At Real Schools, we’re not Anti Individual Behaviour Plans (IBPs). We’ve helped thousands of teachers in mainstream schools design IBPs that actually work. I’m really proud of the practical, narrow focus of our approach and that they’re grounded in what teachers can realistically sustain.
But we draw a clear line on IBP development.
No teacher should be expected to manage more than two IBPs per home group at any one time.
IBPs are intensive by nature. They demand relational energy, close observation, deliberate language, consistent follow-up and review. When teachers are asked to carry five, eight or ten IBPs at once, the outcome is as counterproductive as it is predictable. The IBP loses focus. Consistency of practice dissipates. Frustrations rise. The students the plans were meant to support are the ones most affected.
At that point, IBPs stop functioning as support and start functioning as paperwork.
Across too many mainstream primary and secondary schools, advantaged and disadvantaged, the pattern is consistent. Teachers can do exceptional work with one or two pointy-end students when the plan is specific, time-bound and supported by strong classroom and school-wide practices. Beyond that threshold, the load becomes unsustainable and the quality of support deteriorates.
This is where systems often falter in what they expect of coalface educators. Responsibility for complex needs gets shifted onto individual teachers without adjusting conditions. That doesn’t build inclusion. It erodes it.
Effective IBPs don’t operate in isolation. They rely on classrooms with clear routines, shared expectations and collective responses. They rely on staff not being stretched beyond capacity. And they rely on schools accepting that not every need can be met by one adult, in one room, at one time.
IBPs should be rare, respected and properly resourced. When they become routine, they lose their power.
If a school requires an individual plan for a large proportion of its students, that’s not a student problem. It’s a signal that the collective structures need attention.
And that’s the work that lasts.
Keep fighting that good fight,
P.S. In my recent conversation with former President of the Australian Principals Federation Victorian Branch, Tina King, one thing that really stood out for me was this: workload, wellbeing and workforce aren’t three separate problems – they’re the same problem showing up in different ways.
Tina makes the case for what would actually change in schools if funding matched reality, and why leadership and collegiality matter more than ever for complex classrooms. If you’re leading in a school right now, I think you’ll recognise a lot of it.
Want to subscribe to Adam’s Home Truths? Simply subscribe here.