Developing Self-Advocacy IEP Goals: Your Guide with Examples

Self-advocacy IEP goals measure the skills a student uses to speak for themselves in planning their own education: explaining their needs and strengths, knowing and requesting their accommodations, judging whether those supports work, and taking part in the IEP meeting. Those skills rarely develop on their own. When researchers observed 109 IEP meetings in middle and high schools, special education teachers did the talking in 51% of the 10-second intervals they coded, and students talked in 3% (Martin et al., 2006).

Many self-advocacy goals are written around the annual meeting, which leaves a team one data point a year. Each of the 16 worked goals here is practiced and scored in a touchpoint the school already runs, with a baseline, an observable behavior, a criterion with a window and a named scorer. Another 20 one-line goals cover the same skills by grade band.

Jump to the goals

• Explaining needs and strengths: goals 1–5
• Knowing, explaining and judging accommodations: goals 6–10
• Stating preferences and taking part in the IEP meeting: goals 11–16
• 20 more self-advocacy IEP goals by grade band

Self-advocacy IEP goals for explaining needs and strengths

These goals measure whether a student can say what helps and what is hard in a real class task. Whether the student names a disability label is the student’s and family’s choice, and no goal here scores it.

A student who can name only what is hard may first need goals for naming strengths with evidence.

Most goals use one of two scoring tools. On the I/P/N checklist, I (independent) means the student responds after the question is asked once, with no added cue; P (prompted) means they respond after a repeated question, a model, a sentence starter or a pointed cue; N (not yet) means no response, or one that doesn’t answer. On the 0–2 rubrics, 1 means shown in part or after a prompt and 2 means shown in full without one. For a student who uses AAC, selecting the message is the response, and a partner offering choices in partner-assisted scanning isn’t a prompt. The baselines below are illustrations; set your own.

1. [Grades K–5] During the weekly small-group session, using a picture choice board, [Student] will tell or show one thing they are good at and one thing that is hard at school, with both scored I on the I/P/N checklist, in 3 of 4 consecutive weekly sessions by [date], as measured by the teacher’s checklist each session (baseline: 0 of 3 pre-meeting probes; pointed to a strength after a verbal prompt in 1 and chose nothing for “hard” in any).

2. [Grades K–5] For a 1-minute recorded “All About Me” share made for the annual review, [Student] will answer at least 2 of 3 questions (what I’m good at, what’s hard, what I like learning) by speech, AAC or pointing to pictures, without an adult modeling an answer, in 2 consecutive practice recordings by the annual review, as measured by the teacher’s checklist scored on each recording. Record monthly from the start of the goal and every two weeks from six weeks before the review; the student chooses which recording is shared at the meeting (baseline: answered 0 of 3 in a pre-meeting practice recording, and 1 of 3 after an adult modeled an answer).

3. [Grades 6–8] At biweekly check-ins with the case manager, [Student] will explain how one learning need affects a specific class task (for example, “Long reading passages take me longer, so I lose track of the question”), averaging at least 5 of 6 points across 4 consecutive check-ins, with none below 4, on a 0–2 rubric with three rows (names the task, describes the effect, uses their own words), by [date], as measured by the case manager’s rubric. Set the date at least a semester out, since four check-ins take eight weeks once the student is ready (baseline: 2 of 6 points in each of three pre-meeting probes).

4. [Grades 9–12 and 18–22 programs] In the week before each progress report, [Student] will write, type, record or build with AAC or pictures a one-page student profile (strengths, needs, what helps, goals), with at least one specific entry in each of the 4 sections and at least one change based on that term’s data, such as a grade, a work sample or their support log, in 3 of 4 reporting periods (2 of 3 on a trimester calendar), as measured by the case manager’s profile rubric each period (baseline: 0 of 1 reporting period; the pre-meeting profile had a specific entry in 2 of 4 sections and no change based on data).

5. [Grades 9–12 and 18–22 programs] At a job site or training program, using a script the student chose (“I learn new tasks best with a written checklist”), [Student] will explain one support need to a supervisor, covering all 3 elements (the need, the support, how it helps), in 3 of 4 role-plays with the job coach by [date] and in each start-of-placement or new-supervisor conversation between [date] and the annual review, as measured by the job coach’s observation form (baseline: 1 of 3 elements in each of two pre-meeting role-plays; stated the need but not the support or how it helps). The script describes how the student works best and never requires naming a disability to an employer.

Goals for knowing, explaining and judging accommodations

An accommodation goal measures three things: the student names the support, explains when it helps, and judges whether it still works. Build the student’s list in their own words from the accommodations section of the IEP, and check it against common IEP accommodations for students with autism or other lists when the wording is unfamiliar.

Supports that change what is taught or how work is graded are modifications, and students can learn to name those too.

Judging is the harder part. A student who can say “the timer isn’t helping anymore, because I watch it instead of working” tells the team why a support has stopped working, which observation alone may not show. In goals 6 and 9 the teacher’s rating is recorded beside the student’s and any disagreement goes to the team as information; mastery rests on the student rating consistently (and, in goal 9, giving a reason), and matching the adult isn’t required. Every accommodation in the IEP stays in place while the student learns to name and judge it; none of these goals makes a support depend on the student asking for it.

6. [Grades K–5] During independent work, given two picture cards of supports [Student] uses (for example, headphones and a visual timer), [Student] will choose one to use first and then show whether it helped (thumbs up, sideways or down), in 8 of 10 recorded opportunities over 4 consecutive weeks by [date], as measured by the teacher’s tally, on which the teacher notes their own rating before the student shows theirs (baseline: chose and rated in 0 of 10 opportunities over two pre-meeting weeks; chose a card in 3 and rated none). Any choice counts, and both cards stay available.

7. [Grades 6–8] When a teacher asks what helps [Student] learn, at the start of a new class or term or during the weekly resource-period check-in, [Student] will name two accommodations listed in the IEP and give one example of when each helps in that class (for example, “I use extended time when a test has more than a page of reading”), without reading from the IEP or a cue card, in 4 of 5 consecutive opportunities by the end of the second grading period, as measured by the case manager’s checklist, with each opportunity dated (baseline: in 4 opportunities in September, named one accommodation after a verbal prompt in 2, named none in 2, and gave no example in any).

When the question comes in a general education class the case manager isn’t in, that teacher’s one-line note is the dated entry. An AAC page that holds the student’s accommodations is the student’s own voice and doesn’t count as a cue card.

8. [Grades 6–8] In the first week of a new term, [Student] will start the accommodation conversation with each new teacher without an adult prompt, naming at least one accommodation and when it helps, with at least 3 of 4 new teachers in a term (or every new teacher, if there are fewer than 4) by [date], as measured by the case manager’s count, confirmed by a one-line form each teacher returns, with a missing form counted as no data (baseline: 0 of 4 new teachers last term; the case manager made each introduction). Use this goal only if at least one new term, with new teachers, starts between the IEP’s start and [date]; on a year-long schedule, use goal 7.

9. [Grades 9–12 and 18–22 programs] After each use of a listed accommodation in two named classes, [Student] will log a rating (helped / somewhat / didn’t) with one reason that points to something in that task (for example, “finished both pages” or “lost my place again”), while the class teacher circles the same three-point rating on the work sample when collecting it. By [date], [Student] will have logged a rating with a task-based reason for 8 of 10 sampled uses over two consecutive 2-week cycles (5 per cycle), and at 2 of 2 progress reviews will recommend keep, change or drop for each accommodation with one piece of evidence from the log, as measured by the case manager’s review of the sampled uses, with the teacher’s marks reported beside them (baseline: 0 of 5 sampled uses in a pre-meeting cycle had a rating with a task-based reason; 4 had a rating only; no recommendations made).

10. [Grades 9–12 and 18–22 programs] Before a course or training program starts, [Student] will choose which supports to request there, draft the request with a reason for each, and submit it through the program’s own process, completing all 3 steps in each course or program the student starts during the year (use this goal only if at least 1 is planned) and in 1 simulated request, as measured by the transition coordinator’s 3-step rubric (baseline: 0 of 3 steps for a summer workshop; the coordinator chose the supports and made the call). A college disability services office works under Section 504 and the ADA rather than the IEP and may ask for documentation, so deciding what to disclose is part of the plan. For a course inside the district’s own program, check which supports the district still provides.

Goals for stating preferences and taking part in the IEP meeting

Taking part runs along a continuum: attend part of the meeting and share a page, then present one section, then co-lead, then lead. I’m Determined’s Student Rubric for IEP Participation helps a student place themselves and plan the next level. The Self-Directed IEP, which NTACT:C lists as an evidence-based practice (Martin et al., 2006), teaches 11 steps for leading the meeting. Students start at different points, and not every student needs to reach the top.

Where a goal below mentions the meeting, it is scored on the goal’s own tool and reported beside the session data as a probe. The person running the meeting can’t score it well, and the general education teacher is presenting and may be excused part-way, so a second adult who isn’t presenting during the student’s sections, such as a related-services provider whose report comes later, scores it; where district policy and consent allow, an audio recording of the student’s sections can be scored afterwards. Mastery is judged on check-ins and rehearsals, so a student who freezes on the day keeps the year’s evidence.

11. [Grades K–5] Where the family agrees it’s appropriate, [Student] will attend the first part of the annual IEP meeting and share the “All About Me” page by speaking, pointing or using AAC, presenting at least 3 of its 4 items (a strength, something hard, something that helps, something I like) independently, in 3 of 3 rehearsals in the four weeks before the review, as measured by the teacher’s I/P/N checklist, with the meeting scored as a probe by a second adult. A monthly practice share from the start of the goal gives earlier progress reports a data point (baseline: in a pre-meeting rehearsal, shared 1 of 4 items independently and 2 with a prompt).

12. [Grades 6–8] At biweekly check-ins, [Student] will state one preference for next year (rotating among a class, a support and a setting) with one reason, scoring 4 of 4 on a 0–2 rubric with two rows (the preference: 1 = stated, 2 = specific; the reason: 1 = general, 2 = drawn from their own experience), in 6 of 8 consecutive check-ins by the annual review, as measured by the case manager’s rubric, with the meeting reported as a probe (baseline: 1 of 4 points in each of three pre-meeting probes; named a class with no reason).

13. [Grades 6–8] In rehearsal, [Student] will present the strengths section of the meeting, giving 3 strengths and an example of each (6 items), with no more than 1 item prompted and none missed, in 3 of 4 rehearsals held at biweekly check-ins starting eight weeks before the review, as measured by the case manager’s I/P/N checklist. Before then, score the same section at one check-in a month (baseline: in one pre-meeting rehearsal, named 2 strengths, both after a prompt, and gave no examples: 0 of 6 items independent, 2 prompted, 4 missed).

14. [Grades 9–12 and 18–22 programs] During biweekly check-ins in the advisory period and two rehearsals before the annual review, [Student] will independently complete at least 5 of the 6 elements of the student participation checklist (states a strength, explains a need, names an accommodation and when it helps, says whether a support is working and why, states a preference or goal for after high school, and asks or answers a question from the team), using a self-made one-page profile, in 3 consecutive sessions by the annual review, as measured by the case manager’s checklist scored I/P/N, with the meeting scored on the same checklist by a second adult and reported as a probe (baseline: 1 of 6 independently in each of three September probes; answers adult questions with one word).

The profile can be written, spoken, typed, a slide deck or AAC pages; the six elements are scored the same in any mode. For a student in an 18–22 program, element 5 means after the program.

15. [Grades 9–12 and 18–22 programs] By the annual review, using a slide deck or the profile, [Student] will lead named agenda sections of the meeting (open the meeting, introduce the team, review progress on their own goals, state their goals for after high school or after the program, close with a summary), leading at least 3 of the 5 sections in 2 consecutive full rehearsals, held every two weeks from eight weeks before the review, as measured by a section checklist scored by a second adult, who also scores the meeting as a probe. To lead a section, the student starts and finishes it with no more than one prompt and no adult speaking for them. Practice one section at a monthly check-in from the start of the goal (baseline: 0 of 5 sections in a pre-meeting practice; read the introductions from a card only after repeated prompts).

16. [Grades 9–12 and 18–22 programs] In monthly planning conversations with the transition coordinator, joined when possible by any adult-agency representative invited with the required consent, [Student] will state a preference for work, for training and for living after high school or the program, with one reason each, covering 3 of 3 domains with reasons in 2 consecutive planning conversations by [date], as measured by the transition coordinator’s rubric (baseline: 1 of 3 domains with a reason in the pre-meeting conversation; “stocking at the grocery store, because I like it”, then “I don’t know” for training and living).

More self-advocacy IEP goals by grade band

These 20 goals are starting points. Before one goes into an IEP, take a baseline from the student’s own probes in the criterion’s unit, name the scorer, and keep every accommodation in place whether or not the student asks for it. The checklists are I/P/N and the rubrics 0–2, as defined above.

Two neighboring skills have their own pages. For a student who needs help during a task, see teaching a student to ask for help in the moment. For hygiene, dressing and routines at home, see self-care and daily living goals.

Setting the baseline and finding time to practice

Practice and scoring belong in touchpoints the school already runs: a 5-minute role-play in the resource or advisory period every two weeks, the first-week conversation with each new teacher, progress-report week, and job-site and training check-ins in 18–22 programs.

For students you see in a resource or advisory period, 5 minutes each means a caseload of 20 takes about 100 minutes of probes every two weeks, before graphing. For a student in full inclusion you don’t see that often, use progress-report week plus a monthly probe.

Run the baseline probes. In the two weeks before the meeting where the goal will be written, run three short probes. Ask: “What are you good at? What’s hard at school? What helps you? Is it working, or what would you change?” From grade 6, add “What do you want to do after high school?” and “Do you have a question for me?” Add one natural opportunity, such as a new teacher asking what helps. Score each probe on the tool the goal will use, in the goal’s own unit. The baselines above are illustrations (goals 7 and 14 show September probes, for an IEP written then), and the checklists and rubrics are working tools rather than validated instruments.

Student voice at the IEP meeting: practice all year, probe once

The meeting is where a student uses these skills in front of the whole team, and the month before it needs its own plan.

The four weeks before the annual review

• Week 4 before: the student builds or updates a one-page profile (strengths, needs, what helps, goals) in their own mode: writing, pictures, slides, AAC or video.
• Week 3: the student reviews each accommodation against that term’s data and marks it keep, change or drop. Goal 11 needs a third rehearsal, so run a short one this week.
• Week 2: a rehearsal with the case manager, scored on the checklist, in the mode the student will use at the meeting. For an AAC user, program the meeting vocabulary first.
• Week 1: a rehearsal with a second adult who has sat in on an earlier check-in, such as a general education teacher or a parent. If that adult will score the meeting, both adults score this rehearsal separately and compare. Then agree with the team which agenda sections are the student’s.

At the meeting, the student sits at the table, adults ask the student first and wait for an answer, and the student’s sections come early, before the adults’ reports. Afterwards, a 5-minute debrief is scored as one more checklist session.

The meeting discusses the student’s needs out loud, and some students find that hard to hear. Put strengths first and agree on a signal for stepping out and coming back. A student who finds the full meeting too much can still be heard through a recorded statement, their own sections only, or the profile. If they shut down or escalate when adults discuss them, a self-regulation goal can run alongside this work. If a student raises a safety concern while preparing, tell the school counselor or psychologist the same day and follow your district’s reporting procedures, which may mean making a report yourself. For the adults’ preparation, see preparing the team’s side of the meeting.

Rewriting a goal that counts IEP meetings

The earlier version of this page included a goal measured only at the annual meeting:

“By (date), when participating in their IEP meeting, the student will actively contribute to the creation of their own goals, including self-advocacy IEP goals, by providing input and expressing their preferences and needs, improving from 0/10 opportunities to 8/10 opportunities.”

Read as written, each meeting is an opportunity, and ten would take ten years of annual meetings. Read as ten chances inside one meeting, all ten still arrive on a single day, with nothing to report in between. Two adults watching would score “actively contribute” and “providing input” differently, and 0/10 is the same placeholder the page gave every skill, not a baseline from this student.

A version that can be monitored moves the practice into check-ins and keeps the meeting as one probe:

During biweekly advisory check-ins, using their one-page profile, [Student] will state one need and one preference for next year’s goals, each with a reason from their own data, scoring 4 of 4 on a 0–2 rubric (one row each for need and preference) in 3 consecutive check-ins by the annual review, as measured by the case manager’s rubric, with the meeting scored by a second adult and reported as a probe (baseline: 1 of 4 points in each of three pre-meeting probes).

Before you finalize your own draft, ask: where will the next five data points come from, and will they arrive before the review?

Tracking student voice through the year

Score the six-element checklist every two weeks in an existing touchpoint; each scoring takes about 5 minutes, and using the same elements every time lets the baseline, each session and the meeting be compared directly.

Here is a filled example for a student working on goal 14:

Session 3 was the first check-in with the general education teacher present. The N on element 6 may reflect the new setting; repeat the probe with the same questions before reading it as a lost skill.

Print a blank copy (one page, no sign-up): Download the checklist and rubric data sheet (PDF, one page)

Graph it. Plot the independent count per session. Draw an aim line from the baseline (1 of 6) to the criterion (5 of 6), reaching it three sessions (six weeks) before the review date, because goal 14 needs three consecutive sessions at that level.

Judge it. Look at the graph every three sessions (about every six weeks) and at each progress report, on the schedule the IEP states (34 CFR 300.320(a)(3)(ii)). NCII’s data-based individualization process compares progress data with the goal and intensifies or adjusts the intervention when progress falls short. A workable rule for this checklist:

• Three consecutive sessions below the aim line: change the instruction before changing the goal. Add rehearsals, sentence starters, a different response mode or a shorter profile.
• Three consecutive sessions at or above the line: fade the profile card, or add a new adult to the rehearsal.

The student sees their own graph at each check-in. Reading their own data is part of judging their supports. For families, write one plain sentence from the graph: “Sam completed four of the six checklist steps on their own at this month’s check-in, up from one at the first check-in.”

Invitations, preferences and the age-of-majority notice

In a file review, student participation usually shows up in five places on paper. State monitoring protocols differ.

1. The notice and the invitation. From the first IEP to be in effect when the student turns 16 (or younger, if the team decides), the notice to parents must say that a purpose of the meeting is considering postsecondary goals and transition services. It must also say that the school will invite the student and name any other agency invited (34 CFR 300.322(b)(2)). The student must be invited (300.321(b)(1)); keep a copy of the student’s own invitation. At every meeting, the student is a team member “whenever appropriate” (300.321(a)(7)).
2. Preferences when the student didn’t attend. The school must take other steps to make sure the student’s preferences and interests are considered (300.321(b)(2)). Record how (an interview, a recorded statement or a written profile) and where the IEP reflects it.
3. Student input in the IEP itself. Postsecondary goals are measurable, updated every year and based on age-appropriate transition assessments (300.320(b)); name and date the interview or inventory that captured the student’s preferences. Transition services take account of the student’s “strengths, preferences, and interests” (300.43(a)(2)).
4. Agency invitations with consent. An adult-agency representative is invited with the consent of the parents, or of the student once they have reached the age of majority (300.321(b)(3)).
5. The rights-transfer statement on time. At least one year before the age of majority under state law, the IEP states that the student has been told which rights, if any, will transfer (300.320(c)). If the state transfers rights, the school notifies both the student and the parents (300.520).

Federal law requires transition content from the first IEP in effect when the student turns 16, or earlier if the IEP team decides; many states start earlier. State law sets the age of majority and whether rights transfer. Until they do, parents hold them, and the student’s stated preference is input the team must consider; it doesn’t decide the plan on its own. In an 18–22 program rights have often already transferred, so check who now gives consent.

Questions educators ask about self-advocacy goals

What are some examples of self-advocacy skills for students?

They include describing how you learn best, naming strengths and needs, knowing your IEP accommodations and when each helps, judging whether a support works, stating preferences for school, work and adult life, and taking part in your IEP meeting. In an 18–22 program, add explaining a support need to a supervisor or instructor.

What are some SMART self-advocacy goals?

A SMART self-advocacy goal names the setting, an observable behavior, a criterion, a date and who measures it. Goal 7 is one: asked what helps, the student names two IEP accommodations with an example of each, in 4 of 5 consecutive opportunities by the end of the second grading period, on the case manager’s dated checklist. Pair it with a baseline in the same unit.

Why is self-advocacy important in an IEP?

The student knows things about their own learning that the team can’t always see, such as why a support stopped working. Transition services must take account of the student’s strengths, preferences and interests (300.43(a)(2)), and once the meeting will consider postsecondary goals, the school must invite the student. Until the student reaches the age of majority, though, whether they attend is generally the parents’ decision, ideally after they talk it over with the school (71 Fed. Reg. 46671).

What self-advocacy activities help students with disabilities lead their IEP meetings?

Build up in steps, from sharing an “All About Me” page to leading. Useful activities are a one-page profile, marking each accommodation keep, change or drop against the term’s data, scored rehearsals with a second adult, and the Self-Directed IEP’s 11 steps. A student who doesn’t speak can take part through AAC, pictures, slides or a recording, scored on the same checklist.

What if the student disagrees with the team?

Record what the student said and treat it as information about the support or the plan. The team still decides. If the parents, or an adult student after rights transfer, ask for the change and the school declines, prior written notice explains why.

Preparing with the “Being a Part of My IEP Team” lesson

“Being a Part of My IEP Team” is Lesson 5 of the Self-Determination unit in the 18+ course of Ori Learning’s Transition Curriculum. Early on, small groups of 2–3 discuss “Who is the most important person in your educational meeting?” The lesson’s answer is the student. Students then learn who sits on the IEP team and what to think about beforehand: strengths, goals for school, work or life after graduation, and the supports that help. The lesson tells them: “Your IEP team wants to hear your voice, because you are the expert on yourself.” It adds: “You don’t have to be loud – just clear and respectful.”

Three tiered activities follow. Each student works on the one that fits: an “All About Me: What I Want My IEP Team to Know” page with sentence starters or picture supports, an IEP Prep Sheet, or a practice IEP meeting in pairs. Either page can become the one-page profile in goals 4 and 14, and a practice meeting counts as a rehearsal if an adult scores it. Students close with a journal line: “It is important for me to be part of my IEP meeting because ___.”

Sources

1. Martin, J. E., Van Dycke, J. L., Greene, B. A., Gardner, J. E., Christensen, W. R., Woods, L. L., & Lovett, D. L. (2006). Direct observation of teacher-directed IEP meetings: Establishing the need for student IEP meeting instruction. Exceptional Children, 72(2), 187–200. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290607200204 (ERIC EJ754344)
2. Martin, J. E., Van Dycke, J. L., Christensen, W. R., Greene, B. A., Gardner, J. E., & Lovett, D. L. (2006). Increasing student participation in IEP meetings: Establishing the Self-Directed IEP as an evidenced-based practice. Exceptional Children, 72(3), 299–316. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290607200303
3. National Technical Assistance Center on Transition: The Collaborative (NTACT:C). Self-Directed IEP to teach student involvement in the IEP meeting. https://transitionta.org/effective-practices/pd-self-determined-iep/
4. I’m Determined. Student Rubric for IEP Participation. https://imdetermined.org/tool/student-rubric-for-iep-participation/
5. Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities, 34 CFR §§ 300.43, 300.320, 300.321, 300.322, 300.503, 300.520 (https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/subtitle-B/chapter-III/part-300), with the Analysis of Comments and Changes, 71 Fed. Reg. 46540 (Aug. 14, 2006).
6. National Center on Intensive Intervention. Data-based individualization: Progress monitoring. https://intensiveintervention.org/data-based-individualization/progress-monitoring

Related IEP Goal Resources

• how to write SMART IEP goals
• social-emotional IEP goals
• transition services
• social skills IEP goals