| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Heath: I wholly welcome the framework that the Minister has set out, particularly the fact that teacher training will include specific training for children with SEN. Does he accept, however, that most of it cannot work without sufficient trained educational psychologists to underpin the system? That is why recruitment and retention are critical to the strategy's success and why early decisions are necessary.
Mr. Twigg: I am coming to that point, and I certainly accept that it is important that we should have the right people in place to ensure that the strategy can be effective and successful, and consistently so across the country.
Educational psychologists have a central role to play in working with children with SEN. Their work on statutory assessments and the drawing up of statements is a key function, but they also have an important contribution to make in the area of early intervention and providing support when a child's needs are first identified. I have already addressed early intervention with respect to educational psychology. Four years ago, we published the report of the educational psychology working group, together with a major piece of research on how services operated and how they were seen by their users. That work identified core functions in the areas of working with early years settings, schools and multi-agency teams. It also identified critical factors for success and pointed to good practice. It recommended that all educational psychology services should: apply psychology to promote the attainment and healthy emotional development of children and young people from 0 to 19 years; ensure that early intervention is a priority; be linked to local authority strategies to meet local and national priorities for raising standards in schools and supporting inclusion; be delivered in school settings as well as in local authority and family settings; focus on assessment, intervention and consultation; develop multi-agency approaches to support schools and parents; and be accessible to users independently of schools.
The research confirmed what the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome and my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud said about parents and schools finding educational psychologists a hugely valuable resource. Parents see them as a key link to the school and other agencies and placed particular value on home visiting.
Teachers and SENCOs value educational psychologists for the advice that they give on strategies for the classroom and for providing practical demonstrations, and see them as having an important contribution to make to training. Similarly, educational psychologists make a key contribution to work with children who have, or who are at risk of developing, behavioural, emotional and social difficulties. They are a vital component of the behaviour and education support teams.
The hon. Gentleman rightly focused on the numbers of educational psychologists working in our communities and, in particular, the numbers who are
8 Jun 2004 : Column 253
being trained to enter work in future years. I am pleased to say that the data that we have available, which we collect from local authorities, suggest that there has been an increase in recent years in the total number of full-time equivalent educational psychologists. In 1997, the figure was 1,768. In 2003, it was 2,026, a not insignificant increase.
I absolutely accept, however, the hon. Gentleman's central point that although that is progress, a great deal more needs to be done if we are to meet all the needs that we know exist in the communities that we serve. The figures that he set out are correct. Unfortunately, the Local Government Association decided last year to reduce the number of funded training places to 110. We accept the figure of 150, which the hon. Gentleman cites, as ideal, and we have welcomed the LGA's more recent decision effectively to reverse that cut and to take the figure back up to 130. That is clearly better than 110, but we still believe that 150 is the figure for which we should aim. I shall address that issue right at the end of my remarks.
I turn briefly to the work of the working group, to which the hon. Gentleman referred, which brings together all the key people working in this sphere: the Department for Education and Skills, local government and the various associations representing psychology, and educational psychologists in particular. The working group commits us to working with that range of interests to review the initial training of educational psychologists and their continuing professional development. That work has been carried on through a smaller sub-group of the original working group, and I am grateful to all those who have contributed to its deliberations.
It is from that working group that the new training route that the hon. Gentleman described has emerged. Discussion has focused in particular on the need to develop a new entry training route for educational psychologists. The existing route is lengthy, at eight years, and its arrangements are not wholly in line with those for comparable professions such as clinical psychology. That is viewed as contributing to some of the recruitment problems in the profession. We have to be careful on that, because the Government are not the direct employer, but we see ourselves as having an important role in facilitating bringing people together to do the greater investigative work.
We have commissioned, as the hon. Gentleman described, two detailed implementation studies on the practicalities of introducing a slimmed-down entry route that would extend over six, rather than eight, years. That has been widely discussed and consulted on, and the six-year model has secured clear, unmistakable endorsement during the consultations run by the Department. The studies have drawn together the views of all the key interested parties, including the Association of Educational Psychologists, the British Psychology Association and some of the training providers in higher education.
8 Jun 2004 : Column 254
My hon. Friend the Member for Stroud questioned whether there was a danger that that approach could lead to a two-tier system, or that there might be some contention over that change. From everything that I have seen, I am reassured that the professionals working in the field, as well as local government, the universities and we ourselves, are confident that that does not need to be the case, and that the new system can be made to work. The working group has considered issues such as the status of educational psychologists in training, different regional arrangements, the nature of work placements and associated supervision, and the funding needed to underpin a revised scheme. The hon. Member for Somerton and Frome has put his case very strongly today.
The studies confirm that implementing the new route will entail significant additional expenditure. Officials previously informed the various parties with whom we have been working that the case for such expenditure needs to be considered in the context of the 2004 spending review. I appreciate what the hon. Gentleman said about the uncertainty that that creates, and I am not going to deny that such uncertainty exists in the system. What is important is that we get matters right. I can give him an assurance today that although I am not in a position to go beyond the terms of the letter of a couple of months ago that he read out to the House, we are considering the final allocation of the spending review settlement in the light of our overall priorities for education and for children's services, which are now within the specific remit of the Department for Education and Skills.
Unlike other Government Departments, we received our overall envelope of money in the Budget, which means that we are planning at a different stage from other Government Departments. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the points that he and my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud raised today will contribute to our consideration of our spending priorities. Much as the hon. Gentleman tempts me to go beyond that, I am not in a position to do so today. What I can say is that we take this issue very seriously, and we will decide the long-term position within the next few months.
I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for putting this issue on the record today via an Adjournment debate. He has demonstrated the strength of his case, and the issue that we are addressing is how we can make the very best use of some of our finest professionals to meet the needs of individual children and young people. All three of us who have spoken in this debate have paid tribute to the excellent work done by educational psychologists, which I want to put on the record clearly and explicitly. I hope that, as we move forward, we can ensure both a sufficient supply of good, high-quality people to do this work, and that the very real need and demand out there is met in a consistent and inclusive way that gives the very best possible start in life to children and young people in communities throughout the country. I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for allowing me to put that on the record today.
Question put and agreed to.
- Adjourned accordingly at twenty-two minutes past Seven o'clock.
| Index | Home Page |