General description on research questions, objectives, and theoretical framework

Research question: How has the Educational Psychological Service changed the expectations for collaboration with the school after the new Education Act in Norway?

Objectives:  Our study aims to investigate the impact of the new Education Act provision on the work of educational psychological services (EPS) and to assess whether the new quality criteria for EPS have influenced counsellors' understanding of their roles. Additionally, we seek to determine if these changes have contributed to enhancing inclusive education and increasing participation from students and parents. We conducted interviews with leaders and focus groups with counsellors at three municipal EPS offices. Through data analysis, we will highlight practical implications that may also be significant within a European context.

Theoretical framework: The aim of this study is to discuss whether EPS, as a support system, is moving towards a more system-oriented practice due to new expectations in collaboration with schools. EPS plays a crucial role in supporting inclusive education, and its work is characterized by a lack of resources and high accountability demands, leading to a conflict between these demands and the resources provided (Szulevicz, Moen & Caspersen, 2023).

In connection with the new Education Act introduced in august 2024, the EPS's mandate was defined to support and guide schools in assessing the need for adapted education and implementing measures and strategies as early as possible when needed. EPS is also expected to contribute to competence- and organizational development, to ensure that the educational provision is as inclusive and well-adapted as possible.

EPS contributes to inclusive learning environments by incorporating system-oriented practices into professional school communities (Ainscow, 2020). Safe spaces and supportive leadership enable reflection and promote systems-level changes to enhance inclusive education.

Kuria and Kelly (2023) highlight the importance of these elements in EPS to facilitate reflection and information-sharing. Professional communities, including both EPS and schools, can develop practice in collaboration through systematically working with common goals to enhance inclusive learning environment in schools. Research on professional communities shows positive results when they work together in established groups and discuss research-based knowledge in conjunction with their own experiences (Hargreaves & O’Connor, 2018). Professional communities discuss and decide on a mutual understanding of the values and visions underlying the school's activities, but most importantly, a collective responsibility for student learning, which involves working with reflective and professionally investigative methods (Qvortrup, 2016). This also involves developing a collective understanding of what the new Education Act entails in practice.

A semi-structured interview, individually with leaders and with focus groups of counsellors, are conducted to gather in-depth information about EPS’ attitudes, perceptions, and experiences of expectation to their work. In the focus group interviews we facilitated the discussion by posing open-ended questions and encouraging interaction among the participants for exploring complex issues and uncovering underlying motivations and opinions. An to provide insight into how group dynamics can influence individual viewpoints and decision-making processes (Barbour, 2018; Jordhus-Lier,2023). The data analysis employs an inductive analytical approach, which is common in thematic analysis. Thematic analysis is a method for identifying, analysing, and finding significant patterns in the collected data, guided by the research question (Clarke & Braun, 2017). We will present this process in the paper presentation.

By conducting interviews with EPS leaders and counsellors, we have investigated whether the changes introduced by the new Education Act and quality criteria for their work have influenced their understanding of their roles and positioning in collaboration with their schools. The results indicate that the EPS has been working to a more system-oriented practice in Norway for a long time. To build competence at a school level is considered as important crucial so more pupils can receive adequately adapted education. Since the expert evaluation at the EPS is time-consuming and contributes to limit the school's room for scope of action, it appears as a collective motivation between schools and EPS to with a common rice in competence building at organisational level in the municipalities. When it comes to participation from students and parents int their work, the EPS describes some changes in routines to document that the student’s voice and perspective have been obtained in the expert evaluation. Our study also revealed that many parents believe that individualized education led to additional resources for the student, while it often means that students are deprived of participation in the inclusive community in the classrooms at schools. Regardless of the new Education Act, most students share a goal of participating in regular education. This shared objective facilitates systematic efforts in organisational development and competence building in the professional communities in schools in the municipalities.

Ainscow, M. (2020). Promoting inclusion and equity in education: lessons from international experiences. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 6(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2020.1729587 Barbour, R. S. (2018). Doing Focus Groups. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526441836 Hargreaves, A., & O′Connor, M. T. (2018). Collaborative Professionalism: When Teaching Together Means Learning for All (First edition). Corwin Press. Jordhus-Lier, D. (2023). Fokusgrupper som metode (1.Ed.). [Focus groups as method] Cappelen Damm akademisk. Kuria, E. K., & Kelly, C. (2023). Exploring social justice principles within an educational psychology service. Educational Psychology in Practice, 39(4), 403–418. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2023.2226857 Qvortrup, L. (2016). Capacity building: data- and research-informed development of schools and teaching practices in Denmark and Norway. European Journal of Teacher Education, 39(5), 564–576. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2016.1253675 Simoes, A. R., Lourenco, M., Costa, N., & Simões, A. (2018). Teacher Education Policy and Practice in Europe: Challenges and Opportunities for the Future (1st ed., pp. 1–184). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315141763 Szulevicz, T., Moen, T., & Caspersen, J. (2024). Conflicting norms in Danish and Norwegian educational psychology counselling. Nordic Journal of Wellbeing and Sustainable Welfare Development, 3(3), 149–163. https://doi.org/10.18261/njwel.3.3.3 The Norwegian Education Act. (2024). Act relating to Primary and Secondary Education (LOV-2024-08-01-1). Lovdata. https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/2023-06-09-30