然而，IEP系统并不是解决特殊教育需求的最佳方式。一方面，该系统隔离和提供服务的学生有一种类型的学习问题，而没有解决学生的需要，其问题更环保。如健康问题，干扰学校，但不是一个严重的医疗条件，出勤率低，说话和语言的困难，问题在家里，情感或行为困难以外的SEN准则是不处理IEPs。考虑到其他因素，这不仅会导致对SEN儿童的识别延迟，而且也没有为患有上述问题的学生提供任何帮助，这些问题会影响他们的学习经验。只要IEP体系存在，政府指导或个别的LEAs或学校就不太可能转向面向所有学生的全校战略(Lingard 2001)。iep提供了一个框架来满足SEN学生的需求，但要根据每个学生的具体情况。如果整个学校的策略都到位了，IEPs就会变得不那么详细，甚至可能被淘汰。例如，目前的系统要求每个学校的特殊教育需求协调员(SENCOs)花费大量时间编写和管理IEPs，几乎所有的报告都可以更有效地用于学生的直接互动。大多数森科斯认为，学生和学校作为一个整体将受益于一个系统，在这个系统中，所有负责学生学习的教师和工作人员将分享与iep有关的规划和其他工作。“如要有效地运用全校的政策和工作计划，以区分课程科目的教学，就不应在过于繁复的个人进修计划中重复设定目标。”因此，IEP系统可以被看作是全面纳入的障碍，因为它阻止了学校采用全校策略来满足SEN学生的学习需求。
北美留学生作业代写：特殊教育需求
The IEP system, however, is not the best way to address special education needs. For one thing, the system isolates and provides services for pupils with one type of learning problems whilst not addressing the needs of pupils whose problems are more environmental. Issues such as health problems that interfere with school but are not a serious medical condition, poor attendance, speech and language difficulties, problems at home, and emotional or behavioural difficulties outside the SEN guidelines are not addressed by IEPs . This not only can cause a delay in identification of SEN children, as other contributing factors are considered, but also makes no provision for pupils suffering from issues such as above which compromise their learning experience .IEPs can therefore be viewed as a hindrance to full inclusion. As long as the IEP system is in place, there is less likelihood that government guidance or individual LEAs or schools will move to a whole-school strategy for all pupils (Lingard 2001). IEPs provide a framework for addressing the needs of SEN pupils, but do so on an individual basis for each pupil. If whole-school strategies were in place, IEPs could be much less detailed, or possibly eliminated. For example, the current system requires Special Educational Needs Coordinators (SENCOs) at each school to spend a great amount of time writing and administering IEPs, which nearly all report could be more effectively spent on direct pupil interaction (Lingard 2001). Most SENCOs felt the pupils and the school as a whole would benefit from a system where the planning and other work associated with IEPS was shared amongst all the teachers and staff responsible for the pupil’s learning. “Where whole-school policies and schemes of work are used effectively in order to differentiate the teaching of the subjects of the curriculum, there should be no need to duplicate targets in over-elaborate IEPs”. The IEP system can be viewed, therefore, as a hindrance to full inclusion because it prevents schools from moving to a whole-school strategy for addressing SEN pupils’ learning needs.
