เปรียบเทียบวิธี

	Goal Attainment Scaling	Single-System Design
สาขาวิชา	Social Work	Social Work
ตระกูล	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
ปีกำเนิด	1968	2009
ผู้ริเริ่ม	Thomas J. Kiresuk & Robert E. Sherman	Martin Bloom, Joel Fischer & John G. Orme (codification in social work)
ประเภท	Individualized, criterion-referenced outcome measurement procedure	Time-series design for evaluating intervention with a single client system
แหล่งต้นตำรับ	Kiresuk, T. J., & Sherman, R. E. (1968). Goal attainment scaling: A general method for evaluating comprehensive community mental health programs. Community Mental Health Journal, 4(6), 443–453.	Bloom, M., Fischer, J., & Orme, J. G. (2009). Evaluating Practice: Guidelines for the Accountable Professional (6th ed.). Pearson/Allyn & Bacon. ISBN: 9780205458066
ชื่อเรียกอื่น	GAS, Goal Attainment Scale, Kiresuk-Sherman Goal Attainment Scaling, Individualized Goal Scaling	Single-Subject Design, Single-Case Design, N-of-1 Design, Single-System Evaluation
ที่เกี่ยวข้อง	3	4
สรุป	Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) is a method for measuring the outcomes of an individualized intervention by writing, in advance, a small set of client-specific goals and defining for each a graded scale of possible outcomes from much worse than expected to much better than expected. After the intervention, the actual outcome on each goal is scored on this scale and the scores are combined into a single standardized index, allowing idiosyncratic, personally meaningful goals to be aggregated and compared across clients and programs. It was introduced by Thomas Kiresuk and Robert Sherman in 1968 to evaluate community mental health programs.	A single-system design is a time-series approach to evaluating practice in which a single client system — an individual, family, group, or organization — is measured repeatedly on a clearly defined target before and during (and sometimes after) an intervention. By tracking the same system over time rather than comparing a treatment group to a control group, it lets a practitioner judge whether their own intervention is associated with change in the people they actually serve. It is the methodological backbone of the 'accountable professional' tradition codified by Bloom, Fischer, and Orme.