Teacher and child predictors of achieving IEP goals of children with autism.
Fix the IEP first; a clear goal bank beats teacher burnout and child attention every time.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Lisa and her team followed 49 autistic kids in public schools.
Half got the COMPASS program. Half got typical IEP planning.
The researchers scored every IEP for quality and tracked who met their goals by spring.
What they found
Kids with well-written IEPs hit 25 % more goals than kids with weak ones.
Teacher burnout, child engagement, and how often staff used the plan barely mattered.
The paper trail beat the people skills.
How this fits with other research
Wanchisen et al. (1989) showed that letting teachers watch their own class videos and pick IEP targets also lifted child gains.
Lisa’s 2013 RCT proves the next step: once teachers write the goals, the quality of those goals drives success more than teacher mood or kid focus.
Anonymous (2019) found parent wishes land in final goals only two-thirds of the time. Pair that with Lisa’s finding and you see a leak: parent voice is lost, then goal quality drops, then kids miss targets.
Park et al. (2018) links more school services to later jobs. Lisa shows the inside story: make each service count by sharpening the IEP first.
Why it matters
Before you run another engagement probe or burnout survey, open the IEP. Check if goals are measurable, bite-sized, and tied to daily routines. A 15-minute goal rewrite can beat months of behavior momentum programs.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one current IEP, delete any vague verb like "improve" or "increase," and replace with an observable count, time, or distance you can tally by Friday.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
It is encouraging that children with autism show a strong response to early intervention, yet more research is needed for understanding the variability in responsiveness to specialized programs. Treatment predictor variables from 47 teachers and children who were randomized to receive the COMPASS intervention (Ruble et al. in The collaborative model for promoting competence and success for students with ASD. Springer, New York, 2012a) were analyzed. Predictors evaluated against child IEP goal attainment included child, teacher, intervention practice, and implementation practice variables based on an implementation science framework (Dunst and Trivette in J Soc Sci 8:143-148, 2012). Findings revealed one child (engagement), one teacher (exhaustion), two intervention quality (IEP quality for targeted and not targeted elements), and no implementation quality variables accounted for variance in child outcomes when analyzed separately. When the four significant variables were compared against each other in a single regression analysis, IEP quality accounted for one quarter of the variance in child outcomes.
Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2013 · doi:10.1007/s10803-013-1884-x