SMART VS SCRUFFY Targets for SLD & PMLD Learners

In the quiet corners of special education classrooms, a quiet revolution is taking place. For decades, teachers have been told that for a goal to be valid, it must be “SMART.” We’ve all sat in meetings, squinting at a screen, trying to make a child’s blossoming awareness of the world fit into a box that is Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Time-bound. But if you have spent any time with learners who have Severe Learning Difficulties (SLD) or Profound and Multiple Learning Difficulties (PMLD), you’ll know that their progress rarely follows a straight line.

Honestly, applying corporate management strategies from the 1980s to a child with complex sensory needs feels a bit like trying to measure the beauty of a sunset with a plastic ruler. It just doesn’t work. This is where the “SCRUFFY” approach comes in, a model that prioritizes the “unfolding” of a human being over the “ticking” of a checklist.

The Tension in Target Setting: Goals vs. Growth

The SMART model was never meant for education. It was born in the world of business (Doran, 1981) to ensure projects stayed on track. In a school setting, it demands that we predict exactly what a child will do and when they will do it. But as the late Penny Lacey famously argued, learners with complex needs are often “poor consumers” of SMART targets. They don’t care about our three-month deadlines or our desire for 80% accuracy.

Think of it this way: a SMART target is like scoring a goal. You know exactly when it happens, everyone cheers, and the data is clear. A SCRUFFY target, however, is like planting a seed. You prepare the soil, you provide the water and light, and then you wait. You don’t know exactly when the first sprout will appear, or what shape the leaves will take, but you are fostering growth nonetheless.

The Case for SMART Targets: Is There a Place for the Goalposts?

It is easy to bash the SMART model, but it isn’t entirely without merit. For certain skills, it provides a much-needed map.

The Pros: Clarity and Accountability

When a child needs to learn a specific, functional “chain” of actions, like washing their hands or using a BigMack switch to request a drink—SMART targets offer clarity. They help staff know exactly what they are practicing. “Joe will press the switch 3 times during snack time” is an easy instruction for a teaching assistant to follow. Furthermore, we live in a world of inspections and statutory requirements. Quantitative data, those lovely little ticks, make for very tidy reports for governors and inspectors.

The Cons: The “Blinkered” Teacher

The problem is that specificity often leads to tunnel vision. If a teacher is laser-focused on a student reaching out for a ball four times, they might miss the fact that the student just made eye contact for the first time in a week, or smiled at a peer. These “sparkly moments” are often the most significant signs of progress, but because they aren’t on the SMART sheet, they go unrecorded.

We also see a high failure rate here. Our cupboards are littered with discarded SMART targets that were “too specific” to be reached, leading to a cycle of downgrading goals until they become meaningless. It’s a deficit model, focusing on what the child can’t do yet, rather than what they are doing.

A visual comparison of the SMART vs. SCRUFFY approaches, illustrating the differences in goal-setting for complex learners. The SMART approach is likened to scoring a goal, while the SCRUFFY approach is compared to planting a seed, emphasizing growth and student-led learning.

Embracing the SCRUFFY: Student-Led and Unspecified

If SMART is the rigid ruler, SCRUFFY is the open hand. SCRUFFY stands for Student-led, Creative, Relevant, Unspecified, Fun, and For Youngsters (or those who are developmentally young).

Why Scruffy Works: Following the Learner

By keeping targets “unspecified,” we shift the power. Instead of “doing to” the child, we are “working with” them. If a learner shows a sudden interest in the way light reflects off a silver blanket, a SCRUFFY approach allows the teacher to abandon the “scheduled” activity and follow that spark. This is where deep engagement happens.

It also solves the problem of generalization. A SMART target might only be practiced at 2 PM in the sensory room. A SCRUFFY “learning intention”, such as “encouraging independent movement”, can be seized a dozen times a day: in the pool, at the dinner table, or during a transition in the hallway.

The Hurdles: It’s Not “Easier”

Let’s be real: SCRUFFY targets can be an administrative headache. It requires much more creativity from staff to document a “sparkly moment” than it does to put a cross in a box. Some staff feel exposed without a prescriptive plan. They ask, “What am I supposed to actually do?” It takes a high level of professional confidence to stand in a room and say, “I am following the child’s lead,” rather than “I am completing task A.”

Process vs. Product: A Pedagogical Shift

The debate isn’t just about paperwork; it’s about how we view the human brain. SMART targets assume learning is linear, that you learn step 1, then step 2, then step 3. But for a learner with PMLD, learning is often lateral. They might gain fluency in a skill they already have, or learn to do it in a new place, or with a new person.

Feature	SMART Approach	SCRUFFY Approach
Learning Path	Linear (Step-by-step)	Lateral (Expanding/Deepening)
Focus	The Product (The cake)	The Process (The baking)
Motivation	External (Teacher-led)	Internal (Student-led)
Measurement	Quantitative (How many times?)	Qualitative (How well?)

When we bake a cake with an SLD learner, the “product” (the cake) is almost irrelevant. The “process”, the smell of the flour, the coldness of the egg, the vibration of the whisk, is where the learning lives. SCRUFFY targets embrace this “process-based” curriculum. They focus on agency, well-being, and communication, things that are notoriously hard to measure but are the bedrock of a good life.

Assessment: Making the “Unmeasurable” Visible

How do we prove progress if we aren’t ticking boxes? Thankfully, tools like Routes for Learning (RfL) and MAPP (Mapping and Assessing Personal Progress) have blazed a trail here.

MAPP, for instance, doesn’t look at whether a child “passed” a target. It looks at four key areas of lateral progress:

Independence: Do they need less help?
Fluency: Are they getting smoother and faster?
Maintenance: Can they still do it next week?
Generalization: Can they do it in the gym as well as the classroom?

In this world, evidence is a Post-it note stuck to a wall, a 10-second video of a smile, or an observation of a student finally showing “contingency awareness” (the “aha!” moment where they realize their action caused a reaction).

Reframing the “Specific”

Here is a thought: maybe we’ve been making the wrong things specific. In the SCERTS model, the focus is often on “transactional supports.” Instead of making a target for what the child must do, we make a target for what the environment or the adult must do.

Instead of: “Joe will sit for 5 minutes.”

We try: “Staff will provide a weighted lap pad and a visual timer to support Joe’s regulation.”

We measure our success by how well we adapted the world to fit the child. If the environment is right, the “unfurling” happens naturally.

Conclusion: Finding the Balance

So, is SMART “stupid”? Not necessarily. If I’m teaching a student to use a specialist piece of equipment or a safety skill, I want a bit of SMART. I want to know they can do it. But for the vast majority of our work in complex needs—the communication, the joy, the discovery—SMART is a cage.

We need to move away from an assessment-driven curriculum where the “data cart” is driving the “learner horse.” Our ultimate goal is to improve the quality of life for our students. Sometimes that means setting a goal and scoring it. But more often than not, it means planting a seed, stepping back, and being ready to celebrate whatever beautiful, scruffy thing grows.

Appendix: The Master SCRUFFY Target Bank

100+ Learning Intentions for Complex Learners, English: Communication, Literacy, and Meaning

Use a consistent vocalization to signal more during a sensory story.
Track the movement of a story prop across a 180-degree field.
Show awareness of a familiar partner entering the personal space.
Turn a page in a book using a whole-hand sweep or finger pincer.
Use a rejection signal to stop an unwanted sensory experience.
Orient toward the source of a sudden, meaningful sound.
Sustain eye-to-eye contact during an intensive interaction session.
Use a reach or point to request a desired object during snack.
Demonstrate contingency awareness by pausing for a reaction after an action.
Respond to their own name through a change in body language or stillness.
Show joint attention by looking at an object an adult is holding.
Use a transitional object to understand the next part of the routine.
Demonstrate anticipatory excitement during a familiar song or rhyme.
Use intentional touch to gain an adult’s attention.
Differentiate between yes and no through facial expressions or head shifts.
Respond to symbolic communication using Objects of Reference.
Imitate a simple motor action like clapping or waving.
Use a distress signal that is recognizable to familiar staff.
Show a preference for one person over another in a social choice.
Participate in a shared gaze during a sensory story.
Focus on a high-contrast image or symbol for three seconds.
Locate a specific symbol on a communication board of two.
Use an alternative communication method to greet a peer.
Explore the texture of a tactile book or story massage.
Indicate the end of an activity by pushing a resource away.

Maths: Cognition, Number, and Problem Solving

Explore the physical properties of a hidden object.
Demonstrate object permanence by looking for a toy that has been covered.
Discover cause and effect through the use of a mechanical toy.
Use an intermediary like a string to pull an object closer.
Problem-solve when a familiar routine is slightly changed.
Show sustained concentration on a self-chosen manipulative task.
Categorize objects by a single sensory trait like temperature or weight.
Demonstrate spatial awareness by reaching for objects at different distances.
Recognize a pattern in a light or sound sequence.
Use a switch to activate a reward in a variety of settings.
Show curiosity by approaching a novel or strange object.
Demonstrate memory by anticipating the end of a familiar sequence.
Explore quantity by noticing when an item is removed from a small group.
Use trial and error to fit a shape into a container or puzzle.
Differentiate between one and lots using sensory containers.
Demonstrate intentionality by repeating a movement that produced a result.
Transfer a skill from a 1:1 setting to a small group setting.
Demonstrate self-correction during a building or stacking task.
Sequence two events such as wash hands then eat.
Explore size through the use of nested containers or Russian dolls.
Locate a sound source in a room of multiple distractions.
Group objects that feel the same, such as all the soft items.
Wait for a count of three before initiating a movement.
Recognize a specific item is missing from a familiar set.
Match two identical objects from a choice of three.

Sensory and Physical

Tolerate hand-under-hand support during a tactile activity.
Maintain a head position independently for a short duration.
Use bilateral coordination to explore a large, heavy object.
Tolerate different textures on the palms of the hands.
Demonstrate purposeful grasping and releasing of an object.
Use proprioceptive input like pushing or pulling to self-regulate.
Tolerate vestibular movement like rocking or swinging without distress.
Show visual discrimination between two high-contrast images.
Use fine motor control to pincer-grip a small item.
Track a moving light source in a darkened room.
Tolerate auditory stimuli of varying volumes and pitches.
Use weight-bearing through the arms or legs during play.
Demonstrate independent sitting balance for a short duration.
Reach across the midline to grab a desired toy.
Tolerate smell and taste variations during food exploration.
Use isolated finger movements such as poking a bubble.
Demonstrate body mapped awareness of their own feet or hands.
Stiffen or relax muscles in response to a physical prompt.
Use scanning to find a specific item on a cluttered tray.
Participate in coactive movement by moving in sync with an adult.

Self-Care and Independence

Cooperate with dressing by extending a limb or pushing through a sleeve.
Use a spoon to bring food to the mouth with minimal support.
Signal a dirty or wet nappy through vocalization or gesture.
Locate their own bag or coat in a familiar space.
Participate in wiping their own face or hands after a meal.
Choose between two clothing items or bibs.
Wait for a short period before a reward is provided.
Help with the transition from a wheelchair to a standing frame.
Identify their own cup from a small selection.
Open a simple container using a Velcro tab or lid.
Pour liquid into a bowl with adult support.
Chew or move food in the mouth effectively.
Sip from a cup with minimal spillage.
Indicate hunger or thirst before a meal is presented.
Tolerate a toothbrush or oral swab in the mouth.
Push a sleeve up or down during hand washing.
Navigate a familiar corridor with minimal physical guidance.
Use a bin to dispose of a piece of rubbish after a snack.
Participate in the pack away song by touching a toy.
Demonstrate an awareness of hot and cold during hygiene routines.

Social, Emotional, and Wellbeing

Express joy or excitement through a distinct body movement.
Self-soothe using a preferred sensory toy or blanket.
Show empathy by noticing and reacting to a peer’s distress.
Participate in a group hello circle for the duration of the song.
Accept the presence of a peer in their personal space.
Engage in parallel play alongside another student.
Tolerate a change in the adult supporting them.
Show pride in an achievement through eye contact or a smile.
Express a clear preference for a specific activity.
Remain regulated during a high-energy messy play session.
Wait their turn in a simple game of catch or balloon play.
Recognize familiar staff from a distance across a room.
Seek comfort from a trusted adult when upset or tired.
Show awareness of the mood of a room or the tone of a voice.
Engage with their own reflection in a mirror for five seconds.
Demonstrate agency by choosing to leave an activity or area.
Participate in a relaxation or mindfulness session.
Show interest in the achievements of others by clapping or looking.
Tolerate being watched by others while performing a task.
Demonstrate a sense of belonging by touching a group unity object.

Implementing the Bank

When you use these, the goal is to observe the nature of the achievement. If Joe “tracks a movement” (Target 2), we don’t just say he did it. We note if he was more fluid, if he did it without a verbal prompt, or if he did it in the noisy hall instead of the quiet room. That is where the real progress lives.

Imray, P. (2013) ‘Alternatives to assessment and pupil progress indicators to the P scales for pupils and students with SLD or PMLD’, The SLD Experience, 67, pp. 7–16.

Imray, P. (2025) Are SMART targets smart or stupid?. Newcastle: Equals

Lacey, P. (2010) ‘Smart and Scruffy Targets’, The SLD Experience, 57, pp. 16–21

Prizant, B.M., Wetherby, A.M., Rubin, E., Laurent, A.C. and Rydell, P.J. (2006) The SCERTS™ Model: A Comprehensive Educational Approach for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Baltimore: Brookes Publishing Company.

Quibell, J. (2015) ‘Implementation of Routes for Learning and SCRUFFY Target setting’, PMLD Link, 27(2), pp. 30–32

Sissons, M. (2010) MAPP: Mapping and Assessing Personal Progress. North Allerton: The Dales School

Planting Seeds vs. Scoring Goals: The Debate Between SMART and SCRUFFY Targets for SLD and PMLD Learners