To evaluate a student's adjustment to a family crisis, which informal assessment would be preferred?

Choosing to use interviewing as the informal assessment method to evaluate a student's adjustment to a family crisis is advantageous for several reasons. Interviews provide an opportunity for open-ended dialogue, allowing the counselor to gather nuanced information about the student's feelings, thoughts, and behaviors in response to the crisis. This personal interaction creates a safe space for the student to express themselves more freely than they might in a standardized format.

Through interviews, counselors can ask follow-up questions for clarification, probe deeper into specific areas of concern, and adjust the conversation based on the student’s unique responses and emotional state. This level of engagement can reveal insights that are difficult to capture in a more structured format, such as a questionnaire or rating scale. Ultimately, interviews foster a supportive relationship that can help the counselor better understand the student's coping mechanisms, resilience, and areas where they may need additional support.

In contrast, while standardized questionnaires can provide quantitative data, they may not fully capture the complexities of a student's personal experience during a crisis. Behavioral rating scales offer specific metrics but might lack the depth needed to explore emotional adjustments. Focus group discussions involve multiple students, which can dilute individual responses and make it challenging to focus on one student’s unique situation. Thus, interviewing is particularly suited for understanding a student's