Context and objectives: Interprofessional collaboration is a cornerstone of inclusive education (Azorín & Ainscow, 2020; UNESCO, 2020), yet its effective implementation remains a significant challenge. Research highlights the necessity of strengthening professionals’ collaborative competencies and fostering a shared understanding of the processes, like those involved in Individualized Education Plan (IEP) development (Salas et al., 2018; Weiss & Rodgers, 2025). This study aims to deepen our understanding of how education professionals engage in the IEP process by examining their collaborative practices across its different phases and identifying key factors that facilitate or hinder effective teamwork.

Methodology A quantitative approach was adopted, using a large-scale survey administered to 205 education professionals, including school psychologists, guidance counselors, social workers, etc. The sample was predominantly female (93%), with an average age of 38.4 years. The participants represented both elementary (67%) and secondary education settings, with 60% having more than five years of experience, and 44% working in disadvantaged schools.

The study employed a newly developed measurement instrument to assess professionals’ engagement across four critical phases of the IEP process: investigation, data collection and analysis, consultation, and implementation/revision. This instrument includes two dimensions: self-directed actions (tasks performed autonomously) and collaborative actions (tasks aimed at supporting others [general or special teacher, paraeducator, parent, student, etc.]). Measures include the Inventory of IEP Development Practices (Gaudreau et al., 2023), a Satisfaction Scale (Slade et al., 2018), and an Intent to Act Scale. 

Statistical analyses, including correlation tests, t-tests, and ANOVA with Bonferroni corrections, were conducted to identify patterns of collaboration. Results indicate that professionals who frequently participate in IEP meetings (more than five per year) engage more actively in self-directed practices (p < 0.001) and report higher satisfaction levels (p = 0.007). Collaborative actions aimed at engaging others were more prevalent in secondary schools than in elementary settings (p < 0.001) and increased with experience, particularly among professionals with over 16 years of experience (p = 0.03). Intent to act according to best practices was significantly higher among secondary school professionals (p < 0.001). Additionally, knowledge and preparation levels were strongly associated with the adoption of both self-directed and collaborative practices (p < 0.01).

Discussion et conclusion. Findings indicate that professionals’ engagement in IEPs is influenced by their experience, knowledge level, and participation in meetings. While their role primarily revolves around consultation and coordination, direct involvement with students and parents remains limited. Approximately one-quarter of mobilized practices support student self-determination, and low satisfaction levels are reported regarding students’ active involvement. It also highlights that while professionals acknowledge the importance of collaboration, institutional barriers persist, such as time constraints and lack of structured support; even if they appear inclined to use IEPs as dynamic tools for student monitoring and interprofessional collaboration. However, efforts are needed to strengthen their role in providing direct support to students and families. The study contributes to policy and training initiatives aimed at enhancing teamwork dynamics in school settings. Ultimately, these results provide evidence-based foundation for improving the IEP process to better support students with diverse needs. 

This study employs a quantitative, descriptive, correlational-explanatory design to examine how education professionals contribute to different phases of IEP development. The research focuses on understanding how frequent professionals engage in the process and how their characteristics influence their participation. Data were collected through an online questionnaire administered to 205 education professionals, school psychologists, guidance counselors, social workers, speech therapist, psychoeducator, as well as health and social services (e.g., occupational therapy). The sample was diverse in terms of school levels (67% elementary, 33% secondary), years of experience (60% with more than five years), and socioeconomic school contexts (44% working in disadvantaged schools). The survey included sociodemographic variables (age, gender, professional experience, school socioeconomic index, and level of familiarity with behavioral difficulties) and three validated instruments: - Inventory of IEP Development Practices (Gaudreau et al., 2023): Evaluates self-directed practices (tasks for one's own engagement, 25 items, α = 0.92) and collaborative practices (tasks aimed at engaging others, 27 items, α = 0.91). - Satisfaction Scale (Slade et al., 2018): Measures professionals’ satisfaction with the IEP process (5 items, α = 0.83). - Intent to Act Scale: Assesses professionals’ willingness to adopt best practices in IEP development (7 items, α = 0.89). Descriptive statistics were used to outline participant characteristics and engagement in IEP processes. Inferential analyses included correlation tests to examine relationships between professional characteristics and collaborative engagement, as well as t-tests and ANOVA with Bonferroni adjustments to compare groups based on role, experience, and school level. Findings indicate that professionals who frequently engage in IEP meetings report higher satisfaction levels and a greater intent to act according to best practices. Moreover, those with extensive experience (over 16 years) demonstrate a significantly greater use of collaborative practices (p = 0.03). Self-directed practices are consistently linked to perceived institutional support, highlighting the importance of organizational factors in fostering collaboration.

The findings of this study contribute significantly to understanding the complexities of interprofessional collaboration in IEP development. First, significant relationships are observed between self-directed practices and professionals’ overall satisfaction as well as their intention to adopt favorable practices. Additionally, collaborative-directed practices are strongly associated with professionals’ intent to act. Professionals’ knowledge and preparation levels for working with students with special needs also influences the adoption of these practices. The better prepared for the professionals, the more they implement self-directed and other-directed practices. Similarly, more frequent participation in IEP meetings (over five per year) is associated with increased use of self-directed practices and higher satisfaction levels. The level of education and professional experience also impact the adoption of other-directed practices. These practices are more prevalent in secondary schools than in elementary schools and increase with professional experience (over 16 years). Moreover, the intent to act according to best practices is more pronounced among secondary school professionals. One of the key takeaways is the necessity for clearer role definitions within IEP teams. Findings indicate that professionals predominantly adopt roles as consultants, facilitators, and coordinators, particularly in engaging others at the secondary level. However, direct involvement with students or parents remains limited. Additionally, professionals’ express dissatisfaction with student engagement in their IEP, although they recognize its usefulness in tracking progress and fostering communication. Surprisingly, they are less inclined to provide parents with tools to support them in the process. This research underscores the importance of embedding collaborative skill development within professional training programs. By integrating explicit training on teamwork dynamics, schools can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the IEP process, ultimately benefiting students with diverse needs (Brunsek et al., 2020; Rousseau et al., 2017).

Azorín, C. & Ainscow, M. (2020). Guiding schools on their journey towards inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(1), 58‑76. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1450900 Brunsek, A., Perlman, M., McMullen, E., Falenchuk, O., Fletcher, B., Nocita, G., Kamkar, N., & Shah, P. S. (2020). A meta-analysis and systematic review of the associations between professional development of early childhood educators and children’s outcomes. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 53, 217‑248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2020.03.003 Gaudreau, N. & Duchaine, (2023, 4 mai). J'ai MON plan! La mise en œuvre de plans d'intervention autodéterminés par les élèves en difficulté de comportement - Symposium. 9e Congrès biennal du CQJDC. Hôtel Le Concord. Rousseau, N., Point, M., Vienneau, R., Desmarais, M.-É., & Desmarais, K. (2017). Les apports et les limites liés aux pratiques inclusives et la place de la collaboration dans ces pratiques: une métasynthèse. Revue suisse des sciences de l’éducation, 39(1), 21‑40. Salas, E., Reyes, D. L., & McDaniel, S. H. (2018). The science of teamwork: Progress, reflections, and the road ahead. American Psychologist, 73(4), 593. Slade, N., Eisenhower, A., Carter, A. S. & Blacher, J. (2018). Satisfaction with individualized education programs among parents of young children with ASD. Exceptional Children, 84(3), 242-260. doi:10.1177/0014402917742923 UNESCO. (2020). Towards inclusion in education: Status, trends and challenges: the UNESCO Salamanca Statement 25 years on - UNESCO Digital Library. [Document en accès libre sous licence CC BY-SA 3.0]. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374246 Weiss, M. P. & Rodgers, W. J. (2025). Collaboration in special education : A commentary on where we are and where we need to go. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 0(0), 1‑16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2025.2454026