Quality Standards for
Educational Psychology
Services (Draft)
Division of Educational and
Child Psychology (DECP)
www.bps.org.uk1
History

First produced in 2000, with updates in
2003, 2006 and now

This latest version has benefited from
work undertaken in the West Midlands

A similar self evaluation document was
produced in Scotland
2
Aims
This remains the same – to promote the
highest possible quality of EPSs
The standards are designed as a guide for
self evaluation of quality and consistency
3
Possible Benefits

PEPs, especially those newly in post, can reflect with
their leadership team on the functioning of their service

Compare statistical information with beliefs and ideas
about the service

Act as a framework for visitors to consider the service

Provide a reference for SEND Inspections

Provide information to reference groups who provide
critical challenge e.g. parents, pupils, schools
4
Areas covered

Nine areas of Service functioning- Professional
practice, leadership, Service structure and
staffing ,induction, CPD, Supervision of TEPs
,Appraisal, Supervision and (a new addition)
ethics of trading

A Service would choose one or two areas to
consider first.
5
Pilot

The document is a draft

Looking for Services who are interested in
participating in a pilot

Services would work in a pair

Those who are interested would contact
[email protected] to sign up and
access a copy of the document
6
High Quality Services
It’s essential in today’s fragmenting public services that WE
demonstrate excellence in service quality and in the delivery of
services.
Within Service Excellence: Your service

9 Areas of excellence
 Internal credibility: reliability and validity
 Regional collaboration: verify and moderate the self-evaluation
7
Scoring system 1 (each EP)
The concept: KISS-Average
It’s an average of the total score (until you get back to 1-4 rating)
Individual EP scoring
1.
Tick the box that you judge reflects the correct criterion
2.
Add all the totals for each column: e.g. if there are 4 ticks in the ‘4’
column = 16; 2 ticks in the ‘3’ column = 6 etc.
3.
Take the overall score and divide it by the number of criteria e.g. 7
4.
Score each of the sections
5.
Enter scores into the summary box
8
Individual EP
Number
Criteria
1 unsatis.
1
criteria
√
1
criteria
3
criteria
4
criteria
5
criteria
6
criteria
7
criteria
total
2 satisfact
3 good
4 excellent
√
√
√
√
√
√
1
4
6
8
=19
19/7 = 2.7
9
Scoring systemic 2 (whole service)
The concept: KISS-Averages
It’s an average, of an average (until you get back to 1-4 rating)
Whole Service Scoring: master sheet
1.
Enter the total number of EPs for each criterion in the correct cell
2.
Multiply number by column heading = enter cell number: e.g. if N=4 EPs
in the third column = 12 entered in the cell
3.
Vertically add each column and total it in the bottom cell
4.
Take the overall score and divide it by the number of EPs
5.
Divide the reminder by the total number of criteria
6.
Enter the overall score into the summary table
10
Whole Service: N=15 EPs
Number
Criteria
2 satisfact
3 good
4 excellent
1
criteria
5
5
(15)
5
(20)
1
criteria
10
(30)
5
(20)
3
criteria
3
(6)
2
(6)
10
(40)
4
criteria
2
(4)
10
(30)
3
(12)
5
criteria
5
(10)
10
(30)
6
criteria
2
(4)
3
(9)
10
(40)
7
criteria
total
1 unsatis.
15
(10)
(15)
15
34
120
132
=301
301/15=20/7 = 2.86
11
Development Plan & Inward Looking Leadership
Through discussion across the service the results can be used to inform
the service’s Development Plan.
The Community EPS Development Plan
The service development plan for ‘internal infrastructure building’ can
follow the headings of the Quality Standards framework
12
Learning Conversations
The idea is to drive service development ensuring that everyone
participates in the self-assessment and contributes to the development
of the service.
Ownership
It is vital that the process involves all Community EPS staff.
13
Regional Collaboration and Moderation
The self-assessment can benefit the whole region and strengthen
service development.
Collaboration and Moderation
By arranging peer review processes each Community EPS can learn
from the strengths of the services they review e.g. an excellent
supervision framework.
The aim would be to enrich the quality of thinking and reflection of
service and share excellence across the region.
14