Transitioning to needs based assessment: an exploration of the AFI Model in an educational psychological context

1. ‘Transitioning to Needs Based
Assessment: An Exploration of
the AFI Model in an Irish
Educational Psychological
Context’
CAROL SLATTERY (DECPSY, 2016-2019)

2. Area of Study: Policy Context
Launch of the New
Model for allocation of
special education
teaching resources in
mainstream schools
(DES, 2017)

3. Relevance for EP practice
Focus of professional assessment (Circular
0013/2017):
•Providing understanding of a child’s needs
•Nature of his/her difficulties
•Informing appropriate interventions

4. Literature Review
EP assessment approaches informing
interventions for clients:
•Assessment for Intervention (AFI) model (Pameijer, 2017)
•Dynamic Assessment (Lawrence & Cahill, 2014)
•Strength Based Assessment (Bozic, 2013)
•Response to Intervention (Parker et al., 2016)
•Genogram model (Tobias, 2017)
•Systemic and Solution Focused Assessment (Cane, 2016)

5. Theoretical Underpinnings
Ecological Systems Theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, 1989)
Social Constructivist Theory (Palinscar, 1998; Vygotsky,
1978; Wertsch, 1991)

6. AFI (Pameijer, 2016, 2017)
Five stage model of assessment and intervention, underpinned by seven theoretical principles
AFI aims to bridge
the gap between
assessment and
intervention to
provide
recommendations
that are both
scientifically sound
and useful for the
student, teacher
and parent/
guardian
Circular 0013/2017
outlines
professional
assessment will
focus on providing
understanding of a
child’s needs, the
nature of
difficulties, and
informing
appropriate
interventions

7. Seven Principles of AFI
Seven principles underpinning AFI:
1. Goal directed and functional assessment
2. Transactional Perspective
3. Focuses on educational needs of child
4. Focuses on needs of teachers, parents/guardians
5. Focuses on risk and protective factors
6. Collaborative partnerships
7. A systematic and transparent assessment process

8. Five Stage Model
Five stage model of assessment:
1. Intake: how can we collaborate?
2. Strategy: how to proceed in this particular case?
3. Investigation: answering the selected questions
4. Integration: goals and needs
5. Recommendations, appointments and feedback.
(AFI checklists/templates provide structure to planning
and reflection)
NEPS Model of Service Delivery

9. AFI in Practice
•AFI model is applied by EPs in the Netherlands and
Belgium
•’A model of best practice’ (European Agency for
Development in Special Education)

10. Aims of Current Research
1. Provide empirical evidence of the application of the AFI
model in EP practice in Ireland.
2. Provide qualitative findings on the utility of the AFI
model in bridging the gap between assessment and
intervention, through the theoretical lens of Ecological
Systems Theory and Social Constructivist Theory.

11. Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

12. Diagram of Conceptual Framework

13. Theoretical Statement
‘During a time of ecological transition with the issuance of
Circular 0013/2014, the EP applies the five stages of the AFI
model to a case referral. By interacting with the child,
parents/guardians and teachers in accordance with AFI
principles at the meso and microsystem levels, the assessment
process leads to intervention recommendations that are
meaningful to teachers, parents/guardians and child. Engaging
together in the five stage process exposes elements of EST and
SCT concepts’.

14. Research Question
‘Can the Assessment for Intervention
model bridge the gap between
assessment and intervention,
through activity and interaction at
the meso and microsystem levels?’

15. Methodology
•Qualitative methods utilising an exploratory ‘two
case’ case study are employed (Yin, 2003).
•‘Case’ refers to a group (the student, the
student’s parent(s)/guardian(s), the student’s
teacher(s) and SNA) in two separate primary
schools.
•The student is in a senior class in primary school
(4th, 5th or 6th) and referred to NEPS for
behaviour, social-emotional and/or learning
needs.

17. Methods applied
Likert Statements
Researcher Diary (AFI templates)
Interview Questions

18. Current status in the research process
Pilot Study Two Cases
Data Analysis/
Write up

19. References
Bozic, N. (2013). Developing a strength-based approach to educational psychology
practice: A multiple case study. Educational & Child Psychology, 30(4), 18-29.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature
and design. Boston, MA: Harvard College.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological systems theory. Annals of Child Development, 6,
187-249.
Cane, F. (2016). Everyone's solution: A case study of a systemic and solution-focused
approach to therapeutic intervention in a secondary school. Educational & Child
Psychology, 33(4), 66-79.

20. References
Department of Education and Skills. (2017). Special Education Teaching Allocation Circular
0013/2017. Retrieved from http://www.sess.ie/sites/default/files/inline-
files/cl0013_2017.pdf.
Lawrence, N., & Cahill, S. (2014). The impact of dynamic assessment: an exploration of the views
of children, parents and teachers. British Journal of Special Education, 41(2), 191-211.
Palinscar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review
of Psychology, 49, 345-375.
Pameijer, N. (2016). Assessment for intervention: A practice-based model.
Pameijer, N. (2017). Assessment and intervention: Bridging the gap with a practice-based
model. Educational & Child Psychology, 34(1), 66-82.

21. References
Parker, J., Zaboski, B., & Joyce-Beaulieu, D. (2016). School-based cognitive-behavioral therapy for
an adolescent presenting with ADHD and explosive anger: A case study. Contemporary
School Psychology, 20(4), 356-369.
Tobias , A. (2017). The use of genograms in educational psychology practice. Educational
Psychology in Practice, 34(1), 89-104.
Vygotsky, L. (1978).Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Wertsch, J. (1991). Voices of the mind: A socio-cultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.