A realistic evaluation of the use of group consultation to deliver educational psychology services

The author used a realistic evaluation framework to interview SENCOs and educational psychologists (EPs) who had been involved in Additional Needs Partnerships (ANPs). ANPs involved EPs facilitating solution-focused consultations with groups of SENCos, to assess if ANPs deliver effective service delivery, and if so, when, why and how?

  • Theme: Strategic partnership working/leadership and governance
  • Strength: Good
  • Breadth of Impact: Robust
  • Status: Quality Assured

The author used a realistic evaluation framework to interview SENCOs and educational psychologists (EPs) who had been involved in Additional Needs Partnerships (ANPs). ANPs involved EPs facilitating solution-focused consultations with groups of SENCos, to assess if ANPs deliver effective service delivery, and if so, when, why and how?

They found that ANPs enabled SENCOs to feel supported, gain new perspectives, understandings, and ideas, develop professional skills and to feel that they were meeting children’s needs and working effectively with parents. Structured group discussion, meeting preparation, follow-up and EP contributions helped bring about these positive outcomes. When a group of professionals with a range of expertise and experience, trusted and supported one another, this was conducive to effective ANP working.

This grey literature was appraised using a validated checklist. The AACODS checklist provides guidance when dealing with diverse formats of grey literature (Tyndall, 2010). AACODS includes the following items: Authority (who is responsible for the intellectual content) – Accuracy – Coverage (parameters which define the content coverage i.e., reference to a particular population group, or certain type of publication) – Objectivity (identify bias, if it is unstated or unacknowledged) – Date (that confirms relevance of information)- Significance (value judgment in the context of the relevant research area). The checklist can be used for any discipline area and prioritises expert opinion and expertise over source format (Tyndall, 2010).