In Italy, the Individual Educational Plan (IEP) is officially recognised in Article 3 of the Framework Law 104/1992 and in the Presidential Decree of 24 February 1994. Since then, the IEP (Italian: Piano Educativo Individualizzato [PEI]) has been considered a right of pupils with certified disabilities (e.g., intellectual, physical, sensorial etc.) (Ianes et al., 2020). In contrast to other European countries where individual and separate curricula are used, the IEP in Italy represents a tool, which aims to guarantee all pupils access to the national curriculum and the curriculum of the school (Ianes & Demo, 2021). Thus, the instrument has been applied for almost three decades in the Italian school practice. Despite such a long tradition, problems and dilemmas are still arising around the IEP, both in its nature as a document and in its elaboration or implementation in daily practice (e.g., Associazione TreeLLLe, Caritas Italiana & Fondazione Giovanni Agnelli, 2011; Federazione Italiana per il Superamento del Handicap, 2021). The main aims of the ongoing investigation underlying this paper are to find out (1) how teachers and parents deal with the elaboration of the IEP, (2) how teachers deal with, and parents perceive the implementation of the IEP in the everyday school practice and (3) how teachers deal with, and parents perceive the relationship between the IEP and the class planning. Within a multiple case study design (Yin, 2014), qualitative interviews are combined with document analysis of the IEPs to find out more about possible ambivalences related to the IEP. Overall, 12 primary school classes (i.e., units of analysis) – 6 classes from the Province of Bolzano and 6 classes from the Piedmont region – take part in the investigation. Through a convenience sampling six 2nd and six 5th grade classes with at least one student with an IEP were selected. Qualitative interviews are conducted with one curricular teacher, one support teacher, and one parent of the child with an IEP for each class or unit of analysis (i.e., a total of 36 interviews). Subsequently, the interviews and the IEPs will be analysed using qualitative content analysis (Schreier, 2012). Preliminary results providing an insight into the teachers' perspective on possible challenges and tensions surrounding the phenomenon of individual planning in Italy and how they deal with its practice will be presented.

Alves, I. F. (2018). The Transnational Phenomenon of Individual Planning in Response to Pupil Diversity: A Paradox in Educational Reform. In E. Hultqvist, S. Lindblad & T. Popkewitz (Eds.), Educational Governance Research: Vol. 7. Critical Analyses of Educational Reforms in an Era of Transnational Governance (pp. 151–168). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61971-2_9 Federazione Italiana per il Superamento del Handicap [FISH]. (2021). Risultati sondaggio GLO e PEI. Retrieved January 22, 2022, from https://www.fishonlus.it/GLO-e-PEI/ Ianes, D., Demo, H., & Dell’Anna, S. (2020). Inclusive education in Italy: Historical steps, positive developments, and challenges. Prospects, 49, 249–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09509-7 Ianes, D., & Demo, H. (2021). Per un nuovo PEI inclusivo. L’integrazione scolastica e sociale, 20(2), 34–49. DOI:10.14605/ISS2022103 Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. SAGE. Mitchell, D., Morton, M., & Hornby, G. (2010). Review of the literature on individual education plans. New Zealand Ministry of Education. https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/102216/Literature-Review-Use-of-the-IEP.pdf Associazione TreeLLLe [TREELLLE], Caritas Italiana & Fondazione Giovanni Agnelli (2011). Gli alunni con disabilità nella scuola italiana: bilancio e proposte. Erickson. http://www.treellle.org/files/lll/Gli%20alunni%20con%20disabilit%C3%A0.pdf Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Sage.