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. Over 75% of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) in England use it. NICE guidelines recommend it for identifying children who may need extra social, emotional and mental health support.

What makes the SDQ particularly useful for teachers is its brevity and accessibility. Unlike thorough 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 learners may need further assessment without consuming hours of teacher time.

The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) helps teachers. It assists SENCOs too. Learn what it measures, following Goodman's (1997, 2001) work. Give the SDQ properly. Interpret scores correctly. Use results to plan for learners, based on Ford et al. (2003) and Vostanis (2006). Map provision to support them.

‍

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". Items are rated on three points: 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 Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) has an impact section. This asks if learners struggle with emotions, focus, behaviour, or relationships. If yes, questions follow about duration, distress, and social impact (Goodman, 1997). These questions also assess burden on teachers or family (Goodman, 1997).

‍

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)

Teachers or TAs who know the learner best complete it. This shows behaviour in classrooms: how the learner handles rules, works with others, and manages schoolwork. The teacher SDQ highlights hyperactivity or inattention, as these show clearly in class. Research shows good reliability (0.73) and validity in spotting later neurodevelopmental issues.

Parent Version (SDQ-P)

Parents or carers complete this form, showing behaviour at home and in the community. Parents may report more conduct and emotional issues than teachers. Learners sometimes hide behaviours at school (Murray et al., 2005). This is relevant for learners who mask autistic traits (Hull et al., 2017) during the school day (Dean et al., 2017).

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 adults cannot see. This is particularly important for emotional difficulties and internalising problems such as anxiety and low mood.

Use two informant versions for assessment, as NICE recommends. This is common practice in CAMHS. Agreement between informants boosts confidence in results. Disagreement helps too. It shows specific problems (Goodman et al, 1998; Achenbach et al, 2001) and can highlight triggers (Hinshaw, 1987).

‍

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". 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

Researchers (e.g., Greenberg et al., 2003) find that learners with high emotional and low conduct issues may be internalising. They might be anxious or withdrawn. These learners are often missed as they do not cause issues. They could gain from emotional literacy work or emotion coaching (e.g., Jennings & Greenberg, 2009).

ADHD and externalising behaviours often combine high conduct issues with hyperactivity. The Conners Rating Scale gives detailed info when assessing ADHD. (Conners, 2008). Use it for further learner support.

Learners scoring highly may need complex support. Functional behaviour assessments and teamwork across agencies could help. Consider trauma or attachment issues, plus any undiagnosed needs. (Researcher, Date).

Learners struggling with peers and prosocial skills may have social communication issues. Use autism tools (Attwood, 1998; Baron-Cohen, 2003) to explore this. Gillberg (2010) and O'Nions (2016) help distinguish ADHD, autism and PDA, especially with sensory issues.

Carlo and Knighton (2022) link low prosocial scores to possible social immaturity. Padilla (1992) and others (Greenfield et al, 2003) cite culture or language impacting interaction. Hastings et al (2000) say this may not mean learners are uncaring.

The Impact Supplement Matters

Good learners might score high on SDQ, yet do well in school. The impact supplement shows if problems affect daily life. High scores, low impact (Goodman, 2001) may need watching, not action. Lower scores, high impact (Goodman, 2001) may need quick help.

‍

Using the SDQ Within the SEND Framework

Goodman's (1997) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire supports England's graduated approach for learners. The assess-plan-do-review cycle guides support for learners with special educational needs. This framework helps teachers identify and address each learner's unique needs.

At the Assess Stage

Use the SDQ as part of your initial screening when you first have concerns about a learner'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 support. Learners with high emotional scores need different help than those with conduct issues. Use the profile for interventions. For example, ELSA sessions support emotional needs. Functional analysis can create Behaviour Intervention Plans (BIP) for conduct (Goodman, 1997).

At the Review Stage

Use the SDQ after a term to track progress. It gives numerical scores, which show change objectively. If Total Difficulties drop from 22 to 14, the intervention works. This data supports reviews, reports, and funding applications (Goodman, 1997; Goodman et al., 1998).

‍

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 thorough assessments to every child who causes concern.

‍

Whole-School SDQ Screening: Benefits and Practicalities

Good mental health provision requires schools to track outcomes. Schools use the SDQ for universal screening, (Goodman, 1997). This helps identify learners early and builds a school wellbeing overview. (Woerner et al., 2004; Mellanby et al., 2000).

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 learners
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. It should be stored securely and shared on a need-to-know basis. Keep it according to 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 learners 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.

Many teachers use only the initial 25 items. Remember the impact supplement shows if difficulties impair function. Always complete the full version to use its insights. (Researchers agree).

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.

Cultural context shapes SDQ item meaning. "Picked on or bullied" varies across cultures. Use translated versions and talk about answers if learners face language barriers (Goodman, 1997). Face-to-face chats help understanding (Goodman et al., 1998; Meltzer et al., 2000).

‍

The SDQ for Specific Learner Groups

Learners with ADHD

The SDQ hyperactivity scale aligns with ADHD criteria, but is less detailed than Conners (Goodman, 2001). Use the SDQ for initial evidence before ADHD referrals. It tracks ADHD's impact on emotions and friendships better than Conners (Conners, 1997).

Autistic Learners

The SDQ isn't for autism screening, but profiles may indicate it. Autistic learners often score high on peer issues and low on prosocial behaviour. This reflects different social styles, not a lack of empathy (Constantino & Gruber, 2012). Interpret prosocial scores cautiously; items reflect neurotypical expectations (Goodman, 1997; Goodman et al., 2000).

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

The SDQ emotional symptoms scale gives baseline data on learner anxiety and mood. But the SDQ doesn't capture school avoidance complexity. Combine it with an EBSA screening tool. Analyse attendance patterns, triggers, and maintaining factors as well (Goodman, 1997).

‍

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

The SDQ needs no formal training for use, but know scoring well. Many local authorities offer SDQ training for SENCOs (Goodman, 2001; Meltzer, 2000). This helps learners succeed (Ford, 2003).

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:

Learners with high emotional symptoms need more frequent check-ins. Provide a quiet area so learners can self-regulate emotions. Teach them methods for managing anxiety. Check if a Zones of Regulation intervention is required and watch for school avoidance.

Functional analysis helps review conduct issues. Is the learner avoiding work, or is it a deeper problem? Use positive behaviour strategies. Consider if the behaviour shows an unmet need (Kern et al., 1994; Scott & McIntyre, 1993).

Researchers suggest movement breaks help learners with hyperactivity (ADHD). Reduce waiting times and offer sensory circuits at the start. Give clear instructions, breaking them down (Antshel, et al., 2011). See if ADHD accommodations are needed (Sayal, et al., 2018).

Structured social time can help with peer problems. Social-emotional programmes teach learners vital social skills. Pairing with kind peers helps, and watch for bullying (Farmer et al., 2011). Does the learner's curriculum meet their social needs (Greenberg et al., 2003)?

Model prosocial behaviour, and teach it directly. Use systems that reward kindness and teamwork. See if language issues affect learner prosocial skills. (Walker, Ramsey & Gresham, 2004) found this effective. Consider communication needs (Tantam, 1988; Wing, 1981).

‍

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 strong, 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 you use the SDQ for EHCP evidence? Yes. SDQ scores show difficulties despite help, giving data for EHCP applications. Combine with other data and reports to strengthen the case.

Is the SDQ suitable for autistic learners? The SDQ can be used with autistic learners, 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.