Michigan IEP Goal Bank: Writing Measurable Goals That Comply with MARSE

Michigan IEP goals are not legally valid if they are vague, unmeasurable, or disconnected from the student's documented needs. Yet vague goals are extremely common — and parents sitting in an IEP meeting often cannot tell the difference between a goal that will actually drive progress and one that will produce a "making adequate progress" notation every quarter without any real accountability.

This goal bank is designed to help Michigan parents understand what makes a goal legally sound under MARSE and to recognize when proposed goals fall short.

What Makes an IEP Goal Measurable Under MARSE

Michigan's MARSE requirements — aligned with IDEA Section 614(d)(1)(A)(i)(II) — specify that annual IEP goals must be "measurable." That single word carries significant legal weight. A goal must include:

1. A specific skill or behavior to be demonstrated (the "what")
2. Conditions under which it will be measured (the "when" and "how")
3. A mastery criterion — the level at which the skill is considered achieved (the "how well" and "how often")
4. A timeframe — in Michigan, IEP goals are annual, but progress must be reported on the same schedule as general education report cards

If a proposed goal says "Maya will improve her reading comprehension," it is not measurable. There is no baseline, no criterion, no condition. A compliant version might read: "Given a 3rd-grade Lexile-leveled passage, Maya will answer 4 out of 5 literal comprehension questions correctly in 3 out of 4 consecutive weekly probes by the annual review."

The goal also must connect directly to the PLAAFP. Under Michigan MARSE compliance standards, if the PLAAFP does not document a specific deficit area, no goal can be written to address it. This is why the PLAAFP review is the most important parent action at an IEP meeting.

Reading and Language Arts Goals

Decoding / phonics: Given a list of 20 single-syllable CVC and CVCE words, [Student] will correctly decode 18/20 words in 3 consecutive weekly probes by the annual review date.

Reading fluency: Given a 2nd-grade decodable passage, [Student] will read at 70 correct words per minute with no more than 3 errors in 4 of 5 weekly progress monitoring probes by the annual review date.

Reading comprehension: Given an expository text at [Student]'s current instructional reading level, [Student] will identify the main idea and two supporting details in written form with 80% accuracy in 4 out of 5 trials by the annual review.

Writing mechanics: When given a writing prompt, [Student] will produce a 3-sentence paragraph with correct capitalization, end punctuation, and subject-verb agreement in 4 of 5 weekly writing samples by the annual review.

Math Goals

Basic operations: Given a set of 20 mixed addition and subtraction facts within 20, [Student] will respond accurately and within 3 seconds per problem at a rate of 18/20 correct in 3 consecutive probes by the annual review date.

Problem solving: Given a 2-step word problem read aloud at grade level, [Student] will identify the correct operation and solve with 75% accuracy across 4 consecutive assessment opportunities by the annual review.

Number sense: [Student] will correctly identify the place value of a digit in a 3-digit number in 4 of 5 teacher-presented trials without prompting by the annual review.

Communication and Language Goals

Expressive language: During small group instruction, [Student] will use complete 4- to 5-word sentences to request, comment, or respond to a question in 8 out of 10 opportunities across 3 consecutive data collection sessions by the annual review.

Receptive language: Given 2-step oral directions in the classroom environment, [Student] will follow both steps correctly without repetition in 8 of 10 observed opportunities by the annual review.

AAC use: Using [Student]'s AAC device, [Student] will independently navigate to the correct category and select the appropriate symbol to make a request in 4 of 5 opportunities during structured and unstructured activities by the annual review.

Social-Emotional and Behavioral Goals

Michigan IEP teams must consider behavioral goals for any student whose disability includes significant emotional or behavioral components. Under the 2024 MARSE updates, teams must document ESY consideration; for students with behavioral goals, regression risk during breaks must be explicitly discussed.

Self-regulation: When presented with a non-preferred task or denied a preferred activity, [Student] will use a self-regulation strategy (deep breathing, self-check visual, or requesting a break) within 60 seconds in 4 of 5 documented opportunities by the annual review.

On-task behavior: During independent work periods of 15 minutes, [Student] will remain on task (as defined by eyes on work, materials in use, no off-topic verbalizations) for at least 10 of 15 minutes as measured by interval recording in 4 of 5 weekly observations by the annual review.

Peer interactions: During unstructured social situations (lunch, recess, group work), [Student] will initiate a positive interaction with a peer using appropriate social language on at least 3 occasions per observation period in 4 of 5 weekly observations by the annual review.

Transition Goals (Age 16 and Younger if Appropriate)

Michigan law requires transition planning to begin no later than age 16. The Personal Curriculum (PC) provision allows Michigan students with IEPs to modify the Michigan Merit Curriculum (MMC) — including adjustments to Algebra II requirements or foreign language mandates — to maintain a viable pathway to a standard high school diploma.

Employment/vocational: By the end of the school year, [Student] will identify 3 career interests aligned with their strengths, complete a job application for one interest area, and participate in one job shadow experience as documented by teacher observation and employer feedback.

Independent living: [Student] will independently plan and execute a 3-step daily living task (e.g., preparing a simple meal, managing a weekly schedule, using public transportation) with no more than 1 verbal prompt in 4 of 5 practice opportunities by the annual review.

Post-secondary education: [Student] will visit 2 post-secondary programs (community college, vocational program, or supported employment agency) and complete a comparison worksheet documenting support structures, admission requirements, and fit with personal goals by the annual review.

Red Flags in Proposed IEP Goals

Watch for these patterns during your IEP meeting:

Recycled goals. If the team presents goals identical or nearly identical to last year's unmet goals without explanation, ask why the goal was not met and what will be different about the approach this year.

Goals without baseline data. A legally compliant goal requires a documented baseline from the PLAAFP. If no baseline is stated, the goal cannot be measured as progress from a defined starting point.

"As measured by teacher observation." While teacher observation can be a legitimate measurement tool, it is problematic as the sole method for a measurable annual goal. Teacher observation without defined criteria, frequency, or data collection protocol is subjective and unverifiable.

Goals that address the symptom rather than the skill. A goal targeting "will not have outbursts" is a reduction goal, not a skill-building goal. Effective behavioral goals teach the replacement behavior: "will use [strategy] when [trigger] occurs."

If proposed goals do not meet the standard described here, you do not have to sign the IEP. You can request a rewrite, ask to reconvene the team, or note your objections in the meeting documentation while consenting to services but not the goals.

The Michigan IEP & 504 Blueprint includes a goal review checklist you can use at the meeting table to evaluate each proposed goal against MARSE standards before you agree to anything.

See more United States homeschool guides →