Upload
samantha-quinlan
View
226
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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.