SDQ Questionnaire: A Complete Teacher's Guide to Strengths and Difficulties

If you work in a UK school, you will almost certainly encounter the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) at some point. Developed by Professor Robert Goodman at the Institute of Psychiatry in London, the SDQ has become one of the most widely used mental health screening tools in education worldwide. It is used by over 75% of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) in England and is recommended in NICE guidelines for identifying children who may need additional social, emotional and mental health support.

What makes the SDQ particularly useful for teachers is its brevity and accessibility. Unlike comprehensive assessment batteries such as the Boxall Profile, which requires detailed observation across 34 strands, the SDQ can be completed in as little as five minutes. This makes it an ideal first-step screening tool - a way to identify which pupils may need further assessment without consuming hours of teacher time.

This guide explains everything teachers and SENCOs need to know about the SDQ: what it measures, how to administer it, how to interpret the scores, and how to use the results to inform assess-plan-do-review cycles and provision mapping.

What Is the SDQ?

The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire is a brief behavioural screening questionnaire designed for children and young people aged 2 to 17. It consists of 25 items divided into five scales of five items each. Each item is a statement about the child's behaviour (for example, "Considerate of other people's feelings" or "Often has temper tantrums or hot tempers") and is rated on a three-point scale: Not True, Somewhat True, or Certainly True.

The five scales are:

1. Emotional Symptoms Scale - measures anxiety, worry, unhappiness, somatic complaints, and fearfulness
2. Conduct Problems Scale - measures oppositional behaviour, aggression, rule-breaking, and temper
3. Hyperactivity/Inattention Scale - measures restlessness, fidgeting, distractibility, and impulsivity
4. Peer Relationship Problems Scale - measures social isolation, being bullied, and difficulty making friends
5. Prosocial Behaviour Scale - measures kindness, helpfulness, sharing, and consideration for others

The first four scales combine to produce a Total Difficulties score (range 0-40). The prosocial scale is scored separately because the absence of prosocial behaviour is conceptually different from the presence of difficulties. A child can have both high difficulties and high prosocial behaviour, or low scores on both.

The SDQ also includes an impact supplement that asks whether the respondent considers the child to have a problem in the areas of emotions, concentration, behaviour, or getting along with others. If they answer yes, follow-up questions assess chronicity (how long the difficulties have been present), distress (whether the child is upset by the difficulties), social impairment (whether the difficulties affect home life, friendships, classroom learning, and leisure activities), and burden (whether the difficulties place a burden on the teacher or family).

The Three SDQ Versions and When to Use Each

The SDQ comes in three informant versions, and using multiple versions together provides the most reliable picture of a child's needs.

Teacher Version (SDQ-T)

Completed by class teachers or teaching assistants who know the child well. This version captures behaviour in structured settings - how the child manages classroom expectations, interacts with peers during group work, and copes with academic demands. The teacher version is particularly sensitive to hyperactivity/inattention because the classroom environment makes these behaviours highly visible. Research shows the teacher SDQ has strong test-retest reliability (0.73) and good predictive validity for identifying children later diagnosed with neurodevelopmental conditions.

Parent Version (SDQ-P)

Completed by a parent or primary caregiver. This version captures behaviour at home and in the community. Parents often report higher levels of conduct problems and emotional symptoms than teachers, because children may mask or suppress certain behaviours in the school environment. This is especially relevant for pupils who mask autistic traits during the school day.

Self-Report Version (SDQ-S)

For young people aged 11-17. This version asks the same questions but in first person ("I worry a lot" rather than "Often worried"). The self-report version is the only way to capture internal experiences that may not be visible to adults - particularly important for emotional difficulties and internalising problems such as anxiety and low mood.

For a thorough assessment, use at least two informant versions. The multi-informant approach is recommended by NICE and is standard practice across CAMHS. Agreement between informants strengthens confidence in the findings. Disagreement is equally valuable - it highlights context-specific difficulties and can indicate masking or environmental triggers.

How to Score the SDQ

Scoring the SDQ is straightforward, though some items require reverse scoring. Each item scores 0, 1, or 2. For most items, "Not True" scores 0, "Somewhat True" scores 1, and "Certainly True" scores 2. However, five items are positively worded (for example, "Has at least one good friend") and these are reverse scored: "Certainly True" = 0, "Somewhat True" = 1, "Not True" = 2.

Each of the five scales produces a score from 0 to 10. The Total Difficulties score is the sum of the first four scales (excluding prosocial), giving a range of 0 to 40.

The scoring bands for the teacher-rated SDQ are:

Scale	Close to Average	Slightly Raised	High	Very High
Total Difficulties	0-11	12-15	16-18	19-40
Emotional Symptoms	0-3	4	5-6	7-10
Conduct Problems	0-2	3	4-5	6-10
Hyperactivity/Inattention	0-5	6	7-8	9-10
Peer Problems	0-2	3	4-5	6-10
Prosocial Behaviour	6-10	5	3-4	0-2

Important: These banding thresholds differ between teacher-rated, parent-rated, and self-report versions. Always use the correct norms for the version you have administered. The sdqinfo.org website provides the full scoring instructions for each version.

Interpreting SDQ Results in the Classroom

Raw scores tell you the severity of difficulties. But effective interpretation requires looking at the pattern across scales, not just the total.

Profile Patterns to Watch For

High emotional + low conduct: This pattern often indicates an internalising profile - a child who is anxious, withdrawn, or experiencing low mood. These pupils are frequently missed because they are not disruptive. They may benefit from emotional literacy support or emotion coaching approaches.

High conduct + high hyperactivity: This combination is common in ADHD and externalising behaviour profiles. The Conners Rating Scale can provide more detailed information if ADHD assessment is being considered.

High across all scales: A pupil scoring high on multiple scales may have complex needs that require functional behaviour assessment and multi-agency involvement. Consider whether there are underlying factors such as trauma, attachment difficulties, or undiagnosed neurodevelopmental conditions.

High peer problems + low prosocial: This pattern can indicate social communication difficulties and is worth exploring further with autism-specific tools, particularly if combined with rigidity or sensory sensitivities. The ADHD vs autism vs PDA guide can help differentiate presentations.

Low prosocial in isolation: When prosocial scores are low but other scales are within the average range, this may reflect social immaturity, cultural differences in expressing care, or language difficulties that limit social interaction rather than a lack of concern for others.

The Impact Supplement Matters

A child can score in the high range on the SDQ and yet function well at school. The impact supplement tells you whether the difficulties identified are actually causing problems in daily life. A high Total Difficulties score with minimal impact may indicate subclinical difficulties that warrant monitoring but not immediate intervention. Conversely, a borderline Total Difficulties score with high impact may need urgent attention.

Using the SDQ Within the SEND Framework

The SDQ fits naturally within the graduated approach (assess-plan-do-review) that underpins all SEND provision in England.

At the Assess Stage

Use the SDQ as part of your initial screening when you first have concerns about a pupil's social, emotional and mental health. The multi-informant approach is particularly powerful here: ask the class teacher, the parent, and (if the child is 11+) the young person to complete their respective versions. You now have three perspectives on the same child, which gives the SENCO a much stronger evidence base than a single observation or teacher report.

At the Plan Stage

SDQ subscale scores help you target provision accurately. A child scoring high on emotional symptoms but low on conduct problems needs different support from a child showing the opposite pattern. Use the subscale profile to select appropriate interventions - for example, directing a child with high emotional scores towards ELSA sessions or a nurture group, while a child with high conduct scores might benefit from a Behaviour Intervention Plan based on functional analysis.

At the Review Stage

Re-administer the SDQ after a term of intervention to measure progress. Because the SDQ produces numerical scores, it provides objective evidence of change. A reduction in Total Difficulties from 22 to 14 is concrete evidence that the intervention is working. This data strengthens annual reviews, transition reports, and any applications for additional funding or Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) assessments.

SDQ and Other Assessment Tools: How They Fit Together

The SDQ does not exist in isolation. Think of it as the first layer in an assessment toolkit, with more detailed tools used when the SDQ flags specific concerns.

SDQ Finding	Next Assessment	Purpose
High Total Difficulties	Boxall Profile	Detailed social-emotional developmental profile
High hyperactivity/inattention	Conners Rating Scale	Detailed ADHD symptom profiling
High emotional symptoms	EBSA Screening	Check for emotionally based school avoidance
High peer problems + low prosocial	Autism screening tools	Social communication assessment
Broad concerns across scales	B Squared	Curriculum-linked progress tracking for SEN
Learning and attention concerns	STAR Assessments	Academic screening alongside behavioural data

The key principle is to use the SDQ as a broadband screener and then follow up with narrowband tools that provide depth in specific areas. This approach is more efficient than administering comprehensive assessments to every child who causes concern.

Whole-School SDQ Screening: Benefits and Practicalities

Some schools administer the SDQ to entire year groups as part of a universal screening programme. This approach has significant advantages for early identification and for building a whole-school wellbeing picture.

Benefits of Universal Screening

1. Catches the quiet ones: Universal screening identifies internalising children who would never be referred through behaviour-driven systems
2. Establishes baselines: Year group data allows you to track cohort-level mental health trends over time
3. Targets resources: Data-driven identification ensures SEND provision reaches those who need it most
4. Supports transition: SDQ data collected in Year 6 provides receiving secondary schools with meaningful information about incoming pupils
5. Evidences need: Aggregated SDQ data can support bids for wellbeing funding and justify staffing decisions

Practical Considerations

Timing: Screen in the second half of the autumn term, once teachers have had 6-8 weeks to get to know their classes. Avoid screening immediately before or after holidays, SATs, or other high-stress periods.

Who completes it: The adult who knows the child best should complete the teacher version. This is usually the class teacher in primary and the form tutor in secondary. Teaching assistants who work closely with a child can also be informants.

Data management: SDQ data is sensitive personal data under GDPR and should be stored securely, shared on a need-to-know basis, and retained in line with your school's data retention policy. Many schools use CPOMS or similar SEND administration systems to record and track SDQ scores.

Staff time: At roughly five minutes per child, a class teacher can screen 30 pupils in approximately 2.5 hours. Build this into directed time or provide cover to protect staff from additional workload pressure. Use the SENCO annual calendar to plan screening windows that do not clash with other assessment demands.

Common Mistakes When Using the SDQ

The SDQ is simple to administer, but interpretation requires care. These are the most common errors we see in schools:

1. Using the SDQ as a diagnostic tool. The SDQ is a screening tool, not a diagnostic instrument. It identifies children who may need further assessment. A high SDQ score does not mean a child has a disorder - it means they are showing elevated levels of difficulty that warrant investigation.

2. Ignoring the impact supplement. Many teachers complete the 25 items and stop. The impact supplement is crucial because it tells you whether the identified difficulties are actually causing functional impairment. Always complete the full version.

3. Relying on a single informant. Teacher and parent scores often differ, and this disagreement is informative. A child scoring high on the teacher version but low on the parent version may be struggling specifically with the demands of the classroom environment.

4. Comparing scores across informant versions. The scoring bands are different for teacher, parent, and self-report versions. A teacher Total Difficulties score of 15 falls in the "slightly raised" band, while the same score on the parent version falls in the "close to average" band. Always check you are using the correct norms.

5. Over-interpreting small changes. A reduction in Total Difficulties from 18 to 16 could reflect genuine improvement, but it could also be measurement noise. Look for changes of at least 5 points on the Total Difficulties score before concluding that meaningful change has occurred.

6. Forgetting cultural and linguistic factors. Some SDQ items may be interpreted differently across cultural contexts. The item "Picked on or bullied by other children", for example, may be understood differently by families from different cultural backgrounds. Where there is a language or cultural barrier, consider using the translated version and discussing responses face-to-face.

The SDQ for Specific Pupil Groups

Pupils with ADHD

The SDQ hyperactivity/inattention scale correlates well with ADHD diagnostic criteria but is not as detailed as the Conners Rating Scale. If you are considering an ADHD assessment referral, the SDQ provides useful initial evidence that can be followed up with more specific measures. The SDQ is also valuable for monitoring the broader impact of ADHD on emotions and peer relationships, which the Conners does not cover as comprehensively.

Autistic Pupils

The SDQ was not designed to screen for autism, but certain SDQ profiles can raise flags. Autistic pupils often score high on peer relationship problems and may score low on prosocial behaviour - not because they lack empathy, but because their social communication style differs from neurotypical norms. Be cautious about interpreting prosocial scores in autistic pupils, as the items reflect neurotypical expectations of social reciprocity.

Looked After Children

The SDQ is mandated as part of the annual health assessment for Looked After Children (LAC) in England. For this group, the SDQ serves a dual purpose: identifying individual support needs and contributing to the statutory health assessment record. The impact supplement is especially important for LAC because many present with complex profiles that include high scores across multiple scales linked to early adverse experiences.

Young People with EBSA

For pupils showing signs of emotionally based school avoidance, the SDQ emotional symptoms scale provides baseline data on anxiety and mood. However, the SDQ alone will not capture the complexity of school avoidance. Combine it with an EBSA-specific screening tool and a detailed analysis of attendance patterns, triggers, and maintaining factors.

Accessing and Administering the SDQ

The SDQ is freely available for non-commercial use (which includes schools, NHS, and local authority use) from the official website at sdqinfo.org. The site provides:

• Downloadable PDF versions of all three informant versions (teacher, parent, self-report)
• Versions for different age groups (2-4, 4-17, and 11-17 for self-report)
• Translations in over 80 languages
• Scoring instructions and normative data
• The impact supplement
• A follow-up version for measuring change over time

There is no training requirement to administer the SDQ, though understanding the scoring and interpretation guidelines is essential. Many local authorities provide SDQ training as part of their SENCO professional development offer.

For digital administration, several platforms integrate the SDQ into their assessment workflows. This makes it easier to score, store, and track results over time without manual calculation. If you are using B Squared or similar SEND tracking software, check whether SDQ integration is available.

Linking SDQ Data to Classroom Practice

SDQ results are only useful if they inform what happens in the classroom. Here is how to translate scores into practical adjustments:

High emotional symptoms: Increase check-ins with the child, provide a quiet space for self-regulation, teach anxiety management techniques, and consider whether the child needs a Zones of Regulation intervention. Monitor for school avoidance patterns.

High conduct problems: Review behaviour triggers using functional analysis (is this task avoidance or genuine conduct difficulty?). Implement positive behaviour management strategies and consider whether the behaviour is communicating an unmet need.

High hyperactivity/inattention: Provide movement breaks, reduce unnecessary waiting time, offer sensory circuits at the start of the day, and ensure instructions are clear and broken into manageable steps. Explore whether ADHD accommodations are warranted.

High peer problems: Facilitate structured social opportunities, teach explicit social skills through social-emotional learning programmes, pair the child with prosocial peers, and monitor for bullying. Consider whether the child's social-emotional curriculum needs are being met.

Low prosocial: Model and explicitly teach prosocial behaviour. Use behaviours for learning frameworks that reward kindness, teamwork, and consideration. Investigate whether language or communication difficulties are limiting the child's ability to demonstrate prosocial behaviour.

Research Evidence Behind the SDQ

The SDQ is one of the most extensively researched child mental health measures in existence. Key findings from the evidence base include:

1. Validity: The five-factor structure of the SDQ has been confirmed across multiple countries and cultural contexts (Goodman, 2001; Stone et al., 2010)
2. Reliability: Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) ranges from 0.73 to 0.82 across the subscales, with the Total Difficulties score achieving the highest reliability
3. Sensitivity: The SDQ correctly identifies approximately 70% of children with a clinical diagnosis (sensitivity) and correctly rules out approximately 85% of children without a diagnosis (specificity)
4. Predictive validity: High SDQ scores in childhood predict mental health service use, academic difficulties, and psychosocial problems in adolescence (Goodman & Goodman, 2009)
5. Cross-cultural validity: The SDQ has been validated in over 100 countries with consistent factor structure, making it suitable for diverse school populations
6. Responsiveness to change: The SDQ is sensitive enough to detect clinically meaningful changes after intervention, making it useful for outcome measurement (Ford et al., 2007)

The evidence base supports the SDQ as a robust, valid, and reliable screening tool. However, no screening tool is perfect. The SDQ has modest sensitivity (around 70%), which means approximately 30% of children with genuine difficulties will score in the normal range. This is why the SDQ should always be used alongside professional judgement, not as a replacement for it.

Frequently Asked Questions About the SDQ

Is the SDQ free? Yes, for non-commercial use. Schools, the NHS, and local authorities can download and use it without charge. Commercial organisations (such as software companies wishing to embed the SDQ in their products) need a licence.

How often should I re-administer the SDQ? Once per term is reasonable for children on a graduated response plan. For whole-school screening, annually is sufficient. Avoid re-administering more frequently than every 4-6 weeks, as the scores may reflect transient mood rather than stable patterns.

Can I use the SDQ for children under 2? No. The SDQ is validated for ages 2-17 only. For children under 2, consider the Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQ) instead.

What if teacher and parent scores disagree? This is common and informative. Explore why the scores differ - is the child's behaviour context-specific? Are there environmental factors (such as classroom demands or family stress) that explain the discrepancy? Both perspectives are valid data points.

Can the SDQ be used for EHCP evidence? Yes. SDQ scores, especially when collected over time showing persistent difficulties despite intervention, provide useful quantitative evidence for EHCP applications. Combine with other assessment data and professional reports for the strongest possible case.

Is the SDQ suitable for autistic pupils? The SDQ can be used with autistic pupils, but interpret prosocial and peer relationship scores with caution. These scales reflect neurotypical social norms and may not accurately capture an autistic child's social competence.

Further Reading

• Goodman, R. (1997). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A Research Note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38(5), 581-586.
• Goodman, R. (2001). Psychometric Properties of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(11), 1337-1345.
• Goodman, A. & Goodman, R. (2009). Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire as a Dimensional Measure of Child Mental Health. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 48(4), 400-403.
• Stone, L. L. et al. (2010). Psychometric Properties of the Parent and Teacher Versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire for 4- to 12-Year-Olds: A Review. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 13(3), 254-274.
• Ford, T. et al. (2007). The British Child and Adolescent Mental Health Survey 1999: The Prevalence of DSM-IV Disorders. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 42(10), 1203-1211.