Journal Sumary "Identifying The Costs And Benefits Of Educational Psychology: A Preliminary Exploration In Two Local Authorities"

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