Follow Multi-Step Classroom Directions
Follow novel 2- and 3-step directions delivered in classroom routines without requesting repetition, supporting access to grade-level instruction.
The Four Questions
Full Goal
Given novel 2- to 3-step verbal directions presented once during typical classroom routines (no rote scripts), [Student] will complete each step in the order presented in 4 of 5 opportunities across 3 consecutive data days, as measured by SLP and/or teacher observation and tally data.
Individualization Guidance
Before using this goal, verify:
- “Novel” is doing work in this goal. Repeated daily routines (line up, pack up, get your folder) can be followed via context, not language comprehension. Directions sampled for data must be novel — directions the student has not heard verbatim before.
- Working memory vs. linguistic comprehension. A student who follows the first and last step but skips the middle may have a working-memory load issue, not a comprehension issue. Adjust by varying step count, not by re-teaching vocabulary.
- Concept and vocabulary baseline. If the directions contain spatial concepts (before/after, between) or temporal markers (after you finish), test those receptively first. A “failed direction” caused by an unknown spatial concept tells you something different than a sequencing failure.
- One verbal model only. Do not allow re-reads when probing for data. Re-reads convert this into a “follow directions with maximum support” goal.
- Multilingual learners. If the student’s home language is not English, distinguish English language acquisition from a disorder. CATALISE recommends ruling out exposure factors before identifying DLD.
Clinical Notes
The single-presentation condition is the hardest and most consequential decision in this goal. In a real classroom, teachers rarely repeat directions verbatim — the student either tracks the first delivery or falls behind. Allowing repetitions in probes inflates accuracy and masks the functional problem.
Use directions with similar syntactic and vocabulary complexity to classroom instructions, sampled from actual lesson plans when possible. Keep the directions content-neutral so you’re measuring comprehension, not knowledge.
The 4-of-5 criterion across 3 days is defensible for an IEP and gives you enough samples to detect day-to-day variability — common in students with DLD, attentional differences, or sleep/sensory regulation issues.
Related Goals
- WH-Question Comprehension from Narratives — a comprehension-monitoring goal at the discourse level
Evidence Base
- ASHA Practice Portal: Spoken Language Disorders
- Bishop, D.V.M., et al. (2017). Phase 2 of CATALISE: a multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study of problems with language development: Terminology. JCPP, 58(10).
- Owens, R.E. (2020). Language Development: An Introduction (10th ed.). Pearson.
- Montgomery, J.W. (2003). Working memory and comprehension in children with SLI. JCD, 36(3).
- IDEA (34 C.F.R. § 300.320) — IEP measurability requirements