AAC IEP Goals: 26 Examples, Core Vocabulary and Data Collection

Estimated reading time: 15 minutes

AAC IEP goals are measurable annual goals that build a student’s ability to communicate with augmentative and alternative communication (AAC): signs and gestures, picture or letter boards, or a speech-generating device that supplements or replaces speech. Under IDEA, the IEP team writes the goals and must consider every student’s communication needs and need for assistive technology (34 CFR 300.324(a)(2)(iv) and (v)); the team can include the speech-language pathologist (SLP) as related services personnel (34 CFR 300.321(a)(6)). This guide covers what AAC is, the IDEA rules, a goal framework built on four communication competencies, core vocabulary, 26 example goals, adult modeling as an IEP support, and how to measure progress.

Executive Summary

In the 2024-25 school year, speech or language impairment was the disability category of 18% of the 8.2 million students ages 3 to 21 served under IDEA Part B, and autism of 15% (U.S. Department of Education, OSEP). Goals for students who use AAC must fit the system they actually use.

The SLP cannot carry these goals alone. ASHA’s 2026 Schools Survey reports a median caseload of 50 students for full-time school-based clinical service providers. In a survey of 176 U.S. SLPs published in 2025, 95.4% reported using modeling with early symbolic communicators who use AAC and 85.7% core vocabulary approaches, and SLPs reported training caregivers, teachers and other staff in implementation strategies (Frick Semmler et al.).

What Is AAC?

AAC is any form of communication that supplements or replaces speech: ASHA describes it as augmentative when it supplements existing speech and alternative when it is used in place of speech that is absent or not functional.

The ASHA Practice Portal places AAC “under the broader umbrella of assistive technology” and lists tools from manual signs, gestures and tangible objects to picture communication boards, letter boards and speech-generating devices. The 2020 report of the National Clearinghouse on Autism Evidence and Practice (NCAEP) sorts them into two groups and lists AAC among 28 evidence-based practices, with 44 studies:

AAC in the IEP: What IDEA Requires

IDEA does not mention AAC by name, but an AAC system chosen by the IEP team is usually an assistive technology (AT) device, and the team must consider both AT and communication needs for every student.

• Special factors: the team must “consider the communication needs of the child” and whether the child needs AT devices and services (34 CFR 300.324(a)(2)(iv) and (v)).
• Device and services: an AT device increases, maintains or improves functional capabilities (34 CFR 300.5); AT services include training for the child, the family and professionals (34 CFR 300.6(e) and (f)).
• Home use: school-purchased devices go home when the team finds the student needs them for FAPE (34 CFR 300.105(b)).
• Goals and supports: the IEP includes measurable goals, how progress is measured, and supports for school personnel (34 CFR 300.320(a)(2) to (a)(4)).

The U.S. Department of Education’s January 2024 guidance on AT treats an AAC device chosen by the IEP team as an AT device and notes that a child who requires a communication device will need it at all times of the day. Device selection and the SETT framework are covered in our guide to assistive technology for students with disabilities; other communication goals are in speech IEP goals. This summary is not legal advice.

A Framework for AAC IEP Goals: Four Competencies

Janice Light’s 1989 definition of communicative competence for people who use AAC gives teams a balanced framework: goals across linguistic, operational, social and strategic competence.

In Light (1989), linguistic and operational competence concern the tools of communication, while social and strategic competence reflect knowledge and judgment in interaction. Light and McNaughton (2014) describe each domain and note that psychosocial factors, such as motivation, confidence and resilience, and barriers and supports in the environment also shape competence.

Core Vocabulary in AAC IEP Goals

Core vocabulary is the small set of words commonly used across people and contexts, while fringe vocabulary is the larger, more individual set of words, such as names and topic words.

A 2007 study of preschool talk found “a small core vocabulary comprising frequently and commonly used words, together with large and highly individualised fringe vocabularies,” and concluded that children who use AAC need both (Trembath, Balandin and Togher). In a 2021 study of 5-year-olds during shared reading, 59 common words made up about 62% to 65% of all words said (Sanders and Blakeley). Prioritizing these frequent core words is a common practice in AAC vocabulary selection (Binger et al., 2024). For U.S. students in grades 2 to 8, one study found the most frequent spoken words were short words such as “be,” “I,” “it,” “you” and “do” (Boenisch and Soto, 2015).

The sample above is illustrative, not a validated list. Research urges balance: core word lists may under-emphasize the words that dominate early vocabulary (Laubscher and Light, 2020), and toddlers’ utterances mixing core and fringe words were grammatically and semantically richer than core-only or fringe-only ones (Binger et al., 2024). Choose vocabulary with the SLP and the family.

AAC IEP Goals Bank: 26 Examples

These goals are original examples written for this guide; adapt each one. Set the criterion from the baseline in the present levels, name the student’s system and settings, and open with the timeline (“By [date of the next annual IEP review],”), left out below. “Independently” means without a prompt beyond the natural cue. More goal areas are in the IEP goal bank.

Requesting, Protesting and Refusing

1. Requesting items: During snack and centers, [Student] will request a preferred item using AAC independently in 8 of 10 opportunities across 3 days (event recording).
2. Requesting “more”: During a preferred activity, [Student] will select “more” or “more + item” to continue it in 4 of 5 opportunities (event recording).
3. Requesting help: When a task or container is too hard, [Student] will request “help” using AAC within 10 seconds in 4 of 5 opportunities (latency recording).
4. Protesting: When offered a non-preferred item, [Student] will use “no” or “not that” on the system instead of pushing it away in 8 of 10 opportunities (event recording).
5. Ending an activity: When finished, [Student] will select “all done” before leaving the area in 4 of 5 activities across 2 settings (event recording).
6. Requesting a break: When signs of frustration appear, [Student] will request a break using AAC with no more than a gestural prompt in 4 of 5 opportunities (prompt-level data).

When a request replaces a challenging behavior, the behavior plan should use the same message; see functional communication training.

Commenting and Asking Questions

7. Commenting: During shared reading, [Student] will make a comment such as “funny,” “uh oh” or “I like it” in 5 of 10 pages across 3 sessions (event recording).
8. Describing: During science or art, [Student] will describe an object using a describing word such as “big,” “hot” or “different” in 4 of 5 opportunities (event recording).
9. Sharing feelings: At morning check-in, [Student] will state a feeling and one reason with AAC on 4 of 5 days (check-in log).
10. Asking “what”: When shown an unfamiliar object, [Student] will ask “what that?” or “what is it?” in 4 of 5 opportunities (event recording).
11. Asking “where”: When a needed item is missing, [Student] will ask “where” plus the item in 4 of 5 opportunities (event recording).

Social Routines

12. Greeting: When a familiar adult or peer greets [Student], [Student] will greet back with AAC within 5 seconds in 8 of 10 opportunities (event recording).
13. Turn-taking in games: During a turn-taking game with a peer, [Student] will use “my turn” or “your turn” in 4 of 5 games (event recording).
14. Keeping a conversation going: With a peer, [Student] will take at least 3 conversational turns on one topic using AAC in 4 of 5 conversations (SLP observation).

Combining Symbols and Using Core Words

15. Two-symbol messages: During classroom routines, [Student] will combine 2 symbols, such as “go outside” or “want music,” in 4 of 5 opportunities (language sample).
16. Three-symbol messages: [Student] will produce messages of 3 or more symbols with a verb in 20% of utterances in a 30-minute sample (language sample).
17. Grammar: When telling who did something, [Student] will add a pronoun and a verb ending, such as “he jumped,” in 4 of 5 opportunities (language sample).
18. Core words across activities: [Student] will use the same core word, such as “go,” “stop” or “more,” spontaneously in at least 3 different activities per week for 4 of 5 weeks (core word log).
19. Vocabulary growth: [Student] will use 40 different words or symbols spontaneously across a 2-week period, from a baseline of 15 (number of different words).

Navigation and Operational Skills

20. Finding a page: Given a spoken topic, [Student] will navigate to the correct page of the system within 10 seconds in 8 of 10 opportunities (event recording).
21. Selection method: [Student] will use the team’s chosen selection method, such as direct touch or switch scanning, to select the intended symbol in 80% of trials across 3 sessions (trial data).
22. Getting the system: When the system is out of reach, [Student] will get it or ask for it before communicating in 4 of 5 opportunities across settings (event recording).

Repairing Breakdowns and Telling About Past Events

23. Repairing a message: When a partner does not understand, [Student] will repeat, rephrase or add a symbol in 4 of 5 breakdowns (event recording).
24. Explaining the system: With a new partner, such as a substitute, [Student] will share a pre-stored message explaining how they communicate in 3 of 4 opportunities (staff checklist).
25. Telling about the day: At dismissal, [Student] will tell one thing they did at school using 2 or more symbols on 4 of 5 days (home-school log).
26. Retelling a weekend event: On Mondays, [Student] will tell who, where and what happened using AAC, with photos as support, in 3 of 4 weeks (narrative checklist).

For autistic students, more communication goals are in IEP goals for autism.

Aided Language Input Belongs in the IEP Supports, Not the Goals

Aided language input, where adults point to symbols on the student’s own system while they talk, is something staff do, so it belongs in the IEP’s supports for school personnel and AT services rather than in a student goal.

A 2018 meta-analysis of 26 single-case and 2 group studies found interventions that include aided AAC input “highly effective” for both comprehension and expression, and concluded that partners should use it (O’Neill, Light and Pope). A review of 48 studies with 267 children and youth found aided AAC modeling generally effective at improving expressive communication (Biggs, Carter and Gilson, 2018).

Example support statement, original: “Classroom staff will model on [Student]’s system during morning meeting, snack and reading, at least 5 times per activity. The SLP will train classroom staff and the family in modeling during the first 4 weeks and check implementation monthly.” Training is itself an AT service under 34 CFR 300.6(e) and (f).

How to Measure AAC IEP Goals

AAC goals are measured by counting opportunities and responses, recording the prompt level, and noting the partner and setting, because a message that appears only with one adult and a full prompt is not yet communication.

• Opportunities: 4 requests in 4 chances differs from 4 in 20.
• Prompt level: independent, expectant pause, gestural, model or physical; see the prompt hierarchy.
• Spontaneous versus prompted: report both.
• Language samples: message length and number of different words.
• Partners and settings: generalization is part of the goal.

This sample data sheet is an example to adapt:

More layouts are in IEP data collection sheets. If progress stalls, the team must revise the IEP, as appropriate (34 CFR 300.324(b)(1)).

Common Mistakes District Leaders Make

1. Goals for requesting only. Students also need to refuse, comment, ask and tell.
2. Writing goals about the device. “Will use the device” is not a communication goal.
3. Leaving the system in the speech room or at school. Communication happens all day, and at home when the team decides.
4. No modeling plan for staff. Students rarely use what adults never show.
5. Counting prompted responses as independent.
6. Removing fringe words students care about to keep a board “core only.”
7. One trained adult. Substitutes and specials teachers need a quick guide.

Questions District Leaders Should Ask

• How many AAC users have goals beyond requesting?
• Who models on each student’s system, and how often?
• How many days does a new or repaired device take to reach the student?
• Do our data show spontaneous use across partners?

Frequently Asked Questions

What are AAC goals?

AAC goals are measurable IEP goals for a student who communicates with augmentative and alternative communication, such as signs, a picture board or a speech-generating device. They target what the student says with the system, how they operate it, how they use it socially and how they fix breakdowns, with a criterion, a setting and a measurement method.

What are AAC goals for functional communication?

Functional communication goals target messages a student needs every day: requesting items and help, refusing, asking for a break, greeting, answering yes or no and telling an adult something is wrong. A strong one names the situation and criterion, such as requesting help within 10 seconds in 4 of 5 opportunities across settings.

What is core vocabulary?

Core vocabulary is the small set of words people use often and across many situations, mostly pronouns, verbs, describing words and question words such as “I,” “go,” “more,” “not” and “what.” Prioritizing these words is a common practice in AAC vocabulary selection. Students also need fringe words, the names and topic words that matter to them.

What is the difference between core and fringe vocabulary?

Core vocabulary is a small set of words used frequently by many people across activities; fringe vocabulary is the larger set of words specific to a person, topic or activity, such as names, foods and class topics. Research supports giving AAC users both, since utterances that mix core and fringe words were richer than either alone.

What are early AAC goals?

Early AAC goals usually target requesting a preferred item, protesting with “no” or “stop,” asking for “more” or “help,” greeting, commenting during play and combining two symbols. They start in natural routines like snack and play, with adults modeling on the student’s system and data on prompt levels.

What does AAC stand for?

AAC stands for augmentative and alternative communication. ASHA describes it as augmentative when it supplements existing speech and alternative when it replaces speech that is absent or not functional. It includes unaided forms, such as signs and gestures, and aided forms, from picture boards to speech-generating devices.

Related Resources

• Speech IEP Goals
• Assistive Technology for Students With Disabilities
• Functional Communication Training
• IEP Goal Bank
• Prompt Hierarchy
• IEP Goals for Autism

Conclusion

Strong AAC IEP goals cover what students say, how they operate their system, how they use it with people and how they fix breakdowns. Pair them with core and personal vocabulary, write adult modeling into the IEP supports, and measure opportunities, prompts and partners, so the system becomes the student’s voice all day.

Sources: ASHA Practice Portal, Augmentative and Alternative Communication; Steinbrenner et al., Evidence-Based Practices for Children, Youth, and Young Adults with Autism, NCAEP (2020); Light, Toward a Definition of Communicative Competence for Individuals Using Augmentative and Alternative Communication Systems (1989); Light and McNaughton, Communicative Competence for Individuals Who Require AAC: A New Definition for a New Era of Communication? (2014); Trembath, Balandin and Togher, Vocabulary Selection for Australian Children Who Use AAC (2007); Laubscher and Light, Core Vocabulary Lists for Young Children and Considerations for Early Language Development (2020); Binger et al., How Toddlers Use Core and Fringe Vocabulary (2024); O’Neill, Light and Pope, Effects of Interventions That Include Aided AAC Input (2018); U.S. Department of Education, Myths and Facts Surrounding Assistive Technology Devices and Services (January 2024); ASHA, 2026 Schools Survey: SLP Caseload and Workload Characteristics; U.S. Department of Education, OSEP, 2024-25 Static Tables (Part B Child Count & Educational Environments). Other studies and sections of 34 CFR Part 300 are linked where they are cited.

Join the 2027 Special Education Pilot

The AAC system and adult modeling carry AAC goals, while the skills behind each IEP goal still grow through repeated practice, and adult 1-on-1 time is scarce. Telo AI is being adapted for students with IEPs: patient, 1-on-1 practice aligned to each student’s IEP goals and pace, with teachers setting the goals, topics and rules. It is a practice tool that does not diagnose or treat any condition. We are inviting districts to shape it with us in a 2027 pilot.

Apply to pilot Telo AI in your Special Education program