When schools work with educational psychologists (EPs), the focus is often on assessment, advice or training. However, national guidance from the National Association of Principal Educational Psychologists (NAPEP) makes clear that research is not an optional extra in educational psychology – it is a core professional function.
This article explores what it means for schools to use EPs as researchers, drawing on a recent example of school‑based work conducted by Maral Dabirdoust, trainee EP- one of many team members who use their research skills to support school strategic development as part of their day to day practice.
Educational Psychologists: A Public‑Sector Research Profession
According to NAPEP, educational psychologists are a public‑sector workforce whose role is to provide psychological thinking in the education system, distinct from other roles that support children and families.
EPs are trained to:
- understand how educational settings work,
- work across the 0–25 age range,
- synthesise information from multiple sources, and
- engage critically in complex problem analysis over time, generating and testing hypotheses using evidence.
Crucially, NAPEP identifies research as one of the five core EP functions, alongside consultation, assessment, intervention and training. This research role is not limited to academic studies; it is about supporting schools to understand what is happening, why it is happening, and what is most likely to lead to meaningful change.
Research That Starts With School Questions, Not Preset Solutions
In one primary school, concerns were raised about how consistently ordinarily available provision was being implemented for neurodivergent pupils. Rather than assuming a deficit in staff skills or knowledge, Maral began by working with leaders to frame this as a research question:
What is helping or hindering staff to implement inclusive, everyday provision in this context?
This approach reflects NAPEP’s description of EPs providing psychological critical thinking skills to the education sector, using theory and evidence to challenge assumptions and deepen understanding.
Using Data to Understand Systems – Not to Judge
To explore staff experiences, Maral used an anonymous survey asking about strengths and challenges in implementing ordinarily available provision (OAP), with an option for staff to request a one‑to‑one reflective conversation. Many teachers did.
These conversations were not inspections or performance checks. They functioned as systemic consultations, creating psychologically safe spaces for teachers to talk about practice, uncertainty and decision‑making.
Alongside practical barriers, Maral identified wider patterns:
- staff self‑doubt about practice,
- guilt about “not doing enough”, and
- emotional strain arising from deep care for pupils.
This aligns closely with NAPEP’s emphasis on psychological safety as a core EP responsibility: supporting adults to manage complexity, reduce self‑blame and remain aligned with their inclusive values.
Feedback That Builds Insight, Not Blame
Rather than feeding back individual concerns, Maral synthesised patterns for senior leaders. This allowed school leaders to see that inconsistent practice was not about motivation or professionalism, but about confidence, emotional load and system pressures.
This kind of synthesis exemplifies what NAPEP describes as EPs’ ability to apply implementation science – bridging the gap between research, lived experience and real‑world conditions in schools.
Turning Research Into Practical, Context‑Specific Tools
In response to the findings, Maral developed a shared resource outlining examples of ordinarily available provision, indicators of need and next steps. This drew on:
- materials from different local authorities,
- resources shared by EP colleagues, and
- university teaching materials.
Rather than importing a single model, Maral critically appraised and adapted evidence so it made sense for this school. NAPEP explicitly recognises this blending of research evidence and practice‑based evidence as a defining strength of the profession.
Plans were also made to gather follow‑up feedback, reinforcing that EP‑led research is iterative, participatory and responsive.
Why One‑to‑One Reflection Can Be More Powerful Than Training
School leaders often assume that training is the most efficient way to create change. In this case, Maral reflected that the time involved in individual consultations was similar to preparing a training session – but the impact was different.
Teachers described leaving sessions feeling lighter and more confident. What mattered most was not being taught new strategies, but having their existing practice recognised and understood.
NAPEP emphasises that EPs use therapeutic alliance and reflective approaches to support change, particularly where workload, moral injury or compassion fatigue are present.
Seeing the Bigger Picture Across Schools
Because EPs work across multiple settings, they are uniquely placed to notice patterns. Issues emerging in one school often appear elsewhere. Through team discussion and wider professional networks, EPs can distinguish between isolated challenges and systemic pressures.
NAPEP highlights this multi‑level perspective as a key function of EPs, enabling learning at school, local authority and system levels.
Why This Matters for Schools
Using Educational Psychologists as researchers is not about more paperwork or academic complexity. It is about:
- asking better questions,
- using evidence to understand systems rather than individuals,
- strengthening psychologically safe cultures, and
- making change more sustainable.
As NAPEP makes clear, EPs exist to combine research, implementation science and psychological safety in service of children, families and educators. When schools draw on EPs in this way, challenges become opportunities for reflection, participation and growth – not just problems to be fixed.
For more details on the role of EPs across functions please visit:
6b4f08_f13262ae2fc34312ab2187b6e1c50e04.pdf
England Educational Psychology Role based on the Currie Matrix (NAPEP, 2025)