Background
In this article the authors outline a small-scale pilot study of a means to assess the costs and benefits of educational psychology services. The study was conducted in two small unitary authorities in England. This preliminary research, financed by a grant from the Newcastle Institute for Social Renewal (NIRS) at the University of Newcastle, was intended to assess the viability of developing a research project to explore the economic value of educational psychologists (EPs) in the context of changing economic policies in England.
Introduction
The costs of producing an EP are high.
In England, most of the costs for training students after their first degrees
are borne by the Exchequer. Fees for trainee EPs are fully-funded for all three
years of training and there is a tax-free bursary of £14,400 (£14,900 in
London) for the first year. Hitherto the Department for Education has provided
funds for 132 EPs per year but this has now risen to 150 places per year for
intakes in 2016, 2017 and 2018 (though the last is not confirmed) at a total
cost of £21.79 million. Currently the salary for fully qualified main-range EPs
is in the range £34,273 to £46,244 p.a.
Conceptual economic framework
Evaluating the
costs and benefits of education and educational services is problematic
(Biesta, 2010a, 2010b).
Although some have argued that it is possible to translate methods of
evaluation from medical sciences to the world of education (Cutspec, 2004; Levin & Belfield, 2015;
Slavin, 2002), others have expressed doubts
about the appropriateness of a positivist paradigm and the inevitable risks in
instrumentalising practice (Kvernbekk, 2011;
Simons, 2003). But, in order to be pragmatic
and seek evidence that speaks to the current political and economic agenda, an
explicit economic framework is set out later within which to critically
consider the economic arguments that may be put forward for and against
delivery of services that are of value and can make a difference.
In a market economy, the value of
a good or service is usually indicated by its price. This price reflects both
the cost of production of the item (supply) and its value to the purchaser
(demand). If the public sector is the principal supplier or purchaser of a good
or service, then price becomes a less reliable indicator of value because the
final consumer (the real beneficiary) is not making the decision. There are
very good reasons why, in some cases, beneficiaries might not be trusted to
make good decisions on their own.
It has been recognized that the closer
public decision-making is to the final beneficiary, the more likely are
decisions to be in the best interests of the beneficiary since the
decision-maker will have both better information about the needs and wants of
the beneficiary and be more likely to share some of the benefits. Therefore, it
is important to find proxies for that value in order to estimate an appropriate
level of supply. Estimating the social value of a good or service is based on
two pieces of analysis:
(1) identification
and measurement of the positive impacts on all relevant stakeholders of
supplying this item;
(2) placing
a market value on these value.impacts.
The first task involves the
recognized difficulties of distinguishing the specific contribution of a single
input to an output that requires the use of many inputs. For example, the
educational attainment of a pupil requires the inputs of teachers, support
staff, school buildings and equipment. The particular difficulty in the case of
education is that this contribution is seldom seen immediately and is not
amenable to a simple valuation. In essence, the problem for the measurement of
the impact of EPs is that of estimating the school production function. As has
already been noted, ever more funding is devolved to schools with the result
that many of the decisions about the use of EPs are now in the hands of schools
rather than LAs. As a result, instead of schools estimating the impact of EPs,
there is the possibility that their remuneration could be used to assess their
social.
Research methodology
The main part of this scoping exercise
was conducted by means of semi-structured interviews with key informants in two
LAs. The interviews were carried out in late January/early February 2015. The
purpose of the interviews was two-fold:
(1) to
explore the ways in which EPs are currently deployed and the benefits expected
to result from that deployment;
(2) to
gain insight into the language used in discussing this deployment in order to
inform the development of survey instruments for future research.
The interviews
were conducted as fluid and open discussions intended to elicit as much
information as possible but without leading the informant. The researchers had
a list of issues which they wished to explore and each interview addressed all
items on the list although they did not necessarily do so in the same order.
Results
From analysis of the transcribed
interviews (using a paradigm discussed by Roe [1994])
two broad themes emerged:
(1) All
interviewees articulated the view that EPs could and did deliver services of value to schools, their pupils and the wider
community.
(2) There
was a general perception that there was currently a shortage of EPs in the
region(s) served by these two services, and perhaps nationwide.
Limitations and issues to be addressed in future
research
This was a very small-scale
study. Although the views expressed may not be representative of many schools
the authors have taken steps to seek confirmation that this provisional
analysis is not wildly idiosyncratic. Thus, since completing the data gathering
and an early draft of this article the authors have convened a meeting of
interested parties. The meeting took the form of a workshop in which
participants were encouraged to collaborate in critiquing the findings of the
current research and suggesting questions for further work.
Although the data
suggest clear differences in the functioning of EPs in these two LAs, a number
of undetermined factors could account for these differences. Future research
will need to develop a much clearer picture of the processes by which
educational psychologists’ activity might be associated with how schools
function, the beliefs and practices of staff, and pupils’ development. Further,
the authors recognize that they have at no stage attempted to distinguish
between what an educational psychology service can provide and what may be
offered by an individual EP; they can see that that is potentially an important
distinction.
In developing a
larger scale project the authors suggest that it will be useful to explore the factors
affecting LAs’ choice of the mix of activities to be undertaken by EPs and the
size of the educational psychology service. Exactly what they are valued for,
and what price might be put on their heads are conundrums still to be worried
over. In developing the next phase of investigations the authors contend that
the use of Theory of Change (see De Silva et al., 2014;
Jackson, 2013) and/or Social Sequence Analysis
(Andrew, 1995; Cornwell, 2015) to map the views of a much wider representation
of this problem could be very helpful.
H, Djaali. 2017. Psikologi Pendidikan. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
http://library.uny.ac.id
http://e.library.uny.ac.id
http://search.ebscohost.com
H, Djaali. 2017. Psikologi Pendidikan. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
http://library.uny.ac.id
http://e.library.uny.ac.id
http://search.ebscohost.com
