Are Eye Contact Goals Ethical? A Social Significance Check for BCBAs

Most eye contact targets we write are not for the kid. They are the last surviving piece of an older goal: making the learner indistinguishable from neurotypical peers. That is the framing the field has to walk away from. A Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA) writing a goal today has better questions to ask. The clean replacement pattern is the same one Kaelynn Partlow uses for any skill that feels like it lives at the wrong level: we do not have to teach a kid to dribble a basketball if we can teach them to be coachable. The eye contact version is the same. We almost never need to teach face-looking. We need to teach the learner a way to show a partner they are listening, in a way that partner can read.

That is the whole position. The rest of this page is the work behind it.

Where the eye contact goal came from (and the quiet part it said out loud)#

For a long time, our coursework treated "looks like a typical peer" as a respectable outcome. That is the part that gets quoted on social media now, and for good reason. Kaelynn names it in the talk:

When I was in coursework, we still had all that lovely language about, you know, so and so will accomplish what percentage of this assessment to be indistinguishable from neurotypical peers, right? We're way past that. We know better than that. From the talk — Kaelynn Partlow

Eye contact is the cleanest example of a goal that came from that older framing. It was rarely the kid's idea. It was rarely the parent's top priority either, once you asked them what they actually wanted. It was a behavior the adult world recognized as "paying attention," so we kept writing it long after we should have stopped. The goal said the quiet part out loud: we wanted the kid to look like the other kids.

That is the part to retire. The skill underneath it, showing attention in a way a partner can read, is still real, and we will get to how to write that.

The one question that flunks most eye contact targets#

Kaelynn's filter for any goal is short. Why is this skill important, and how will having it directly correspond to improving the client's quality of life. That is it. Run an eye contact target through it and almost every version fails.

If the answer is "so the kid looks more typical," the goal does not pass. If the answer is "so the teacher knows they are listening," the goal you actually want is "show a teacher you are listening," and there are five ways to do that without faces. If the answer is "so the parent feels less judged in public," that is a real problem, but it is not the kid's goal. It is a family support conversation.

Here is the line from the talk that I keep coming back to when a target feels like it is there to close a gap with peers instead of to help the kid:

Why is this skill important? How will having this skill directly correspond to improving the client's quality of life? I do not believe that it is ethical or effective to play the catch-up game with any of our neurodivergent learners, but especially those with profound disabilities. From the talk — Kaelynn Partlow

A "catch-up" goal is a goal you wrote because the assessment had a box for it and the kid did not have the box checked. Eye contact is almost always one of those boxes. That is not enough reason to teach it.

What the goal is usually trying to fix (and how to write that instead)#

When a team asks for an eye contact goal, the real concern is almost always one of these:

• The learner does not respond when their name is called.
• The teacher cannot tell when the learner is ready to start.
• A partner cannot tell when the learner is paying attention to them.
• The learner has trouble keeping a back-and-forth going with a peer.

Each of those has a cleaner goal that does not require the kid to look at a face. Responding to your name is its own target, and it can be taught with any response the learner already has, a head turn, a sound, a tap on the table. "Show me you are ready" can be a thumbs up, a card flip, a sound. Joint attention with a partner can be taught around a shared object, where both people are looking at the toy, not at each other.

The pattern Kaelynn uses to replace any too-narrow goal is the same pattern that works here:

We do not have to teach them to dribble a basketball if we can teach them to be coachable. We may not need to work on figures of speech if we can give them the skills to ask for clarification or how to Google an answer or how to play along. From the talk — Kaelynn Partlow

So for eye contact, the replacement is not "look at faces." It is "show a partner you are with them." The form is up to the learner. The function is the same. That is the goal that actually moves quality of life.

How to handle the parent who lists eye contact as the #1 priority#

This one is delicate. A parent puts "eye contact" at the top because they have been told, often for years, that it is how you know a kid is paying attention. They are not wrong to want their kid to connect with people. They are using the only word the system gave them.

The move is to back up from the goal to the value. Ask why eye contact matters to them, in their own words. Most of the time, the answer is some version of "I want her to be able to connect with people" or "I want him to be able to keep a friend." Those are real values. Eye contact is one tiny, optional ingredient in either.

Then offer the same value with a goal that does the work. "He shows a friend he is listening" is a goal that survives the social significance test. It includes face looks if the kid wants to. It includes a body lean, a verbal "yeah," a hand on the shoulder. It is taught in real interactions, not at a table. And it generalizes, because it was never tied to one form.

When you talk with the family, name the trade. Time on a goal is time that is not on something else. Working on a face-look skill that the kid may never use eats hours that could go to a skill they will use every day. Most parents will pick the second one if you give them the choice in plain language.

The IEP version: what to put in writing when the school asks for it#

Schools ask for eye contact targets for the same reason families do, and for one extra reason: the prior IEP had one. The fastest way to drop it without a fight is to replace it with a goal that solves the actual classroom problem.

A few replacement patterns that work in writing:

• "When the teacher calls his name, the learner will orient toward the teacher (turn, look toward, or respond verbally) within 5 seconds, across 4 of 5 opportunities, in 3 consecutive sessions."
• "During small group, the learner will signal readiness to start a task (raise hand, thumbs up, verbal 'ready') within 10 seconds of a group cue."
• "During a partner activity, the learner will show attention to the partner (verbal acknowledgement, body orientation, or response to partner's statement) on 80% of partner turns."

Notice what is missing. The word "eye." None of these require a face look. All of them can be measured. All of them survive a parent reading them out loud. And all of them produce the actual classroom behavior the teacher was trying to get when she asked for eye contact.

A sample replacement goal you can adapt this week#

Here is a starter you can pull into a treatment plan. Adapt the form and the criterion to the learner.

Skill area: Showing attention to a social partner.

Goal: During a structured social activity with a familiar peer or adult, the learner will signal attention to the partner across at least three of the following modalities: orienting body toward partner, verbal acknowledgement, responding to partner's question or comment, or sharing attention to a joint object. Criterion: at least one signal on 80% of partner turns, across two activities, three settings, over three consecutive sessions.

Why it works: The form is flexible. The function is clear. The criterion measures the behavior the partner can actually use. It passes Kaelynn's filter because the skill directly improves the learner's quality of life, the partner can read it, and it generalizes outside of a teaching table.

That is the goal that replaces eye contact. Not "look at face." "Show me you are with me."

Frequently asked questions#

Can I ever ethically include eye contact in a goal?

Yes, if the learner has told you it is something they want and if the form of the goal is the learner's idea. A teen who says she wants to get better at dating and asks for help with looking at her date during dinner has just chosen the goal. That is different from a four-year-old who has had a face-look target on her plan for two years because the assessment said so. Learner assent is the line.

What do I do if the parent insists on eye contact as the priority?

Back up to the value, then offer a replacement goal that meets that value better. Most parents who insist on eye contact actually want connection, attention, or a smoother classroom. Each of those has a goal that does the job without a face-look target. Give them the choice in plain language and most will pick the goal that does the work.

Is teaching "look toward the speaker" the same thing as teaching eye contact?

It is closer to the right goal, but it is still narrower than it needs to be. "Show the speaker you are listening" is the version that holds up. It includes a head turn for the learner who can do that comfortably, and it includes a verbal acknowledgement or a body lean for the learner who cannot. Same function. Wider form. That is the one to write.

If this is the kind of goal-writing call you make a lot, the full talk is the best hour you can spend on it. Kaelynn walks through three case examples in real time and shows the exact filter she uses on each goal.

Watch the full session on openceu.com