10-Minute Speech Practice That Doesn't Require Sitting Still

Last updated 2026-07-09

What is an AAC device goal, exactly?

An AAC device goal is a written target that says what a child will communicate, how they'll do it, in what situation, and how well. It's not "use the device more." It's something like: "Given a preferred activity, Maya will use her AAC device to make a request across three different communication partners in four out of five opportunities, over three consecutive data sessions."

That level of specificity matters because AAC learning isn't one skill. A child might be great at requesting snacks and completely lost when trying to comment on something exciting that just happened. Goals carve the skill into learnable chunks.

The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) defines AAC as any approach that supports or replaces natural speech or writing for people who have difficulties ^[1]. Goals for AAC users sit inside that broader framework. They should reflect what the child actually needs to communicate in real life, more than what's easiest to measure on a clipboard.

One more thing: a goal isn't a therapy activity. The goal describes the outcome. The activity is how you get there. Confusing these two is the most common mistake parents see in early IEP drafts.

Who writes AAC goals and who should be in that room?

A licensed speech-language pathologist (SLP) writes the formal language of AAC goals, but the best goals come out of a team conversation. The core people: the SLP, the family, any teachers or paraprofessionals who work with the child daily, and, where possible, the child.

For school-age children in the U.S., AAC goals usually live inside an Individualized Education Program (IEP). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 34 C.F.R. § 300.320) requires that the IEP team include the parents, at least one general education teacher, a special education teacher, and a school district representative ^[2]. An SLP is typically part of that team when communication needs are present.

For children from birth to age 3, goals may appear in an Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) instead, with a family-outcomes focus rather than a school-placement focus ^[7].

Parents bring information nobody else has: what the child wants to talk about at home, which communication partners they prefer, what frustrates them most. An SLP who writes goals without that input often writes goals that look fine on paper and never transfer to real life. Push for a pre-meeting conversation, more than a signature at the table.

If you're working outside the school system, say with a private SLP or through early intervention, the process is less formal but the collaboration should be identical. Goals still need your voice in them.

What do SMART AAC goals actually look like?

SMART stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It's a useful frame as long as you don't let it turn into a fill-in-the-blank exercise.

Here's what each element means in AAC practice:

Specific: Name the communication function. Requesting is different from commenting, which is different from protesting, which is different from asking a question. ASHA identifies core communication functions including requesting, rejecting, commenting, and social interaction ^[1]. Pick one function per goal.

Measurable: Define what counts as success. "Four out of five opportunities" is measurable. "Improve communication" is not. The measurement method matters too: who collects data, how often, in what setting.

Achievable: The target should stretch the child without being out of reach. A child who is still learning to move around their device independently shouldn't have a goal about spontaneous multi-word combinations yet. Sequence the goals.

Relevant: The goal should map to something the child actually wants or needs to say. A child who loves trains should have goals that show up in train play, more than during a clinical drill.

Time-bound: IEP goals have an annual review cycle at minimum ^[2], but most teams check AAC goals at every quarterly progress report. For children who are moving fast, six-week check-ins make sense.

Here are two contrasting examples:

The strong goals feel harder to write. They are. They're also the ones that tell you clearly whether the child is making progress.

What communication functions should AAC goals cover?

This is where a lot of goal-writing goes wrong. Teams fixate on requesting because it's easy to measure (the child asks for a cookie or they don't). Communication is much bigger than requesting.

ASHA's practice portal on AAC lists communication functions that a full AAC system should support ^[1]. They include:

• Requesting objects, actions, and information
• Rejecting or protesting
• Commenting and sharing information
• Asking and answering questions
• Social closeness (greetings, small talk, keeping relationships going)
• Social etiquette (please, thank you, excuse me)

A child who can only request stays communicatively isolated. They can get things. They can't tell you something surprised them, they can't say no to something they hate without a meltdown, and they can't connect socially.

Good goal planning looks at the child's current communication profile, spots which functions are missing or weak, and prioritizes by what's limiting their life right now. For a child who melts down constantly, a protesting/rejecting goal might be the most urgent thing on the list. For a socially motivated child, commenting and greeting goals may matter most.

This is also where connecting AAC goals to broader autism spectrum speech therapy approaches becomes relevant, since the functions that matter most vary a lot by the child's social communication profile.

How do you write AAC goals for different stages of device use?

A child who got their device last month needs completely different goals than a child who has used AAC for three years. Goals have to match the stage.

Researchers and clinicians describe AAC learning in a few overlapping stages, though no single staging system has universal adoption. Here's a practical way to think about it:

Stage 1: Device access and navigation. The child is learning where things are, how to operate the device, and that the device is a communication tool, not a toy. Goals here focus on activating symbols on purpose, moving to a second page, tolerating the device in their space. Accuracy targets are often low, like 2/5 opportunities, because the behavior is brand new.

Stage 2: Functional single words or symbols. The child can reliably use a small set of words. Goals target expanding the vocabulary set, cutting prompts, and generalizing to new partners and places.

Stage 3: Combining symbols. The child starts putting words together. Goals target two-word combinations ("more juice," "I want"), then move toward subject-verb-object structures. This is often where childhood apraxia of speech intersects with AAC, because motor planning for speech and for device use can both be in play.

Stage 4: Expanding language and literacy. The child uses the device for more complex communication: telling stories, answering wh-questions, joining classroom discussions. Goals at this stage can look a lot like language goals for speaking peers, just written for the AAC modality.

One rule holds across all stages: never strip out a communication function to make the goal simpler. If a child can protest verbally, their AAC goals should include protesting too. Removing functions from the device or the goals because they're hard to teach is a well-documented source of AAC abandonment.

How should families track progress on AAC goals at home?

Tracking at home doesn't have to be clinical. It has to be consistent.

The simplest method: pick one goal, choose a natural activity that happens every day (breakfast, bath time, a specific book), and count opportunities and successes in a notebook or phone note. Five minutes of consistent data beats a perfect data sheet you abandon after a week.

Some families use a frequency count ("How many times did she start with the device today?"). Others use an opportunity-based tally ("Of the five times I set up a request, how many times did she use the device without my prompting?"). Which one you pick depends on what the goal specifies.

A few things worth knowing:

• Most SLPs will ask you to collect data in at least one setting they can't reach, usually the home. Your data isn't filler. It tells the SLP whether the skill is generalizing beyond the therapy room.
• If the child performs beautifully in therapy and falls apart at home, that's information you need. It usually means the skill is stuck in a narrow context and the goal needs expansion, not celebration.
• Device logs can be a partial data source. Many modern AAC apps store a history of what symbols were activated and when. That's not the same as observational data, because it doesn't tell you whether the tap was intentional or spontaneous, but it can show vocabulary patterns over time.

Tools like Little Words give parents a simple way to watch communication attempts outside formal therapy and share what they see with their SLP.

If you're doing any of this through online speech therapy, your SLP will likely share a simple tracking template. Ask for one if they don't.

How often should AAC goals be reviewed and updated?

At minimum, once a year inside an IEP cycle. In practice, that's not often enough for a child who is learning quickly.

Most experienced AAC clinicians will tell you quarterly progress checks are a floor, not a ceiling. A child who hits a six-month target in eight weeks shouldn't sit on a goal that no longer stretches them. Goals are living documents.

IDEA requires that IEP teams measure and report goal progress at least as often as they report progress to parents of non-disabled students, which usually means quarterly progress reports ^[2]. That's the legal minimum. Requesting a mid-year IEP meeting to revise goals is well within your rights as a parent.

Outside the school system, the review cycle is whatever you negotiate with your SLP. Monthly reviews for children in intensive early intervention aren't unusual, and early intervention programs often run shorter plan cycles than school IEPs do.

Signs a goal needs updating: the child has clearly mastered the skill and data sits at ceiling; the child's communication needs have shifted; the original goal turns out to have been too narrow or too broad; or the child's device has changed significantly.

What are the most common mistakes in AAC goal writing?

Parents who have been through multiple IEP cycles report the same patterns over and over.

Goals that only cover requesting. The most common problem. A requesting-only plan leaves huge gaps in the child's communication.

Vague accuracy targets. "The student will improve" is not a goal. Neither is "the student will use the device more often." If you can't count it, you can't know whether it happened.

No generalization built in. A goal that only measures performance in the therapy room is a therapy-room goal, not a communication goal. Good goals name at least two settings or two communication partners.

Ignoring aided language input. Goals for the child often get written without any plan for the adults around them. If the adults in the child's life aren't modeling AAC use (called aided language stimulation or aided language input), the child's progress will be slower. Some goal plans now include family and educator targets alongside child targets. That's good practice.

Prompting that never fades. A goal that always allows full physical or verbal prompting isn't measuring independent communication. The prompt level should be part of the goal, and the plan should show how prompts get reduced over time.

Setting goals without the family's priorities. An SLP who writes goals from clinical assessment alone, without asking what the parents most need the child to communicate, will often produce technically correct goals that miss real life. Push back gently. You can say, "These look good, but the biggest issue at home is [X]. Can we add a goal for that?"

For children where apraxia of speech is also in the picture, goals need to address both the motor speech piece and the AAC piece without assuming one will replace the other. AAC is not a substitute for speech therapy. It's a parallel tool.

Do AAC goals look different for nonspeaking versus minimally verbal children?

Yes, and the distinction matters more than people expect.

For a child who is fully nonspeaking and relies on AAC as their primary expressive modality, goals can be ambitious across all communication functions from the start. The device is the voice. Every communication function a speaking child develops should eventually show up in the AAC user's goals.

For a minimally verbal child, one who uses some speech but inconsistently or with limited intelligibility, the goal-writing gets more nuanced. Speech and AAC belong together as complementary tools, not competitors. A minimally verbal child should never feel that using the device means giving up on speech. The research is clear that AAC does not suppress speech development. A 2006 review by Millar, Light, and Schlosser in the American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology found that AAC intervention did not impede natural speech production and in many cases supported it ^[3].

For children with echolalia, goal-writing has to account for the fact that some echolalic utterances are communicative (delayed echolalia used to express meaning) and some are not. Goals should distinguish functional communication from non-functional repetition, and should build on the communicative intent already present in the child's echolalia rather than trying to erase it. Understanding echolalia meaning is useful background for anyone writing goals for this population.

For children with childhood apraxia of speech, AAC goals should support communication while motor speech skills develop, with a clear plan for how the two intervention streams coordinate.

How does a child's AAC device type affect what goals are written?

The device type puts some real constraints on what's achievable, but fewer than most people assume.

Low-tech AAC (picture boards, communication books, PECS) can support requesting and some basic social functions, but it's harder to write goals around commenting or complex question-asking because the vocabulary set is limited. Goals for low-tech users tend to focus on vocabulary expansion, partner training, and consistent initiation.

High-tech AAC (speech-generating devices, tablet-based apps with full vocabulary systems) can support the entire range of communication functions, but access and navigation become goal areas in their own right. A child using a full-featured AAC app on an iPad might have goals like: independently moving to a secondary page, fixing a word choice without adult prompting, or using the device's phrase bank for social scripts.

The specific AAC system matters less than whether it gives the child access to a full vocabulary. ASHA's technical report on AAC notes the importance of ensuring access to a full range of vocabulary and communication functions ^[1]. A device with 12 symbols is fine for a child just starting out. It's not a long-term solution for a child who needs to communicate across all the functions listed above.

If you're not sure what kind of device your child needs, or whether their current device is capping their goals, an AAC evaluation by a specialist SLP is the right first step. The aac devices landscape is wide, and the right match depends on motor access, cognitive level, and communication goals. A speech therapy speech therapist with AAC specialization can walk you through the options.

What does the research say about which AAC goals produce the best outcomes?

The honest answer is that AAC outcome research is growing but still has real gaps. Most studies have small sample sizes and short follow-up periods. Here's what the better evidence supports.

Goals that target functional communication in natural settings beat goals built around isolated drill. A systematic review by Schlosser and Wendt in the American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology found that naturalistic instruction produced stronger generalization of AAC use than structured, discrete-trial approaches ^[4].

Goals that include partner training alongside child targets produce better outcomes than child-only goals. When the adults in the child's environment know how to prompt and model AAC use, the child gets thousands more learning opportunities per week than therapy alone can provide.

Early intervention matters. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends developmental surveillance at every well-child visit and standardized screening at 9, 18, and 30 months ^[5]. Children who get communication support earlier tend to do better, and AAC introduced early, even in toddlerhood, does not delay speech development.

The specific vocabulary in the goals matters. Research on core vocabulary consistently shows that a small set of high-frequency words (want, more, go, stop, help, like, that, it) appears across the widest range of communication contexts for young children ^[6]. Goals that prioritize core vocabulary access tend to produce faster functional gains than goals built around fringe vocabulary (object labels tied to one topic).

Nobody has clean data on the best goal intensity or session frequency for AAC learners. The closest large-scale work comes from studies of naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions, which suggest that high-frequency practice embedded across natural routines outperforms massed clinic-based sessions. The research specifically on AAC goal parameters is still catching up.

Frequently asked questions

How many AAC goals should be in an IEP?

Most IEPs include two to five AAC-specific goals, though there's no magic number. The right count depends on the child's current level and how many distinct communication functions need targeted support. More goals don't mean better outcomes. Three well-written, well-supported goals will outperform seven vague ones. Quality and coherence matter more than quantity.

Can parents suggest or request specific AAC goals?

Yes, absolutely. Parents are full members of the IEP team under IDEA and have the right to propose goals, request revisions, and disagree with the team's suggestions. Come to the meeting with a written list of the two or three communication needs you most want addressed. You don't need clinical language. Describe what's happening at home and let the SLP help translate it into goal language.

What is an example of a good AAC goal for a toddler?

A reasonable goal for a two-to-three-year-old just starting with AAC might be: "Given a motivating activity, the child will activate a symbol on their AAC device to request a preferred item, without physical prompting, in three out of five opportunities across two settings, over four consecutive sessions." It's specific, counts something real, and can happen at snack or play time without clinical equipment.

What is aided language stimulation and should it be part of AAC goals?

Aided language stimulation (also called aided language input or modeling) means the adults around the child point to or activate AAC symbols while talking with the child, showing how the device works without requiring the child to respond. Research supports it as one of the most effective supports for AAC learning. Some SLPs now include caregiver or educator modeling targets in the written plan alongside child targets.

How do I know if my child's AAC goals are too easy or too hard?

If the child hits the accuracy target in the first few weeks, the goal was probably set too low. If they're still below 50 percent accuracy at the six-month mark despite consistent practice, either the goal is too hard, the instruction approach needs to change, or the device isn't the right fit. Either situation warrants a conversation with the SLP before the annual review cycle.

Should AAC goals address both school and home environments?

Yes. A goal that only measures performance in one setting doesn't tell you whether the skill has generalized. Strong goals name at least two settings or two communication partners. If the IEP team only writes school-based goals, ask explicitly about home generalization: how will you know the skill is working at home, and who collects that data?

Do AAC goals replace speech therapy goals?

No. AAC goals and speech therapy goals coexist. A child using AAC may have goals targeting natural speech production, oral motor skills, or language development at the same time. AAC supports communication while speech therapy works on the underlying skills. Treating them as alternatives is a mistake. Both can and should appear in the same plan.

What happens when a child outgrows their AAC goals?

When a child consistently hits their accuracy targets ahead of schedule, the team should update the goals without waiting for the annual IEP review. Parents can request a meeting at any time to amend the IEP. Outgrowing goals is a good problem to have. Leaving a child on mastered goals because it's inconvenient to schedule a meeting is a missed opportunity.

Can AAC goals be written for children without a formal diagnosis?

Yes. AAC and AAC goals are appropriate for any child whose communication needs exceed their current expressive abilities, regardless of diagnosis. Under IDEA's Child Find obligation, school districts must identify and evaluate children with potential disabilities regardless of diagnosis status. Privately, an SLP can write AAC goals for any child as long as there's a clinical rationale.

How do AAC goals connect to literacy goals?

For older AAC users, literacy and AAC goals increasingly overlap. A child learning to spell can begin using a keyboard-based AAC approach alongside or instead of symbol-based navigation. Literacy goals that target phonological awareness, letter-sound knowledge, and spelling directly support more flexible AAC use. Light and McNaughton's research at Penn State has documented this connection in depth.

What should I do if the school refuses to include AAC goals in the IEP?

Ask for the refusal in writing and ask the team to document why AAC is not considered necessary. You have the right to request an independent educational evaluation (IEE) at public expense if you disagree with the district's assessment. The Wrightslaw website (wrightslaw.com) has plain-language summaries of parental procedural safeguards under IDEA.

How long does it typically take to achieve an AAC goal?

Timelines vary widely. A simple navigation goal for a child who is cognitively ready might be achieved in six to eight weeks of consistent practice. A complex generalization goal targeting spontaneous commenting across five partners might take a full school year. Honestly, nobody has reliable population-level data on AAC goal timelines. Your child's trajectory depends on the skill, the instruction quality, and practice frequency.

Sources

1. ASHA, Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) Practice Portal: ASHA defines AAC as any approach that supports or replaces natural speech or writing, and lists core communication functions including requesting, rejecting, commenting, and social interaction.
2. U.S. Department of Education, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 34 C.F.R. § 300.320: IDEA requires IEP team composition including parents, teachers, and district representatives, mandates IEP annual review, and requires progress reporting at least as often as for non-disabled peers.
3. Millar, Light, & Schlosser (2006), American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 'The Impact of Augmentative and Alternative Communication Intervention on the Speech Production of Individuals with Developmental Disabilities': The 2006 systematic review found that AAC intervention did not impede natural speech production and in many cases supported it.
4. Schlosser & Wendt (2008), American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 'Effects of Augmentative and Alternative Communication Intervention on Speech Production in Children with Autism': Naturalistic instruction approaches produced stronger generalization of AAC use than structured, discrete-trial approaches.
5. American Academy of Pediatrics, Developmental Surveillance and Screening Policy: AAP recommends developmental surveillance at every well-child visit and standardized screening at 9, 18, and 30 months.
6. Beukelman & Mirenda, Augmentative and Alternative Communication (4th ed.), citing core vocabulary research: A small set of high-frequency core words (want, more, go, stop, help, like, that, it) appears across the widest range of communication contexts for young children.
7. U.S. Department of Education, IDEA Early Intervention (Part C) Overview: Children birth to age 3 with communication needs may have goals in an Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) rather than an IEP.
8. ASHA, AAC Evidence Maps: ASHA evidence maps summarize research on AAC intervention outcomes including partner training and naturalistic instruction.
9. Light & McNaughton (2014), Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 'Communicative Competence for Individuals Who Require AAC': Research documents the connection between literacy skill development and more flexible, independent AAC use in older children.
10. CDC, Learn the Signs. Act Early. Developmental Milestones: Early identification and intervention for communication delays is associated with better long-term outcomes.