The study assessed the effects of alternative goal structures within curriculum based assessment (CBA) in the area of math. Subjects were 30 elementary level special education teachers, assigned randomly to a dynamic goal CBA, static goal CBA, or control group for 15 weeks. Two pupils in each class were identified to evaluate the effects of the instructional intervention. In the dynamic goal condition, teachers employed CBA, and (1) modified instructional programs when student progress fell below expectations and (2) increased goals when student progress exceeded expectations. In the static goal condition, teachers employed CBA and modified programs when progress was below expectations, but did not systematically increase goals in response to progress that exceeded anticipated improvement rates. Multivariate analyses of variance conducted on fidelity of treatment measures indicated that dynamic goal teachers increased goals more frequently and, by the study's completion, employed more ambitious goals. Multivariate analyses of covariance indicated that students in the dynamic goal group had better content mastery than control students, whereas students in the static goal group did not. Content coverage for the three groups was comparable. Implications for instructional goal-setting practice are discussed. (Author/DB)