 |
 |
 |
 |
    |
 |
 | |
Nurture
Measures
| Name: | Adolescentís Participation in Activities with Parents Scale |
| Reference: | Touliatos, J., Perlmutter, B.F., & Straus, M. A. (Eds.). (1990). Handbook of family measurement techniques. London: Sage. |
| Target Audience: | Children and adolescents |
| Abstract: | This is a six-point, six-item Likert-type questionnaire designed to examine the amount of time the pre-adolescent or adolescent spends with his or her parent in educational or recreational activities. |
| Administration: | This is a self-test with separate forms for evaluating time spent with either mother or father. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Not available |
| Date: | 1987 |
| Psychometrics: | Internal consistency is .68. Individual item correlations range from .39 to .52. |
| Subscales: | Not available |
| Cost: | Not available |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | This is a short questionnaire that could be useful in assessing children's perceptions of how much and what kind of activities they do with their parents or primary care provider. |
| Conditions for utilization: | Not available |
| Name: | Adult-Adolescent Parenting Inventory (AAPI) |
| Reference: | Demo, D. H., Small, S.A., & Savin-Williams, R.C. (1987).
Family relationships and the self-esteem of adolescents and their
parents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 49, 705-715. Touliatos, J., Perlmutter, B.F., & Straus, M. A. (Eds.). (1990). Handbook of family measurement techniques. London: Sage. |
| Target Audience: | Adult and adolescent parents |
| Abstract: | This is a 32-item 5-point Likert-type scale designed to assess the child rearing attitudes of parents and identify those who might be at risk for abusive behavior toward their children. |
| Administration: | This is a self-test that can be administered in groups or individually. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Scores can be obtained to provide index of risk for abusive and neglectful parenting. Child rearing behavior scores can be compared to responses of known abusive or abused adolescents. |
| Date: | 1986 |
| Psychometrics: | Not available |
| Subscales: | Inappropriate expectations of children, empathic awareness of childrenís needs, belief in the use of physical punishment, family role reversal. |
| Cost: | $57.50 for complete kit |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | Not available |
| Conditions for utilization: | The AAPI is used in research as a measure of parenting attitudes. It is also used as an evaluation tool with the companion curriculum: The Nurturing Program. |
| Name: | Child Behavior Checklist |
| Reference: | Benasich, A. A., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (1996). Maternal
attitudes and knowledge of child-rearing: Associations with family and
child outcomes. Child Development, 67, 1186-1205. Conoley, J.C., & Kramer, J.J. (Eds.). (1989). The tenth mental measurement yearbook. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. CYFERNet: http://www.cyfernet.org Promoting Family Strength. Murphy, L.L., Conoley, J.C., & Impara, J.C. (Eds.). (1994). Test in print IV: an index to tests, test reviews, and the literature on specific tests. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. |
| Target Audience: | Children ages 2-3, 4-18, 11-18, 5-14, and 6-12 |
| Abstract: | The purpose is to assess the competencies and problems of children and adolescents through the use of ratings and reports by different informants. |
| Administration: | The test can either be self-administered or interview-administered except the direct observation form. The procedure takes approximately 15 minutes. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Scores can be obtained for each subscale plus a family average and a family incongruence score can be scored. |
| Date: | 1980-1994 |
| Psychometrics: | The test has good test and retest reliability, and stability reliability. Studies have reported construct and criterion validity of the test. |
| Subscales: | The instrument has five parts: a. Child Behavior Checklist: ages 2-3: withdrawn, anxious/depressed, sleep problems, somatic problems, aggressive, destructive; boys 4-18 and girls 4-18: Syndrome scales (withdrawn, somatic complaints, anxious/depressed, social problems, thought problems, attention problems, aggressive behavior, delinquent behavior), plus internalizing externalizing, total problems, competence scales (activities, social, school, total competence). b. Teacherís Report Form: boys age 5-18 and girls age 5-18: same as above plus academic performance and adaptive functioning. c. Youth Self-Report: same as Child Behavior Checklist ages 4-18. d. Direct Observation Form: ages 5-14: behavior problems, internalizing, externalizing, withdrawn-inattentive, nervous-obsessive, depressed, hyperactive, attention-demanding, aggressive, on-task behavior. e. Semi-Structured Clinical Interview for Children and Adolescents: age 6-12: aggressive behavior, anxious, anxious/depressed, attention problems, family problems, resistant, strange, withdrawn. |
| Cost: | $10.00 for 25 profiles of any form. $25.00 for manuals. |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | This instrument received two positive reviews in the Mental Measurement Index. The test measures childrenís competencies and behavior problems, is easily administered, and includes a well-written manual. The major disadvantage is that the nature of the instrument is parent self-report which is subjective. However, cross testing with other components of the test, such as direct observation, may help overcome this criticism of the instrument. |
| Conditions for utilization: | Not available. |
| Name: | Child Rearing Practices Report |
| Reference: | Block, J.H. (1972). Generational continuity and discontinuity in
the understanding of societal rejection. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 22 (3), 333-345. Costos, D. (1986). Sex role identity in young adults: Its parental antecedents and relation to ego development. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50 (3), 602-611. Gjerde, P.F. (1988). Parental concordance on child rearing and the interactive emphases of parents: Sex-differentiated relationships during the preschool years. Developmental Psychology, 24 (5), 700-706. Touliatos, J., Perlmutter, B.F., & Straus, M. A. (Eds.). (1990). Handbook of family measurement techniques. London: Sage. |
| Target Audience: | Parents and their adolescent or young adult children |
| Abstract: | This is a 91-item Q sort with two forms. Form one is for parents to rate the amount that phrases describe themselves. Form two is for adolescents and young adults to rate the amount that phrases describe their parent(s). The CRPR is designed to measure child rearing orientations and values. |
| Administration: | Participants sort descriptions into seven piles ranging from most descriptive to most undescriptive. The typical time for completion is 30 to 40 minutes. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Not available |
| Date: | 1965 |
| Psychometrics: | Test-retest reliability scores ranges from .61 to .71. |
| Subscales: | Not available |
| Cost: | Not available |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | Not available |
| Conditions for utilization: | Not available |
| Name: | Closeness to Parent |
| Reference: | Bowerman, C. E., & Irishs, D. P. (1962). Some relationships
of stepchildren to their parents. Marriage and Family Living, 24,
113-121. Coleman, M., & Ganong, L.H. (1984). Effect of family structure on family attitudes and expectations. Family Relations, 33, 425-432. Touliatos, J., Perlmutter, B.F., & Straus, M. A. (Eds.). (1990). Handbook of family measurement techniques. London: Sage. |
| Target Audience: | Children |
| Abstract: | This is a five-item questionnaire in which children rate their parent or primary caregiver. A three-point Likert-type scale is used. Four of the items measure the frequency that a relationship occurs. The fifth item measures the childís perception of the closeness of the relationship. |
| Administration: | This is a self-test report. It can be administered to a group or individual. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Not available |
| Date: | 1962 |
| Psychometrics: | Not available |
| Subscales: | None |
| Cost: | Not available |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | This test is applicable to varying family situations and is easy to administer since it only has five questions. |
| Conditions for utilization: | Not available |
| Name: | Dyadic Parent-Child Interaction Coding System: a manual |
| Reference: | Conoley, J.C., & Kramer, J.J. (Eds.). (1989). The tenth
mental measurement yearbook. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press.
CYFERNet: http://www.cyfernet.mes.umn.edu:2400 Promoting Family Strength. Touliatos, J., Perlmutter, B.F., & Straus, M. A. (Eds.). (1990). Handbook of family measurement techniques. London: Sage. |
| Target Audience: | Children ages 2-7 and their parents |
| Abstract: | The manual describes a system for coding parent-child interaction in a clinical setting. The coding system is most appropriate for children referred for conduct disorder. |
| Administration: | The parent and child are observed in a clinical setting for 15 minutes. The first five minutes are child-directed interaction, the next five minutes are parent-directed interaction, and the last five minutes, the dyad are involved in cleaning up. |
| How results can be analyzed: | The manual provides descriptions of behavior types for scoring. |
| Date: | 1981 |
| Psychometrics: | Data on reliability and validity are limited. Interrater reliability rates range from .65 to 1.00. |
| Subscales: | Child-directed interaction, parent-directed interaction |
| Cost: | $14.00 per manual |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | Psychometric data are limited. The system is designed for clinical evaluation which may differ from behavioral observations in the home. |
| Conditions for utilization: | This is designed for use as a screening and treatment assessment procedure. |
| Name: | FACES III (Family Adaptation and Cohesion Evaluation Scales) |
| Reference: | Conoley, J.C., & Kramer, J.J. (Eds.). (1989). The tenth
mental measurement yearbook. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press. CYFERNet: http://www.cyfernet.org Promoting Family Strength. Murphy, L.L., Conoley, J.C., & Impara, J.C. (Eds.). (1994). Test in print IV: an index to tests, test reviews, and the literature on specific tests. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. |
| Target Audience: | Families |
| Abstract: | This measure is designed to assess the family structure of all types of families, those with children and those without. The factors measured are emotional bonding, supportiveness, family boundaries, time and friends, interests and recreation, leadership, control, discipline, roles and rules. |
| Administration: | This is a self-report instrument that can be administered in groups. The approximate time to complete is 15 minutes. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Not available |
| Date: | 1985 |
| Psychometrics: | Not available |
| Subscales: | This instrument has two subscales: Family Cohesion and Family Adaptability |
| Cost: | $30 per set of inventory materials |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | Not available |
| Conditions for utilization: | Not available |
| Name: | Family Environment Scale (FES) |
| Reference: | Conoley, J.C., & Kramer, J.J. (Eds.). (1989). The tenth mental measurement yearbook. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. |
| Target Audience: | Adult and adolescent family members |
| Abstract: | This scale has 90 items with true false answers. It is designed to measure the social environment characteristics of all families. The 10 subscales cover three domains: relationship, personal growth, and system maintenance. |
| Administration: | The FES can be administered to individuals or small groups either orally or self-test. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Scores can be obtained for each subscale plus a family average and a family incongruence score can be scored. |
| Date: | 1974-1986 |
| Psychometrics: | Internal consistency scores for subscales range from .61 to .78. Eight-week test-retest scores ranges from .68 to .86. Twelve-month stability rates range from .52 to .89. Only face validity had been reported thus far. |
| Subscales: | This instrument has ten subscales: Cohesion, Expressiveness, Conflict, Independence, Achievement Orientation, Intellectual-Cultural Orientation, Active-Recreational Orientation, Moral-Religious Emphasis, Organization, and Control. |
| Cost: | $15-$16 for test booklets; $10-$15 for answer sheets. |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | This instrument is good for assessing the social properties of individual families. It is not appropriate for making comparisons or judgments between families. |
| Conditions for utilization: | Because of limited proof of validity, this measure is recommended for use in assessing individual families, but it should not be used to compare families. |
| Name: | Family Environment Scale: Childrenís Version |
| Reference: | Conoley, J.C., & Kramer, J.J. (Eds.). (1989). The tenth
mental measurement yearbook. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press. Murphy, L.L., Conoley, J.C., & Impara, J.C. (Eds.). (1994). Test in print IV: an index to tests, test reviews, and the literature on specific tests. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. |
| Target Audience: | Ages 5-12 |
| Abstract: | The Childrenís Version of The Family Environment Scale is designed to be used with the Family Environment Scale. It is intended for use as a tool for assessing childrenís perceptions of their family functioning across the dimensions of relationship, personal growth, and system maintenance. |
| Administration: | This is a 30-item pictorial test. It requires a third grade reading level because the pictures contain words which must be read to be understood. The test is designed for group administration. With children under third grade the test should be individually administered. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Not available |
| Date: | 1984-1987 |
| Psychometrics: | The test-retest reliability is .80 for the whole test. The content validity of the test has yet to be clearly reported. |
| Subscales: | Cohesion, Expressiveness, Conflict, Independence, Achievement Orientation, Intellectual-Cultural Orientation, Active-Recreational Orientation, Moral-Religious Emphasis,, Organization, Control. |
| Cost: | Not Available |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | This instrument is useful for cross referencing with adult and adolescent responses on the FES. It may be useful in program evaluation since the authors intended it for use with a program of family enrichment which they developed. The limitations to reliability and validity at this point are a disadvantage. The test is also difficult to score. The test is biased toward two parent families (i.e., all the pictures depict families with two parents). Also, the test is harder to administer to children without a third grade reading level because some of the questions depend on reading ability. |
| Conditions for utilization: | Best for use in feedback on family therapy. |
| Name: | Family Relations Test (FRT): Childrenís Version |
| Reference: | Conoley, J.C., & Kramer, J.J. (Eds.). (1989). The tenth
mental measurement yearbook. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press. Murphy, L.L., Conoley, J.C., & Impara, J.C. (Eds.). (1994). Test in print IV: an index to tests, test reviews, and the literature on specific tests. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. |
| Target Audience: | Children 3-7 and 7-15 |
| Abstract: | The FRT for Children is designed to assess individual childrenís feelings about members of their family. It also allows children to express their perceptions of family memberís feelings toward them. |
| Administration: | This is an individually administered test that is delivered in a play format. Children pick out figures from a selection of cardboard people that they select to represent their family members plus themselves. Then 48 cards for the younger group and 100 cards for the older group are sorted by the child according to which statement best suits which family member. The procedure is reported to take from 25 to 40 minutes to administer. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Score are tallies of statements for each family member. |
| Date: | 1957-1985 |
| Psychometrics: | The FRT for Children is designed to assess individual childrenís feelings about members of their family. It also allows children to express their perceptions of family memberís feelings toward them. |
| Subscales: | a. Ages 3-7: Outgoing Feelings
(Positive Total and Negative total), Incoming Feelings (Positive Total
and Negative Total), Dependency Feelings, Sum of Positive, sum of
Negative, Total Involvement. b. Ages 7-15: Sum of Outgoing Positive, Sum of Outgoing Negative, Sum of Incoming Positive Sum of Incoming Negative, Total Involvement, Sum of Positive Mild, Sum of Positive Strong, Sum of Negative Mild, Sum of Negative Strong, Maternal Overprotection, Paternal Overindulgence, Maternal Overindulgence. |
| Cost: | Not available |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | This is an innovative method for measuring childrenís attitudes. Disadvantages lie in the lack of reported validity and reliability scores. |
| Conditions for utilization: | This test should only be used in individual clinical settings. |
| Name: | Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment (HOME) |
| Reference: | Benasich, A. A., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (1996). Maternal
attitudes and knowledge of child-rearing: Associations with family and
child outcomes. Child Development, 67, 1186-1205. Bradley, R.H., & Caldwell, B.M. (1984). The relation of infantsí home environments to achievement test performance in first grade: A follow-up study. Child Development, 55, 803-809. Conoley, J.C., & Kramer, J.J. (Eds.). (1989). The tenth mental measurement yearbook. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. |
| Target Audience: | Parents with children birth to 3, preschool, and middle school age. |
| Abstract: | This instrument has three inventories designed as screening instruments to identify and describe types of stimulation in the childís home environment that foster cognitive development. |
| Administration: | Data is collected primarily through observation in the childís home and is supplemented with parent report during visit. Each item is score as either ìyesî if observed or ìnoî if not observed. Time required is 1 hour. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Not available |
| Date: | 1978-1984 |
| Psychometrics: | Good predictive validity, moderate to high stability. |
| Subscales: | a. Infant: Emotional and verbal
responsibility of mother, acceptance of childís behavior,
organization of physical and temporal environment, provision of
appropriate materials. b. Preschool: Stimulation through toys, games & reading materials, language stimulation, physical environment, pride & affection & warmth, stimulation of academic behavior, modeling & encouragement of social maturity, variety of stimulation, physical punishment. |
| Cost: | $13.00 per monograph; $6.00 per instruction manual. |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | This is measure is a good alternative to traditional SES indices. It is possible that distortions could occur due to the presence of an observer. May be perceived to be too invasive. |
| Conditions for utilization: | The observation session must take place in the home of the child when the child is awake. |
| Name: | Parental Attitudes Toward Child Rearing |
| Reference: | CYFERNet: http://www.cyfernet.org Promoting Family Strength. Easterbrooks, M. A., & Goldberg, W. A. (1984). Toddler development in the family: Impact of father involvement and parenting characteristics. Child Development, 55, 740-752. Holden, G.W., & Edwards, L. A. (1989). Parental attitudes toward child rearing: Instruments, issues, and implications. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 29-58. Touliatos, J., Perlmutter, B.F., & Straus, M. A. (Eds.). (1990). Handbook of family measurement techniques. London: Sage. |
| Target Audience: | Parents with toddlers |
| Abstract: | This is a 51-item Likert-type scale that measures attitudes toward parenting that are most relevant to parents of young children. The attitudes measured include affection, childrenís autonomous behavior, discipline and self-control, and feelings of being annoyed or upset by their childrenís behavior. Some items on the questionnaire have been adapted from the Child Rearing Practices Report Q-sort. |
| Administration: | This is a self-report questionnaire that takes about 15 minutes to complete. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Not available |
| Date: | 1984 |
| Psychometrics: | Internal reliability rates have been reported to range from .58 to .78. |
| Subscales: | Independence, warmth, strictness, aggravation. |
| Cost: | Not available |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | Not available |
| Conditions for utilization: | The Parental Attitudes Toward Child rearing questionnaire has been used in research. It may be adaptable to evaluation. |
| Name: | Parental Disciplinary Orientations |
| Reference: | Touliatos, J., Perlmutter, B.F., & Straus, M. A. (Eds.). (1990). Handbook of family measurement techniques. London: Sage. |
| Target Audience: | Parents |
| Abstract: | Uses hypothetical situations to assess the discipline strategy of parents. The strategy measure is either inductive (i.e., uses reasoning and explanation with little external power) or sensitization (i.e., uses physical punishment or force or removal of privileges.) |
| Administration: | This is a self report test administered either in group or individual settings. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Not available |
| Date: | 1986 (not published) |
| Psychometrics: | Not Available |
| Subscales: | Induction and Sensitization |
| Cost: | Not Available |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | Not Available |
| Conditions for utilization: | Not Available |
| Name: | Parenting Stress Index |
| Reference: | Conoley, J.C., & Kramer, J.J. (Eds.). (1989). The tenth mental measurement yearbook. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. |
| Target Audience: | Parents of children under 10 years of age |
| Abstract: | The Parenting Stress Index is designed to identify parent-child systems that are under stress. |
| Administration: | Not available |
| How results can be analyzed: | Not available |
| Date: | 1983-1990 |
| Psychometrics: | Adequate internal consistency, questionable validity. |
| Subscales: | a. Parent domain: Depression,
attachment, restriction of role, sense of competence, sense of
isolation, relationship with spouse, parental health. b. Child domain: Adaptability, acceptability, demandingness, mood, distractibility/hyperactive, reinforces parent. |
| Cost: | $3.50/reusable booklet, $.75/self score answer sheet. $27.50/specimen set, $14.50/manual, $109.00/computer scoring and interpretive report. |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | Not available |
| Conditions for utilization: | Recommended for use as a screening instrument for Caucasian families. |
| Name: | Perceptions of Parental Role Scales |
| Reference: | Conoley, J.C., & Kramer, J.J. (Eds.). (1989). The tenth
mental measurement yearbook. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press. Gilbert, L. A., & Hanson, G.R. (1983). Perceptions of parental role responsibilities among working people: Development of a comprehensive measure. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45, 203-212. Touliatos, J., Perlmutter, B.F., & Straus, M. A. (Eds.). (1990). Handbook of family measurement techniques. London: Sage. |
| Target Audience: | Parents |
| Abstract: | This instrument is designed to assess parentsí perceptions of role responsibility in three domains: teaching the child, meeting the childís basic needs, and family as the interface with society. |
| Administration: | This is a 78-item self-report questionnaire, with a completion time of approximately 15 minutes. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Not available |
| Date: | 1982 |
| Psychometrics: | The PPRS has good reliability, internal consistency rates ranging from .81 to .91, and test/retest ranging from .69 to .90 across subscales. Limited information is available for validity. |
| Subscales: | a. Teaching the Child: Cognitive
development, social skills, handling of emotions, physical health,
norms and social values, personal hygiene, survival skills. b. Meeting childrenís Basic Needs: Health care, food/clothing/shelter, childís emotional needs, child care. c. Family as the interface with Society: Social institutions, the family unit. |
| Cost: | Not Available |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | Not Available |
| Conditions for utilization: | Not Available |
| Name: | Single Parenting Questionnaire |
| Reference: | Touliatos, J., Perlmutter, B.F., & Straus, M. A. (Eds.). (1990). Handbook of family measurement techniques. London: Sage. |
| Target Audience: | Single Parents (divorce custodial) |
| Abstract: | This is a 88-item Likert-type questionnaire designed to assess single parentís perceptions of their interactions with their children. |
| Administration: | This is a self report questionnaire. Time to complete was not reported. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Scores are summed for each subscale. A higher score reflects better parenting skills. The subscales are summed to generate a total score. |
| Date: | 1987 |
| Psychometrics: | Internal consistency rates range from .63 to .86. Test/retest reliability rates range from .40 to .67. |
| Subscales: | Problem solving skills, parental warmth, discipline procedures, parent rules, enthusiasm for parenting, parental support systems. |
| Cost: | Not available |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | Scores are summed for each subscale. A higher score reflects better parenting skills. The subscales are summed to generate a total score. |
| Conditions for utilization: | Not available |
| Name: | The Problem Situations Scale |
| Reference: | Christensen, A., Phillips, S., Glasgow, R. E., & Johnson,
S.M. (1983). Parental characteristics and interactional dysfunction
in families with child behavior problems: A preliminary investigation.
Journal of Abnormal child Psychology, 11 (1), 153-166. Touliatos, J., Perlmutter, B.F., & Straus, M. A. (Eds.). (1990). Handbook of family measurement techniques. London: Sage. |
| Target Audience: | Parents |
| Abstract: | The Problem Situations Scale consists of 12 short descriptions of common behavior problems. Parents choose 1 of 8 possible solutions for each situation. The solutions are balanced between positive and negative responses. |
| Administration: | This is a self-report questionnaire. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Each parent receives a score that is the sum of positive and negative responses. |
| Date: | 1983 |
| Psychometrics: | Not Available |
| Subscales: | Not Available |
| Cost: | Not Available |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | Not Available |
| Conditions for utilization: | Not Available |
| Name: | Personal Resource Questionnaire |
| Author: | Brandt, Patricia; Weinart, Clarann |
| Target Audience: | Suitable for ages 20-80 |
| Abstract: | This questionnaire consists of two sets of measures of social support for adults ages 20-80. The author defines social support as: a) a pro vision for attachment/intimacy, b) social integration being an integral part of a group, c) opportunity of nurturant behavior, d) reassurance of worth as an individual and in role accomplishments, and e) the availability of in formational, emotional, and material help. Part 1 is an estimate of the number of interpersonal resources a person can count on, across ten life situations and the satisfaction level of the person with these resources. This provides information about peoples' social network on which they can rely for situational support. Part 2 is a 25-item Likert scale which measures the person's perceived level of social support. Subscales of Part 2 include: intimacy, social integration, nurturance, worth and assistance. The questionnaire can be self-administered and is easily scored for use with various statistical procedures. |
| Administration: | 55 items can be administered in approximately 10 min. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Each parent receives a score that is the sum of positive and negative responses. |
| Date: | 1985 |
| Psychometrics: | Not Available |
| Subscales: | Not Available |
| Cost: | Not Available |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | Not Available |
| Conditions for utilization: | Not Available |
| Name: | Crafting Your Own Program-specific Measure for "Nurture" |
| Reference: | Goddard, H. W., Smith, B. L., Mize, J., White, M. B., & White, C. P. (1994). The Alabama Children's Trust Fund Evaluation Manual. Auburn University. |
| Target Audience: | Parents completing an educational program in parenting skills. |
| Abstract: | 1. Break each of your goals/objectives
into the smallest conceptual pieces possible. For example, an
objective that reads "Parents will know how to manage personal
stress and seek community resources when necessary," should be
broken into at least two pieces "Parents will know how to manage
personal stress" and "Parents will seek out community
resources when necessary," and possibly more, depending on how
specific your goals/objectives are. 2. Once you have identified the ground-level, essential pieces of each of your goals/objectives, write items to assess them. If you create scales to assess the concepts that are important to you, include at least 3-4 items per scale. The following items can be used to construct a Likert-scale for "Nurture." 3. We also recommended having between four and five response choices for each item (e.g., Strongly Agree, Agree, Undecided, Disagree, Strongly Agree). More than five response choices is usually not warranted. With less than four responses, you tend not to get as much variability in responses. 4. Be clear on whether or not you want to measure attitudes or behaviors. If your program seeks to change attitudes, your items need to reflect changes in clients' feelings and thoughts about the specific issues addressed in your program. However, if your program seeks to change behavior, your items should be worded in such a way that they assess differences in the way people do things. |
| Administration: | These suggested items could be used in conjunction with a paper and pencil measure administered in a pretest/posttest manner. |
| How results can be analyzed: | Analysis of degree of change between pre and post tests. |
| Date: | Not Available |
| Psychometrics: | Not Available |
| Subscales: | Not Available |
| Cost: | None |
| Advantages/Disadvantages: | Not Available |
| Conditions for utilization: | Not Available |
 Measures |
Bibliographies |
| Parent Outcomes | | |
| | Program Outcomes for Parents & Families | | |
| | NOWG Home | | |