educational psychology n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Educational Psychology PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Educational Psychology

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 31

Educational Psychology - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 510 Views
  • Uploaded on

Educational Psychology. C83EDP 2nd semester 2008. Purpose. To introduce students to the professional practice of Educational Psychology by considering a range of relevant theoretical and practical issues. Lecturers:. Prof Andy Miller - Group Director Nathan Lambert - APT

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

Educational Psychology


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Presentation Transcript
    1. 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. Lectures

    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

    8. 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

    19. 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 Psychologist17(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 Practice14(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 Journal25(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 Psychology40(1): 65-83.