Goal Attainment Scaling

Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) is a process of monitoring progress from a list of predetermined goals. Each goal is clearly set, then broken down into five categories that range from much better, to neutral, [Page 228]to much worse outcomes. GAS is tailored to a specific individual and his or her expected progress, and can be adapted to all skill ranges and used to address a large number of issues (Figure 1). GAS is widely used in education, counseling, social work, rehabilitation, medicine, and other areas.

Figure 1 Goal Attainment Scaling

The development of GAS has several steps. To begin, the major problems that need to be addressed are stated. For example, to use GAS with a student, the major issues may be numerous referrals to the office for misbehavior, failing class, or social problems. Next, goals are created to address the major issues. In the creation of goals, it is generally best to state the goals in simple, jargon-free terms. It is also necessary to create a few goals; three is optimal. To continue with the example, three goals are set; the student will pass math class, limit the number of referrals to the office for class disruptions, and improve social skills.

In GAS, goals must be operationally defined. How can these goals be described in a way that could be rated? What behavior (or feeling) can be rated that applies to the goal? In the example, good choices might be average of daily grades in math, number of referrals to the office, and listing of friends and activities successfully completed with peers. While typically only one indicator of progress is used for each goal, it is possible to use more.

The major component of GAS is the addition of expected levels of progress. Where is the student expected to be at the end of the intervention(s)? After a set period of time, what is the expected progress of the student? This progress is typically expressed as a range, so a range of expected progress may be an average weekly class grade of 60 to 69, 4 to 5 office referrals a month, a list 2 to 3 individuals who are friends, and completion of 2 to 3 activities with these friends. Having defined expected progress, GAS then identifies what “slightly better” and “slightly worse” levels of accomplishment would look like. It is important that goal levels are continuous and discrete (i.e., no gaps between two goal levels, and no overlapping goal levels). Having defined slightly better and slightly worse progress, GAS then defines what “much better” and “much worse” progress would look like. While this process represents the basic use of a GAS, it is also possible to give weights to the different goals to indicate the level of importance attached to each one. These weights typically range from 1 (low importance) to 10 (high importance), but other weighting scales can be used.

GAS was first described in 1969 by Thomas Kiresuk and Robert Sherman. GAS was used as a program evaluation tool to study the effectiveness of treatment options and therapists. Kiresuk and [Page 229]Sherman proposed that goals should be set by a group of therapists who are not involved with the treatment of the individual. They also designed GAS originally to have independent raters to assess the client's level of progress. In this way, both individual therapists and treatment options could be evaluated. More modern uses of GAS have altered the original idea of independent goal setters and evaluators in favor of self-selected goals and evaluation by the client. As a clinical tool, the GAS is ultimately the responsibility of the therapist, but in some cases there may be benefit in collaborating with the client and negotiating the goals. GAS can also be effective when a multidisciplinary team—a decision-making group composed of different professionals such as a regular education teacher, special education teacher, school psychologist, principal, and parents—collaborates to set goals for a student.

...