Educational Psychology

C83EDP

2nd semester 2008

2

Purpose

• To introduce students to the professional practice of Educational Psychology by considering a range of relevant theoretical and practical issues

3

Lecturers:

• Prof Andy Miller - Group Director• Nathan Lambert - APT• Anthea Gulliford - DAEP Co-director• Victoria Lewis - APT • Neil Ryrie - APT• Nick Durbin - DAEP Co-director

All working as practitioner EPs in Local Authority settings.

4

Office Hours

• Each lecturer will offer an office contact time, usually about 2 or 3 weeks after their lecture.

• Details will be posted on the website.

5

Lectures1 21.1.08 The History and Development of the Educational

Psychologist RoleNFR

2 28.1.08 Working with Vulnerable Young People NFR

3 4.2.08 Working with Schools as Organisations AG

4 11.2.08 Psychology and inclusion NL

5 18.2.08 Challenging Behaviour in schools: thepsychological contribution.

AM

6 25.2.08 Working with Bullies – and the Bullied VH

7 3.3.08 Coping with Life by Coping with School AM

8 10.3.08 Educational Psychologists and Bilingual YoungPeople

AG

9 14.4.08 Responding to the impact of traumatic incidents inschools

ND

10 21.4.08 Revision Session

6

Examination

• The module will be assessed by one two-hour examination at the end of the second semester.

• You will be asked to answer two questions out of six.

7

General References • Frederickson & Cline (2002) Special

Educational Needs, Inclusion and Diversity. Buckingham: Open University Press

• Beaver, R (1996) Educational Psychology casework. London: Jessica Kingsley

• Frederickson, Miller & Cline (in press) Educational Psychology: Topics in Applied Psychology

• Journals:• Educational Psychology in Practice• Educational & Child Psychology• Journal of School Psychology

History and development of the role and function of the

educational psychologist

9

Educational Psychology is …

10

Terminology

Educational Psychology?

Or

School Psychology?

11

Relevant theory?

12

Domains of interest

• Problem-solving• Individual child• Whole class• Whole school• Local authority

DfEE 2000

13

Historical landmarks

• Cyril Burt, the first EP (1913)– Assessment of children’s ability and

advice on the placement of children in special education

– Development of mental tests.– Researching into causes of learning

difficulties.

14

Historical landmarks

• Summerfield Report (1968)– To consider role and training of EPs and to

advise on numbers• Individual diagnostic and therapeutic work with

children• No serious consideration of other possible

functions

• Central core of activities seen as: the identification and treatment of learning and adjustment difficulties.

15

Historical landmarks

• The ‘Reconstructing’ developments (Gillham 1978)

• Challenged the central position of assessment of difficulties.

• Moved the focus onto alternative ways of working:

– Research and project work– Working with schools as systems

• Criticisms of the relevance of psychometrics

16

Historical landmarks

• Special needs legislation (1981 & 1996)

• Gave EPs a statutory responsibility in the assessment and reviewing of children’s special educational needs

• Every child in receipt of special educational provision would have a ‘Statement’ of SEN based on formal ‘Advice’ from, inter alia, EPs.

• Gave EPs increasing involvement with Early Years and with parents

17

Historical landmarks

• DfEE working party report (2000)– 4 levels of work:

• Individual child• Groups of children• Schools• LEAs

– Other agencies– Recommendations about service

delivery

18

The future?

• Extended training

• ‘Every Child Matters’– Review of role and function (DfES

2006).

– Integrated Children’s Services

EPs and ‘Assessment’

20

Debates in assessment?

• Assessment vs Testing?– Purpose– Informs action– Tests hypotheses– Rigour

21

Over-riding principles

• Applied science

22

Debates in assessment?

• Normative vs Ipsative?– Normative assessment:

• Compares a sample of behaviour with the same behaviour in a sample of the population.

• Generalises from that sample• Requires validity• Requires reliability• Issues about relevance & equity

23

Debates in assessment?

• Normative vs Ipsative?– Normative assessment:

• In the UK, typically involves:– Wechsler Scales: WISC IV, WPPSI III– British Ability Scales (BAS)– A range of attainment tests

• Produces norm-referenced scores, typically IQ (or ‘Standard’) scores or percentile rankings

24

Debates in assessment?

• Normative vs Ipsative?– Ipsative assessment:

• Compares a child with themselves• Can include normative assumptions• Can allow a focus on the learning /

behaviour issues themselves.

25

Debates in assessment?

• Static vs ‘dynamic’?– Static assessment:

• Looks at what a child has achieved;• Analyses strengths and difficulties;• Deals in snap-shots of behaviour/learning• Emphasises reliability and validity

26

Debates in assessment?

• Static vs ‘dynamic’?– dynamic assessment:

• Based on Vygotsky’s work, developed by Feuerstein;

• Looks at a child’s response to teaching• Focuses on modifiability and adaptability

- therefore looks at change

27

Alternative methods

• Curriculum-based assessment – Ipsative by nature– Based on (social) learning theories– Looks at the child in context– Attempts to lead directly to action– Requires careful monitoring,

evaluation and review

28

Challenges to practice

• Keep the psychology • To maintain relevance to teachers• To understand the difficulties in terms

of the interaction between the child and their environment.

• To maintain an objective stance• To collect data rigorously and to

transform that understanding of the child’s circumstances

29

Further Reading• Anastasi, A. and Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological Testing

(7th Edn). Upper Saddle River, NJ., Prentice Hall.• Deno, S.L. (1989) Curriculum based measurement: the

emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3): 219-32

• Dessent, T. (1978). The historical development of School Psychological Services. In: Reconstructing Educational Psychology. B. Gillham. London, Croom Helm.

• DfEE (2000). Educational Psychology Services (England): Current Role, Good Practice and Future Directions. Nottingham: DfEE.

• DfES (2006). A Review of the Functions and Contributions of Educational Psychologists in the Light of ‘Every Child Matters: Change for Children’ Nottingham: DfES Research Report 792 http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR792.pdf

30

Further Reading• Gersch, I. S. (2004). "Educational Psychology in an age

of uncertainty." The Psychologist 17(3): 142-145.• Gillham, B., (Ed.) (1978). Reconstructing Educational

Psychology. London, Croom Helm.• Leyden, G. (1999). "Time for change: the reformulation

of applied psychology for LEAs and schools." Educational Psychology in Practice 14(4): 222-228.

• Mellor, N. J. (1999). From exploring practice to exploring inquiry: a practitioner researcher’s experience. University of Northumbria at Newcastle. PhD. (Chapter 2) http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/nigel.mellor/thesis/chap2.html

31

Further Reading• Miller, A. and Leyden, G. (1999). "A coherent framework

for the application of psychology in schools." British Educational Research Journal 25(3): 389-400.

• Solity, J. and Bull, S. (1987). Special Needs: Bridging the Curriculum Gap. Milton Keynes, Open University Press.

• Sternberg, R. J. and Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). "Difference scores in the identification of children with learning disabilities. It's time to use a different method." Journal of School Psychology 40(1): 65-83.