Article

School psychology in the Czech Republic: Development, status and practice

School Psychology International 34(5) 556–565 ! The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0143034312469759 spi.sagepub.com

Veronika Kavenska´ Palacky´ University, Czech Republic

Eleonora Sme´kalova´ Palacky´ University, Czech Republic

Jan Sˇmahaj Palacky´ University, Czech Republic

Abstract This intensive exploratory research maps the working conditions of school psychologists in the Czech Republic. An electronic questionnaire consisting of 71 questions (58 quantitative, 13 qualitative) from nine fields was used as a research tool. The respondent sample (N ¼ 63; 53 females, 10 males) indicate that they are largely jobsatisfied and there is significant statistical relationship between their job satisfaction and their acceptance by both management and teaching staff. Compared to prior years, these school psychologists appear more certain of their work identity. Keywords Czech Republic, development of school psychology, job satisfaction, school psychologist role and function, sense of acceptance, working conditions

School psychology in the Czech Republic, as in other countries with a totalitarian past, has been developing slowly and with difficulty. That said, there has been a steady increase in the number of psychologists who work in this professional field either as counsellors in schools or as teaching and research staff at academic institutions. The development of the theory and practice of school psychology is related Corresponding author: Veronika Kavenska´, Department of Psychology, Palacky´ University, Olomouc, 77180, Krˇ´ızˇkovske´ho 10, Czech Republic. Email: [email protected]

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

Kavenska´ et al.

557

to the development of psychological services for schools that, in practice, are part of the Czech system of educational-psychological counselling. The base of this system is formed by school counsellors and, in recent years, by school prevention specialists. A further component of educational/psychological counselling are the so-called school guidance facilities which were founded by regional councils following a decree by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS), and are known as Educational-Psychological Counselling Centres and Special Educational Centres. Educational-Psychological Counselling Centres (EPCC) focus on the provision of diagnostic assessment and appropriate recommendations for teachers as well as parents whose children have school problems. These Centres also concentrate on the prevention of education and training difficulties at school and help pupils to select suitable study or work careers (in 2007, there were 141 EPCCs in the Czech Republic). Special Educational Centres (SEC) focus on children with disabilities, supporting their education and recommending suitable conditions for their integration (in 2007, there were 127 SECs in the Czech Republic). In addition to these two agencies, there has been an increase in the number of Educational Care Centres that focus on behaviour problems in children and young people (in 2007, there were 39 ECCs). In 2007, apart from a number of special educators and social workers, a total of 670 counselling psychologists worked in these centres. At that time, approximately 200 school psychologists worked directly in Czech schools. While the number of school guidance facilities is little changed, the number of school psychologists employed by schools is on the increase—today their number is estimated at between 300 and 350 (Sme´kalova´, 2009). The Czech Institute for Information on Education data show that compared to 175 psychologists working in schools in September 2005, their number nearly doubled to 331 by September 2010; while the number of schools decreased from 8,681 in 2005 to 8,474 in 2011. Unlike work requirements for school guidance facilities, the job description for school psychologists is based on their influence on those people involved both directly and indirectly in child socialization. This means that in practice an important part of the work of Czech school psychologists is a prevention-orientation in addition to diagnostic assessment and intervention functions. The development of the work of school psychologists is reflected in the current approach to school psychology as a science. The term ‘school psychology’ has not yet been fully established in the Czech professional literature. Sˇtech (2009) agrees with Oakland and Cunningham’s definition (1997) and understands it as a ‘term used at a more general level for professionals trained in psychology and pedagogy who specialize in providing psychological services for children and young people in schools, in families and other social environments that affect their growth and development’ (p. 397), and further states that school psychology is characterized by the direct incorporation of a school psychologist into a particular school. Lazarova´ (2008) also speaks of school psychology as a professional discipline, related to the activities of psychologists in schools. According to Maresˇ (2010), school psychology explores and deals with educational and training problems in the context of a school from a psychological viewpoint. It helps individual students

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

558

School Psychology International 34(5)

as well as classes, teachers, teaching staff as a whole, and school managerial staff with their specific problems, and also gives parents advice on questions regarding child rearing (Cˇa´p & Maresˇ , 2001). On the other hand, Va´gnerova´ (2005, p. 11) states that ‘school psychology helps to apply general psychological knowledge to school system, provides various psychological services to both direct and indirect participants in the education and training process and concerns itself with all children, not only those with school problems’. Another approach, to which the authors of this study tend to incline, regards the work of school psychologists in schools as only one part of the field of school psychology. In the Czech Republic, we understand school psychology as being a young, promising, specialized psychological science whose focus is derived from the connection of the science of psychology and the discipline of education. Understood like this, Czech school psychology concentrates on seeking and researching theoretical foundations of psychological processes occurring in school (e.g. interaction and communication, learning processes, school and classroom climate, school evaluation) in contrast to pedagogic psychology, which focuses on learning issues—regardless where learning takes place. In terms of the historical development of school psychology in the Czech Republic (CR) it is closely aligned to practices and services in Slovakia beginning with professional cooperation established under the Association of School Psychologists of the Slovak Republic and Czech Republic. Although the conditions for the development of school psychology are slightly different in terms of legislation, regulation and government support, school psychologists from both countries are in close contact, hold joint conferences, and publish a magazine oriented on school psychology issues. In both countries, school psychologists were until recently codified as ‘school workers’, and matters of funding and training still remain long-term challenges. For example, psychology graduates, according to the Czech Education Act, can work as school psychologists in schools despite lacking practical and theoretical knowledge of the discipline of school psychology. Psychology as studied at faculties of philosophy usually concerns itself with the topic of school psychology only marginally and subjects related to this field are optional. Thus, it often happens that in practice the position of a school psychologist is filled by a person with a master’s degree in psychology who has only studied school-related topics within the mandatory subject of pedagogic psychology. One might assume that as a result of an increasing need for school counselling in schools, there will also be an increasing number of schools that will want to employ school psychologists, for whom adequate pregraduate as well as postgraduate training is currently unavailable. One of the reasons for the current state of unsatisfactory pregraduate training in school psychology is that this young scientific discipline has been accepted into the study of psychology only recently. There are many reasons—from university teachers, who teach in departments of psychology and who train future psychologists despite themselves having negligible or no experience—to the shortage of

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

Kavenska´ et al.

559

basic-level books on school psychology, to the continuing mistrust for this relatively new field. The aim of Czech school psychology research has been to uncover distinct influential characteristics connected with the running of a school. Exemplars of Czech school psychology research, includes longitudinal research performed by the Prague Group of School Ethnography (2004), research on the quality of school life (Maresˇ , 2010), and investigations aimed at understanding the nature of the work of school psychologists. The aim of the current research is to describe models of functioning for Czech school psychologists, and provide descriptions of their work in different types of school, their job content, their relations with others, and similar characteristics.

Methods This study investigates the working conditions of school psychologists in the Czech Republic. The research goals were to map working conditions of school psychologists, their relations with school management and teaching staff; to create an overview description of the activities of school psychologists; and, to find links between concrete factors that will prove relevant to the work of Czech school psychologists.

Research design This comprises intensive exploratory research incorporating a custom-developed questionnaire posed in electronic format during 2012 via a website that included both quantitative and qualitative questions.

Questionnaire description The questionnaire consisted of 71 questions (58 quantitative, 13 qualitative) from nine areas (organization of work, qualifications and work experience, legal awareness, work activities, time distribution, cooperation and relations, support and supervision, working conditions, stocktaking and mission). Data were collected online with an average time for completion of 25 minutes. The questionnaire was a modified and extended methodology of a study by Sme´kalova´ (2010).

Research sample The research sample comprised 102 school psychologists from various regions of the Czech Republic who responded to invitations sent to the head teachers of the schools where they worked. After a logical and formal data check, 63 valid questionnaires were submitted for statistical processing. Respondents’ ages ranged from 25 to 55 years; with 55% between 26 and 35 years. Fifty respondents worked in primary schools and 13 respondents worked in secondary schools (SOU [secondary

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

560

School Psychology International 34(5)

vocational school], SOSˇ [secondary technical school], SSˇ [secondary general school], and gymna´zium [secondary grammar school]. Their working hours ranged from 2–50 weekly, with an average of 27.5 hours of work per week.

Results (Supplemental Tables are provided to expand the data outlined below)

Who determines the school psychologist‘s job description? Thirty-four school psychologists determine their own job description. Nineteen school psychologists determine their job contents in collaboration with another person or their job description is determined by a decree, and nine school psychologists have their job description determined by head teachers.

Work experience and qualifications Our respondents had an average of nine-years of psychological work experience. Nine of the 63 school psychologists had a highest degree at the bachelor’s level. Most school psychologists (52 of 63) had previous work experience in their professional field. Work experience in school guidance facilities (SGFs) was the most common setting. Work experience was also acquired in the following fields: Clinical psychology; counselling (helplines, online counselling, marriage and family counselling); police and military psychology; human resources management and the psychology of work; primary prevention (particularly primary prevention training); teaching and education; and working as a teacher’s assistant. Several psychologists (8 of 63) had links to universities where they worked as assistant professors.

Legal awareness Since school management and teaching staff are largely uncertain as to the duties of a school psychologist, we focused on legal awareness of the school psychologists themselves. In the questionnaire we gave three legal norms, one of which was invented and served as a ‘pseudo-score.’ Despite the possibility of opting out of this question, 50 out of 63 respondents (79%) chose to answer it. All of them were familiar with the decree regulating the work of school psychologists. As to the invented legislative norm, it was revealed that not all school psychologists are certain what specific legislative norms regulate their profession (24 school psychologists stated that they use this norm, understand it, or are aware of what it regulates; only 26 school psychologists admitted ignorance to the pseudoregulation). In the regulated profession of psychology, knowledge about regulatory legislation might not be regarded as a marginal matter.

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

Kavenska´ et al.

561

Work activities We focused on the nature of school psychologists’ work activities. Our research showed that the work of school psychologists in the Czech Republic is varied; they perform a broad spectrum of activities. The most frequent activities are summarized in Table 2 (see Supplemental Materials). Apart from the ten most frequently performed activities, we discovered a range of diverse activities, each incorporated by only a few school psychologists, such as organizing school clubs, teambuilding activities for teachers, conducting school surveys, holding educational discussions for parents, providing supervision for teachers (Balint groups), creating school noticeboards with psychological foci, and setting up ‘confidential post-boxes.’ Twenty-three school psychologists also provide online counselling in schools. All of these activities are in compliance with legal regulations (MEYS Decree on Providing Guidance in Schools and School Guidance Facilities). School psychologists also carry out psychological diagnostic assessment of students. In addition to observation and dialogue, 54 school psychologists use published diagnostic tools. The most frequently used tools are sociometric questionnaires designed for diagnostic assessment of classes (35 school psychologists); intelligence tests (IST 2000R, 24; WISC-III, 14; Raven, 6; W-J, 5); projective tests (FDT, 24; Handtest, 6; ROR, 3); and questionnaires (CDI, 6; CMAS, 5; NEO, 4). Respondents’ comments suggested that the reason why some school psychologists did not conduct psychological diagnostic assessment was because their work setting failed to provide them with the necessary diagnostic tools.

Time distribution With regard to mapping the job contents of school psychologists in the CR, we considered time distribution to be an important indicator. The basic division of labour is shown in Figure 1 (Supplemental Materials). We also focused on the possibility that there is a relationship between the number of a school psychologist’s working hours and the distribution of time which they dedicate to particular parties involved. This relationship is described in Table 3 (Supplemental Materials).

Cooperation and relations Another focus area of the research was cooperation with others. We tested the assumption that school psychologists’ job satisfaction is related to their acceptance by teachers, school management, and students, and the assumption that this acceptance correlates with the higher number of teacher-focused activities. Fiftytwo school psychologists are satisfied or are relatively satisfied in their jobs; three are dissatisfied. Fifty-five feel accepted or relatively accepted by school management and 59 school psychologists feel accepted or relatively accepted by the

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

562

School Psychology International 34(5)

students. The first assumption was that there is a correlation between school psychologists’ job satisfaction and their acceptance by teachers; positive statistical dependence was found (r ¼ 0.26). The second assumption was the existence of a connection between school psychologists’ job satisfaction and their acceptance on the part of school management; in this case, too, positive statistical dependence was determined (r ¼ 0.51). The third assumption was that there is a relationship between school psychologists’ job satisfaction and their acceptance on the part of students—for which positive statistical dependence (r ¼ 0.23) was found. The fourth assumption was the existence of a connection between the acceptance of school psychologists on the part of teachers and the degree to which school psychologists’ activities are teacher-focused. The degree of focus was expressed as a percentage of working hours dedicated to teachers. This dependence was not supported (r ¼ 0.18). Correlation values are separately provided (Supplemental Materials).

Support and supervision It is important for school psychologists to be provided professional support; 31 of 63 psychologists said that they attend supervision meetings, the costs of which are reimbursed by their employers. Those school psychologists who do not attend supervision meetings gave reasons such as a lack of financial means and difficulty in finding a suitable supervisor.

Working conditions Mapping school psychologists’ working conditions was also part of this research. In addition to social, educational, and other conditions which were investigated (e.g. support and supervision, cooperation, and interpersonal relations), we focused on material conditions such as office equipment and the procurement of consumable supplies, materials necessary for working with students, and professional literature. A positive finding was that 59 school psychologists have their own offices or share with another specialist (guidance counsellor, special educator). All except four school psychologists have access to a computer; 54 are provided with consumable materials necessary for working with students but schools purchased diagnostic tools for only 12 school psychologists.

Stocktaking and mission Most school psychologists find their jobs interesting, creative, and demanding. At the same time, they pointed out the need to pay attention to prevent burnout not only through supervision meetings, but also by being aware of their own limits. Poignant similes were used–one school psychologist compared himself to ‘a lonely soldier on a battlefield’; another stated ‘although we do the donkey work, we cannot make asses of ourselves.’

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

Kavenska´ et al.

563

Discussion The aim of this research was to map the working conditions of school psychologists in the Czech Republic. School psychologists are, compared to previous years (Sˇtech, 2001), rather more certain of their work identity, their positions in schools are better defined, and they feel more accepted by school management as well as by teaching staff. We discovered that in terms of their job satisfaction, this sample of Czech school psychologists feel a sense of acceptance from school management (r ¼ 0.51) and to a lesser extent, from teaching staff (r ¼ 0.26). Job descriptions for school psychologists correspond to previous findings from the Czech Republic (Lazarova´ & Ondrusˇ , 2000; Sˇtech & Zapletalova´, 2001; Zapletalova´, 2001) and, as our research revealed, they are largely in accordance with legal regulations. By contrast, we found that nine school psychologists were performing their work without having met the legal minimum training requirements. For our set of respondents, the most common workplace activities were: Individual work with students; consultation with teachers; and work with classes. Fifty-four school psychologists occupy themselves with diagnostic assessment that is in compliance with legal regulations; however, in order to confirm a learning disability such as dyslexia, their investigation must be followed by an examination in a school guidance facility. Thirty-four school psychologists claim to have acquired postgraduate training in completing advance diagnoses. Schools provide school psychologists with appropriate material conditions for their work (office, computer, consumable supplies, etc.). The situation is less favourable with regard to financing further training, access to supervision, and the purchase of an adequate inventory of diagnostic tools. There are clear limitations to our research study. We have a small set of respondents with an uneven distribution within regions of the Czech Republic. Participation in the research was voluntary and therefore it is safe to assume that more motivated and job-satisfied school psychologists participated in the research. The use of a self-produced questionnaire may also be regarded as questionable. For the sake of anonymity, we selected online data collection that has both advantages (it is cost-and time-saving) and disadvantages (respondents’ access to the Internet, finding the invitation, use of false identity). Consequently, the generalization of these obtained results is not appropriate.

Conclusion The aim of this research was to map the working conditions of school psychologists in the Czech Republic. Based on our small-scale survey we demonstrated that most respondent school psychologists are satisfied in their jobs and that there is statistically significant dependence between their job satisfaction and their acceptance on the part of school management and teaching staff. Job descriptions vary and in terms of their duties, individual consultations with students, individual consultations with teachers, and work with classes prevail. Most activities performed by

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

564

School Psychology International 34(5)

school psychologists are in compliance with the law. Most school psychologists occupy themselves with diagnostic assessment, especially with classwide diagnostic assessment. Schools provide school psychologists with educational intervention material conditions that are appropriate for their work. The situation is less favourable with regard to financing further professional training, supervision, and the purchase of diagnostic tools. One positive finding is the fact that school psychologists are, compared to previous years, more certain of their work identity. In summary, the Czech school psychology profession is trending positively and gradually is finding its place in the field of psychological research (Kavenska´, Sme´kalova´ & Sˇmahaj, 2011). References Cˇa´p, J., & Maresˇ , J. (2001). Psychologie pro ucˇitele [Psychology for teachers]. Praha: Porta´l. Kavenska´, V., Sme´kalova´, E., & Sˇmahaj, J. (2011). Vy´zkum v oblasti sˇ kolnı´ psychologie v CˇR [Research in school psychology in the CR]. E-psychologie [online], 5(4), 55–67, Retrieved January 18, 2012, from Dostupny´ z www:. Lazarova´, B. (2008). Sˇkolnı´ psychologie v Cˇeske´ republice po roce 1989 [School psychology in the Czech Republic after 1989]. Cˇeskoslovenska´ psychologie, 52, 480–492. Lazarova´, B., & Ondrusˇ , D. (2000). Dva pohledy na na´plnˇ pra´ce sˇ kolnı´ ho psychologa [Two views on the school psychologist‘s role]. Sˇkolsky´ psycholo´g, 10, 2–10. Maresˇ , J. (2010). Kvalita zˇivota sˇ koly [The school life quality]. Sˇkolsky´ psycholo´g, 1–2, 17–24. Oakland, T., & Cunningham, J. (1997). Na´vrh koncepce sˇ kolnı´ psychologie [Draft concept of school psychology]. Sˇkolsky´ psycholo´g, 7(1/2), 5–10. Prazˇska´ skupina sˇ kolnı´ etnografie [Prague group of school ethnography]. (2004). Cˇesˇtı´ zˇa´ci po deseti letech [Czech pupils in ten years]. Praha: Univerzita Karlova v Praze, Pedagogicka´ fakulta. Sme´kalova´, E. (2009). Do schools need psychology or psychologists? (Looking for a good model of psychological consulting for school practice). In XXVI. Psychologicke´ dny 2008: Ja´ & my a oni. CD-ROM s plny´mi texty, vyda´n ve spolupra´ci CˇMPS a FSS MU Brno. Sme´kalova´, E. (2010) Rozhovory se sˇ kolnı´ mi psychology, provedene´ studenty kombinovane´ho studia psychologie [Interviews with school psychologists, conducted as a combined study of psychology students]. Sˇtech, S. (2001). Sonda do profese sˇ kolnı´ ho psychologa v Cˇeske´ republice [The probe into the profession of school psychologist in the Czec Republic]. Pedagogika, 51, 47–55. Sˇtech, S. (2009). Sˇkolnı´ psychologie [School psychology]. In B. Basˇ tecka´ (Ed.), Psychologicka´ encyklopedie: aplikovana´ psychologie (pp. 397–400). Praha: Porta´l. Sˇtech, S., & Zapletalova´, J. (2001). Kvalitativnı´ analy´za prˇ ı´ stupu sˇ kolnı´ ch psychologu˚ k profesi - srovna´nı´ kazuisticky´ch studiı´ [Qualitative analysis of access to the profession of school psychologists: Causal comparison studies]. In: Metodika pra´ce sˇkolnı´ch psychologu˚ na ZSˇ a SSˇ. Projekt MSˇMT (pp. 37–47). Praha: IPPP. Va´gnerova´, M. (2005). Sˇkolnı´ poradenska´ psychologie pro pedagogy [School counseling psychology for teachers]. Praha: Karolinum. Zapletalova´, J. (2001). Co deˇla´ sˇ kolnı´ psycholog? Kriticka´ mı´ sta profese. [What makes a school psychologist? Critical points of the profession]. Pedagogika, mimorˇ a´dne´ cˇı´ slo, 36–41.

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

Kavenska´ et al.

565

Author biographies Veronika Kavenska´ is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychology, Palacky´ University at Olomouc, while also serving as a school psychologist in a primary school. Her research and publications focus on the current status and practice of school psychology in the Czech Republic and in neighboring countries. Eleonora Sme´kalova´ is Senior Lecturer at the Departments of Psychology and Philosophy, Palacky University, Czech Republic. Her primary research activities are linked to esstablished consulting practices in the fields of school psychology and social services. Jan Sˇmahaj is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychology, Palacky´ University, and the Institute of Educational Sciences TBU, in Zlı´ n, Czech Republic. He studies cyberbullying, interpersonal communications and cyberpsychology.

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016