linked to communication breakdown, work completion.

Example snippet (initials only): P.Q. uses LAMP Words for Life on a district iPad as primary expressive communication. AAC log (9/2–9/20): initiation in 5 of 13 blocks (38%). ELA (9/18): SGD response within 15 seconds on 1 of 5 lessons when wait time was enforced; other days staff accepted nods only. Science (9/16): three-word peer-directed message in 1 of 4 sessions. SLP probe (9/10): 7 of 10 two-word requests with light prompt. P.Q. via device (9/17): “They don’t wait for my talker.”

If evaluation lists AAC but school has no logs, run one two-week logging cycle with gen-ed before annual criteria go live. Present levels that read like vendor brochures make common IEP progress report mistakes show up by second quarter.

Accommodations and the condition line

Wait time, accepted response modes, seating, and fatigue breaks belong on the goal condition when they change scoring—not only in accommodations. SLP minutes support goals; they do not replace criteria. Name who charts classroom data versus therapy probes.

Goal wording examples for P.Q. (rewrite for your student)

The lines below are conversation starters for your team meeting—swap device, percentages, and settings for P.Q.’s actual baseline. Adapt frames from the communication goal bank after the SLP signs off on vocabulary level.

Initiation — middle school blocks
During core-content classes (ELA, math, science, social studies), P.Q. will initiate a functional message on the speech-generating device (request, help, break, or comment) in 4 of 5 observed class blocks per week, as recorded on the team AAC log, by the annual IEP date. Baseline: 5 of 13 blocks (38%) 9/2–9/20.

ELA participation with AAC
When the teacher asks a comprehension question after reading, P.Q. will respond using the SGD (single- or multi-word message) within 15 seconds of the question in 3 of 5 lessons per week, as charted by the ELA teacher, by the annual IEP date. Baseline: 1 of 5 on 9/18 with enforced wait time.

Peer-directed message — lab or small group
During structured small-group science activities, P.Q. will use the SGD to direct a peer (action + object message) in 2 of 4 sessions per week, with no more than one gestural prompt, as recorded by the teacher, by the annual IEP date. Baseline: 1 of 4 on 9/16.

Read each goal aloud at the table. If someone asks “How will you know?”, you should point to a log, rubric, or trial sheet—not “we’ll know when we hear it.” SMART IEP goals help teams argue about ambitious but reachable criteria without vague “improve communication” language.

Reporting and common mistakes

Report each goal in its own units—dates, setting, prompts, device availability—not labels like “non-verbal.” If therapy data rise but ELA stays flat, split conditions or fix wait time before you blend progress into one sentence. See how to write IEP progress notes for non-verbal students and sample IEP progress reports for speech goals.

Watch for oral-only criteria when AAC is primary, unnamed devices on the goal line, therapy-only baseline for classroom discussion goals, and stacked skills in one data column. Fix before signatures—vague goals make compliance reporting harder for everyone.

What I’d do Monday

1. Open P.Q.’s draft IEP and highlight any communication goal that does not name mode, setting, and scoring rule.
2. Match each annual goal to one data column; split therapy-only and gen-ed conditions when probes differ.
3. Run one week of classroom AAC logging in the same format you will promise on the IEP.
4. Share a one-page “how P.Q. responds in class” sheet with wait time and accepted modes before the team signs.

FAQ

Are IEP goals different because the student uses an AAC device?

The format is the same: measurable annual goals linked to present levels under IDEA. What differs is that criteria must name mode and tool, settings match the student’s real schedule, and baselines come from logs or trials on the same system the team implements—not oral participation alone.

Should annual goals require spoken answers if the student has a speech-generating device?

When present levels document AAC as the primary expressive mode, measurable goals should state device, sign, or multimodal criteria unless the team writes a separate, data-supported oral speech goal. Do not bury an oral requirement inside a goal measured only by hand-raising or oral turn-and-talk.

Where do AAC goals belong on the IEP?

In the annual goal section, linked to present levels. Related services, accommodations, and assistive technology document implementation—they do not replace measurable communication targets. See IEP writing for students with AAC devices for how sections divide labor.

Who collects data for AAC goals?

The IEP should name who collects—classroom teacher, para, SLP, or shared log—using the tool referenced in the goal. SLP-only trials rarely prove gen-ed participation unless the goal condition includes those settings.

How many AAC goals does a student need?

There is no magic number. I aim for enough to cover critical access needs and few enough that someone actually charts. Cover initiation and participation in content classes before adding fringe vocabulary goals that nobody logs in math.

Can I copy goals from an AAC vendor or goal bank?

Banks give sentence frames after you have baseline and vocabulary alignment. Paste only after the SLP confirms the message set matches the app P.Q. uses in school—not a demo page from a conference handout.

Sources

• 34 CFR §300.320(a)(1)–(3) — present levels, measurable goals, progress methods
• 34 CFR §300.324 — IEP development and participation
• ASHA — Augmentative and alternative communication — clinical context; pair with school logs for criteria
• Center for Parent Information and Resources — Assistive technology basics — team vocabulary for families
• Your LEA AT assessment process, device implementation checklist, and AAC data templates

This article is about measurable annual goals when AAC is in play—not device shopping or shortcut compliance. When you reach the progress narrative field each quarter and need to turn P.Q.’s AAC logs, teacher charts, and SLP trials into readable prose, that is what IEP Progress is for: notes in, first draft out, you edit, then paste into Frontline, PowerSchool, or your LEA portal. It does not write PLAAFP, program vocabulary, or pick service minutes. Start free if narrative drafting—not goal selection—is the bottleneck on your caseload.

Elena Vasquez, M.S., CCC-SLP, is a school-based speech-language pathologist and IEP team member. Student examples use initials only. General guidance, not legal advice—confirm AT and IEP procedures with your district.