Determining the opinions of BEP development unit members on individualized education programs

The purpose of this study is to determine the opinions of the members of the IEP development unit on individualized education programs. The sample of the study was interviewed with the head of the IEP development unit, school psychological counselor/guidance teacher, a branch teacher who teaches the student's course, and a parent of a special needs student determined from each school, who were working in two secondary schools, two middle schools, and two primary schools determined within the scope of the research in a province in the Eastern Anatolia Region in the 2022-2023 academic year. Phenomenological design and easily accessible case sampling were preferred among qualitative research methods in the study. In the study, a previously prepared participant demographic information form and a semi-structured interview form were used to obtain data from the participants. For the data of the study, interviews were conducted with six school administrators, six guidance teachers/psychological counselors, six teachers from different branches, and six parents of special needs students. The data were analyzed using content analysis. When the results of the research are examined, it is concluded that the social relations, affective states and educational status of the students are supported in line with the opinions of the IEP development unit members regarding the positive aspects of inclusive education. It is concluded that the students who receive inclusive education regarding supporting social relations are in the same educational environment with their peers, thus they socialize, integrate into society, gain the ability to express themselves, learn social rules, learn to communicate and acquire positive behaviors. It is concluded that the self-confidence of the students who receive inclusive education regarding supporting the affective status increases, they feel good psychologically, their perspective towards students with special needs changes, they learn to share, their sense of responsibility develops, they love school, they feel a sense of achievement and the acceptance process is facilitated by the parents. It is concluded that the students who receive inclusive education show academic development, the student's level can be reached, the continuation of education is ensured for students with special needs, progress can be made according to the individual pace of the inclusive student and incorrect learnings are eliminated. It was concluded that the IEP development unit members experienced external difficulties/bullying and student-related difficulties regarding the negative aspects of inclusive education. It was concluded that students with special needs were labeled by their normally developing peers, treated with contempt, excluded, and experienced conflict and violence regarding external difficulties/bullying. It was concluded that students with special needs were academically behind their peers in the general education environment, inclusive students behaved inappropriately at school, they were divided academically, some students were not suitable for inclusive education, and inclusive students felt inadequate among their peers regarding student-related difficulties. It was concluded that school administrators and guidance teachers/psychological counselors provide process management and information services in the IEP development unit. It was concluded that they contribute to the stages of collaborating with parents, organizing IEP meetings and appropriate educational environments, and directing and monitoring/following up regarding the process management. It was concluded that they contribute to the stages of supporting teachers and consulting/informing/guiding regarding information. According to teachers, it was concluded that the systematic deficiencies of the IEP are that the IEP is not predictable, difficult to implement in the classroom, there is no draft program, there are no materials, planning is restrictive and requires expertise. It was concluded that the systematic strengths of the IEP are that it is individualized, guides the teacher, has a concrete plan, provides order and supports the student academically. It was concluded that teachers benefit from official and other sources regarding the resources used while preparing the IEP. It was concluded that they benefit from guidance teachers/psychological counselors/teachers, rehabilitation centers and annual plans regarding official resources. Regarding other sources, it was concluded that teachers take the student's current situation as a basis, use internet resources and hold meetings with the family. Regarding the work teachers do during the IEP preparation process; it was concluded that they determine the student's readiness, hold meetings with the family, try to get to know the student, hold meetings with the guidance teacher/psychological counselor, cooperate with other teachers, determine the appropriate outcome for the student and revise the ready programs. Regarding the work teachers do during the IEP application process; it was concluded that they prepare appropriate materials for the student, do homework, follow the student's academic development and progress, make changes in the program when necessary, try to teach by doing and experiencing and use the smart board. Regarding the work teachers do during the evaluation process according to the IEP; it was concluded that they prepare appropriate exam questions for the student, evaluate them verbally, ask open-ended questions and assign tasks in activities. It was concluded that the IEP development unit members experience problems regarding the IEP development unit and the student during the IEP preparation phase. It was concluded that the knowledge level of the BEP development unit members was low, BEP meetings were not held, ready-made individualized education programs were used, there was no cooperation, the BEP development unit members had wrong attitudes, there was difficulty in preparing the BEP, teachers saw the BEP as an extra workload and there were problems because there was no guidance teacher/psychological counselor. Regarding the problems regarding the student, it was concluded that they had difficulty in determining the student's readiness level, parents had difficulties in the acceptance process and teachers did not prepare separate BEPs for inclusive students. The BEP development unit members made recommendations for creating awareness, collaborating and supervising in order to solve the problems they encountered during the BEP preparation phase. Regarding creating awareness; the BEP development unit members should be trained, parents should be informed about the process, the Ministry of National Education should publish framework plans, social awareness should be increased, the BEP should be simplified, teachers should know the student in a multi-dimensional way and guidance awareness should be created in administrators. Regarding collaborating, it was concluded that they made the recommendation that cooperation should be made with the BEP development unit members. Regarding the audit proposal, it was concluded that they proposed a solution to audit all processes related to the BEP. The analysis results regarding the problems encountered by the members of the IEP development unit during the IEP implementation phase revealed that there were problems with the IEP development unit and the student. The IEP development unit was faced with problems such as not being able to use time efficiently, the family not supporting the process, the IEP remaining on paper, teachers concentrating on the curriculum and teachers not being sufficiently equipped, therefore not being able to explain the achievements by reducing them to the student's level, not being able to provide the achievements in the IEP in the classroom, school administrators not being effective in the process, decisions taken in the IEP meeting not being implemented, teachers not wanting to take on a role, making changes in the individualized education program and wrong parental attitudes. The student-related problems were faced with negative outcomes such as the large class sizes and therefore ignoring the inclusion student in the classroom, other students acting reactively, the inclusion student experiencing adaptation problems, books/materials not being suitable for the inclusion student, the inclusion student disrupting the course, not being able to participate in some activities and not being able to do individual work in the classroom. It was determined that the members of the IEP development unit made suggestions regarding the solution of the problems encountered during the IEP implementation phase regarding the implementation legislation and the implementation in the school context. It was concluded that they made suggestions regarding the implementation legislation such as; support education rooms should be opened, IEP development unit members should be trained, inspections should be carried out, extra time should be allocated, wage policy should be revised, IEP should be prepared according to the student's progress, part-time integration should be implemented, students with severe levels should not receive integration education and support education regulation should be arranged. In the context of the implementation in the school, it was concluded that they made suggestions such as; class size should be reduced, cooperation should be increased, teacher sensitivity should be increased, appropriate books/materials should be sent to the integration student, peer awareness should be increased, socialization of the integration student should be ensured and physical conditions of the school should be improved. It was concluded that the problems encountered by the members of the IEP development unit during the evaluation phase according to the IEP were teacher-related, integration student-related, other student-related and parent-related. Teacher-related problems; It was concluded that the main problems were not evaluated in accordance with the IEP/diagnosis of the inclusion student, not preparing a separate exam for the inclusion student, not focusing on the progress of the inclusion student, not preparing an evaluation report, giving an average grade to the inclusion student and giving an unplanned exam. It was concluded that the problems originating from the inclusion student were; the inclusion student not reaching the determined goal, the inclusion student not wanting to take the exam, the inclusion student focusing on one type of question and the inclusion student getting used to the easy way. The problem originating from other students was that other students behaved reactively; it was concluded that the parents had high expectations from the inclusion student regarding the problem originating from the parents. The IEP development unit members made suggestions regarding the problems encountered during the evaluation phase according to the IEP and conducting exams. Regarding managing the process; They suggested that inspections should be carried out, IEP development unit members should be trained, cooperation should be established, sensitive teachers should be trained and sent to schools with low student numbers. It was concluded that they made solution suggestions such as; one-on-one exams should be given to inclusive students, an evaluation report should be prepared, students with special needs should be evaluated in a multi-faceted way and an exam should be prepared according to the student's diagnosis.