1 Ariadna Mendoza RTH 401 October 25, 2017 Free Time Boredom Case information: I performed the Free Time Boredom assessment to Linda (fictitious name to protect her identity). Linda is a Hispanic 18-year old female, who goes to the Macon Early College (MEC); when she graduates, she will earn a high school diploma and an Associates of Arts. Linda has completed all her high school courses, and now she is taking college courses; she is a fulltime college student. She lives with her parents, brother and little sister in Franklin, North Carolina. I met Linda through her grandparents; her grandparents and I go to the same church. Linda and I were acquaintances, and we never spoke before the assessment. After my first encounter with Linda, I thought she was the perfect candidate to give the assessment since I did not know much about her. I told Linda that I had an assignment in one of my recreational therapy class. I then explained to her that I had to give an assessment to someone who was not a friend or family member. After, the explanation, she agreed to take the assessment; before she left, we set a date, time, and place to meet. Our first scheduled meeting was Wednesday, October 18, 2017, at 5:00 pm at a coffee shop. The second meeting took place at the same location on October 27, 2017, at 4:00 pm. Assessment observational notes: My first meeting with Linda took place at a coffee shop in Franklin on October 18, 2017, on a Wednesday. When Linda and I got to the coffee shop, we ordered tea and
2 sat down in a corner faraway from the entrance. On the day of our meeting, there were about three people inside the coffee shop. This place was perfect because it was quite, also because we sat in a secluded area to have privacy. Before I gave the assessment to Linda; I built a rapport with her. I tend to become nervous around people who I don t know. Building rapport with Linda helped me overcome my nerves. I was able to get to know her in order to understand her persona. As Linda and I were talking, I observed signs of nervousness, which later turned to calmness. At first, her hands were crossed together, she was tapping her finger on her arm, and she was avoiding eye contact. After chatting for a few minutes, she placed her hands on the table without crossing them and making eye contact. Once Linda was relaxed, I explained the assessment and then read the instructions. I also briefed her to let me know if any questions were unclear. As I gave the assessment, there were some questions where Linda would pause for a few seconds and seemed that she did not understand the question. I explained the question more in depth so that Linda could understand and also repeated the answer choices so that her answers were accurate. The second meeting took place in the same setting as the first meeting; we met on October 27, 2017, on a Friday at 4:00 pm. When Linda and I met for the second time, I could tell she was more relaxed. Her posture was in a comfortable position. She was smiling and was maintaining eye contact when the results were given. Before giving Linda the results, I explained each of the subcomponents. After the explanation, I gave Linda the results for each subcomponent, and her overall score and asked her if she had questions. Linda agreed with the findings and knew where she needed to make some improvements. After the results, Linda and I conversed about activities that she might
3 want to consider incorporating in her free time. Lastly, I thanked her for her participation in the assessment. Client assessment results: The assessment used in the interview is called Free Time Boredom (FTB). According to Burlingame and Blaschko (2010), the purpose of the Free Time Boredom is to find out how bored the client feels in his or her free time, under the four components that make up boredom. The four components measures are physical involvement, mental involvement, meaningfulness, and speed of time. Physical involvement deals with the client perception and satisfaction on physical activity in his or her free time. Mental involvement is how emotionally satisfied the client feels in his or her use of thinking during his or her free time. Meaningfulness deals with the client s purpose and focuses during his or her free time. The speed of time deals with how fast or slow time goes for the client during free time. The FTB only takes about ten minutes to administer, and five to ten minutes to score. The recommended reading level for the participant is fourthgrade level; to ensure that the client understands each of the questions. The assessment is composed of twenty questions; the FTB uses the Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree) (Burlingame and Blaschko, 2010, p.212). To make sure the clients understand each of the questions the assessment uses positive and negative statements. The test comes with a scoring scratch sheet, which makes it easier to get the results from each of the subcomponents. Obtaining the subscore for each of the components will depend on the math equation that is placed under each component on the scoring scratch sheet. The physical involvement and speed of time component have the same equation, which includes addition, subtraction, and division. Mental involvement only includes
4 addition and division. The equation for meaningfulness includes addition, subtraction, and division (p.225). Getting the results from the subcomponents was relatively easy when using the scoring scratch sheet. Here are the results for each subcomponent; physical involvement was 2, mental involvement was 3.4, meaningfulness was 4.2, and speed of time was 4.2. The overall score for Linda was 3.4. Linda scored highest in meaningfulness and in the speed of time. The scores mean that Linda has focus, purpose, and enough activities to fill her free time and be satisfied at the same time. Her lowest sub-score was physical involvement; this means that she is not satisfied with how much physical activity she completes in her free time. After discussing her physical involvement in her free time, I understood why her score was low. With the total result being in a midpoint, for example, neither low nor high, I can conclude that Linda is mostly satisfied with the way she spends her free time. When Linda and I discussed her results, she mentioned some activities that she would like to incorporate into her free time to be more physically active. Taking into consideration the activities that Linda mentioned, I was able to come up with two functional goals and objectives. Treatment goals: 1. Goal: Increase physical activity based on the results of the Free Time Boredom assessment Objective: Within two treatment sessions with the CTRS, Linda will hike with a friend for 50 minutes, 3x a week for a month to increase physical activity. 2. Goal: Improve mental involvement based on the results of the Free Time Boredom assessment
5 Objective: After three-treatment session with the CTRS, Linda will attend a pottery class for 60 minutes, 2x a week for a month to improve mental involvement. Reflection: My overall experience in giving the Free Time Boredom assessment was better than what I anticipated. Before administering the assessment, I was nervous because I was going to provide the assessment to a person who I knew little about. At first, I was having trouble finding the person whom I was going to give the FTB assessment. In the first meeting I was somewhat nervous, but once I got to know the client, my nervousness decreased. Something that I learned about myself in this assessment is that I need to practice in maintaining eye contact with the client at all times. It was hard for me because I had to write down the answers. I also noticed that when I speak, I use my hands a lot. I liked that this assessment was brief and that each of the questions were not too long. I felt that the answer choices were easy to remember because it uses the Likert scale. After assessing the client, I realized my strength as an active listener. During the meetings, I would re-state what Linda was saying to make sure we had a clear understanding. I kept an objective position throughout the assessment by not judging the client s responses. I was able to build a rapport with the client quickly. Being able to create rapport with a client is essential quality to have. In the next assessment that I administer, I will practice reading the questions out loud to myself. From my point of view, there is always room for improvement no matter how good or how many assessments one has given. As I mentioned earlier, I need to improve in maintaining eye contact with the client. Even though the place where the Free
6 Time Boredom assessment took place was quiet; I believe that the client would feel more comfortable taking the assessment in a place where people are not hearing his or her responses. I think that with practice and confidence, I will not be as nervous during the assessment; also it will help the interview process go smoother.
7 References Burlingame, J., & Blaschko, T. M. (2010). Assessment tools for recreational therapy and related fields (4 th ed.). Ravensdale, WA: Idyll Arbor, Inc.