Affiliation:
1. University of North Carolina at Pembroke,
2. University of North Carolina at Pembroke
3. The Ohio State University Center for Family Research
Abstract
Goal attainment scaling (GAS) has been considered to be one of the most versatile and appealing evaluation protocols available for human services. Aspects of the protocol that make the method so appealing to practitioners—that is, collaboratively working with individual clients to identify and assign weights to goals they will work to achieve—have produced critical psychometric challenges that have threatened the method's acceptance by funders and researchers. This interrater reliability study of weighted goals contributes to their psychometric validation and therefore to the continued use of a methodology so attractive to practitioners. The subjective clinical impressions of 43 students trained in using GAS has statistically significant scorer reliability. These findings suggest that use of GAS composite scores (weight times the problem level) is a reliable tool and therefore not a reason to discourage the use of GAS as a means for monitoring a client's progress over time.
Subject
Strategy and Management,Sociology and Political Science,Education,Health(social science),Social Psychology,Business and International Management
Cited by
15 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献