anirudh4792
commented
6 years ago Since we have a negative likert scale, I feel -2 indicates undesirable and 2 indicates highly desirable which is judmental. This is totally not the case as behaviours can be good or bad depending on the context. I feel these numbers must be replaced with variables, smileys or symbols.
BS had an evaluation form for each child to be filled after every session
1 - Never | 2 - Very little | 3 - Sometimes | 4 - Most of time | 5 - Always for able to follow instructions, attentiveness, sportsmanship, cognitive flooding, and uses strategies.
Take attentiveness for example - we had to justify giving a score (eg 4) with different reasons. The idea of one number representing all these reasons is not ideal. Next time, the reasons may be different and these cannot be represented/changes reflected by a number. if the game is different that needs more attention or the child was thirsty, did not get water and hence was inattentive etc...
I believe a number should be given, but some complementary qualitative data must be present to complement it.
Relevance in our questionnaire - eg attention to detail -2=Does not attend to any details (eg in all objects of disinterest) < -1 =does not attend to some details (ADHD forgets cc’ing people in emails) < 0= attends to detail consistently across different situations < 1= does attend to some details < 2=does not stop attending to all details (keeps staring at the object of interest)
a parent could select 2, and proceed to select example behaviors of 2 (that we will add) in a drop-down menu if relevant. If not, she would add a behavior.
eg - she does not find keeps staring at maps as an option and she adds it.