You are on page 1of 5

Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program

Individualized Learning Plan (ILP)

Revised 6.1.17
Directions: The ILP should be completed with Mentor input. Complete blue cells prior to classroom implementation. Complete orange cells after POP Cycle is completed. Cells will expand as
needed. When submitting completed ILP to instructor, please include copies/images of pre/post assessments/directions and the Pre/Post Assessment Data Table.
Section 1: New Teacher Information
New Teacher Email Subject Area Grade Level
Rebecca Alder French 9-12
Mentor Email School/District Date
Sergey Artemyev La Habra High/FJUHSD 10/14/18
Section 2: CSTP Areas of Inquiry
Directions: Identify 2-3 CSTP elements for ILP focus, including at least one as required: Semester 2 – CSTP 1/2/3; Semester 3 – CSTP 4/5/6; Semester 4 -all. Use most recent CSTP Assessment for
Initial Rating. Identify both teacher and student rating for CSTP 1 and 2. See example.
Element Initial Rating Description Goal Rating Description
T - Guide students to think critically through use of questioning strategies, T - Facilitates systematic opportunities for students to apply critical thinking
Promoting critical thinking posing/solving problems, and reflection on issues in content. by designing structured inquires into complex problems.
T – Applying T – Innovating
1.5 through inquiry, problem S - Students respond to varied questions or tasks designed to promote S - Students pose and answer a wide-range of complex questions and
S – Exploring S - Innovating
solving, and reflection comprehension and critical thinking in single lessons or a sequence of problems, reflect, and communicate understandings based on in depth
lessons. analysis of content learning.

Collecting and Designs and integrates and assessment

analyzing plan that provides formal and informal
Collects a variety of formal and informal
assessment data assessment data on student learning.
Applyi data on student learning. Uses analysis of Innovati
5.2 from a variety of Uses data analysis of a broad range of
ng a variety of data to inform planning and ng
sources to assessments to provide comprehensive
differentiation of instruction.
inform information to guide planning and
instruction differentiation of instruction.
Implements structures for students to
involving all Models and scaffolds student self- self-assess and set learning goals related
students in self- assessment and goal setting processes to content, academic language, and
assessment, Applyi for learning content and academic Innovati individual skills.
goal-setting, and ng language development. ng
progress Guides students to monitor and reflect Integrates student self-assessment, goal
monitoring on progress on a regular basis setting, and progress monitoring across
the curriculum.
Section 3: Inquiry Focus and Planning (Attach Pre/Post Assessments to ILP)
Inquiry Focus Inquiry question Pre-Assessment Post-Assessment Expected Results
Based on your selected CSTP elements, Pose measurable and observable question
What will you use as your baseline What will you use as your final How do you expect student performance
identify a focus of inquiry (e.g., group in terms of students (e.g., what impact will
assessment of student assessment of student to change? Use percentages to describe
discussion, differentiation, strategy X have on student performance
actions/performance? actions/performance? anticipated growth.
motivation…) as measured by Y?)
What impact will increased use of higher-order
There will be a 20% increase in the average exam
Use of analysis, synthesis, and evaluation questions (teacher talk, worksheet, and student
Previous examination scores New chapter exam score for students who participated in class and
questions + student problem generation problem generation) have on student performance
successfully completed the worksheet.
as measured by chapter exam?

Use of digital portfolios

First six-week Student listening
for student assessment
What impact will student assessment (given in comprehension will hold
and self-assessment,
self-assessment by three parts - listening Second six-week steady, while reading
using levels of
proficiency level rather comprehension, assessment (given in comprehension and
proficiency to monitor
than letter grade have on reading same manner as first) writing scores will see an
and help students self-
student achievement? comprehension, and average increase of one
assess rather than
writing) proficiency level
letter grades
Focus Students
Directions: Identify three focus students for your inquiry. Identify special characteristics of the students and include performance data. Explain why you have selected them for this inquiry focus.
Do not use actual names of students. (Note: At least one focus student should be an English learner and at least one must have an ILP/504 accommodation. The third is your choice, but please
identify someone that poses an instructional challenge.) Identify expected results for each focus student.
Focus Student 2: Student with
Focus Student 1: English Learner Focus Student 3: Your Choice
This student was chosen because he This student was chosen This student was chosen because he is
Performance scored particularly low on writing for because she is hyperactive and high-achieving and becomes frustrated
Data a second-year student and very often has problems focusing during when he is not “the best” at something.
substitutes Spanish words when he assessments. She has an He incorrectly self-assesses because he
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 1 of 5
doesn’t know the French word. accommodation that allows her wants “a higher grade.” It is difficult to get
more time on exams but she him to see that he will not immediately
often chooses not to use it. This start out at the highest proficiency level
results in her rushing through and that is okay, and that the levels don’t
and showing poor necessarily correspond to a letter grade.
This student will work more
slowly, ask clarifying questions Student will become more honest in self-
Student will work on circumlocution
when necessary, and increase assessment and continue to demonstrate
Expected Results methods and begin to show skills in
her reading comprehension appropriate proficiency for a level 2
the next proficiency level.
score by at least one student.
proficiency level.
Inquiry Lesson Implementation Plan
Administer Post-
Administer Pre-Assessment Deliver Lesson(s) Analyze Results Discuss Results with Mentor
Identify dates for activities.
Sept 17-21 Sept 24-Oct 26 Oct 29-Nov 2 Nov 5-9 Nov 9
Lessons are administered using Comprehensible Input strategies. Classes are structured around small talk,
Provide 1-2 sentence
summary of your lesson plan.
student-created characters, and stories that help students learn grammar structures and vocabulary in an
organic way.
Assessments are given in three parts: Listening comprehension, Reading comprehension, and writing
proficiency. During the listening section, the teacher orally presents three different paragraphs of
Summarize process for information (based on specific conversations or stories from previous lessons) in the target language, and
administering and analyzing students write as many details as they can in English. Reading comprehension is given in a similar way, but
pre- and post-assessments. the students have three paragraphs of information written in the target language. For the writing
assessment, students are given three paragraphs of information in English that they must translate to
French as accurately as possible.
Section 4: Inquiry Research and Exploration
Research/Professional Learning (Identify two articles that have informed inquiry focus. Provide title, URL or citation, and statement of what was learned.)
An Investigation of the Construct Validity of the ACTFL Proficiency
Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition by Dr. Stephen D.
Guidelines and Oral Interview Procedure by Patricia Dandonoli and
Krashen, according to Dr. Krashen, comprehensible input-based methods
Grant Henning, these research results provide strong support for the
are superior for second language acquisition. He also states “it is very
validity of the ACTFL guidelines as measures of student proficiency in
important to make a strong effort to inform students about the process
second language acquisition
of language acquisition, so they can continue to improve on their own”
Colleagues (Summarize how two colleagues have addressed this issue in their classroom. Identify grade level, subject, and summary of ideas.)
One of my Spanish teacher colleagues has addressed the issue of student
My German teacher colleague (also my mentor) has students self-
proficiency assessment by using an AP supersite that goes along with her
assess as well as peer-assess based on a rubric that has levels based
AP textbook. This supersite is able to automatically assess students’
on ACTFL proficiency levels. He finds that peer assessment helps to
writing samples and score them appropriately. Unfortunately I do not
avoid bias (students over or under-estimating their own ability). I will
have access to anything similar as my school site will not buy me AP
be using my own assessment to keep proficiency levels realistic.
textbooks or access to AP supersites.
Special Emphasis: Instructional Strategy, ISTE Standards, NBPTS Core Propositions
Special Emphasis Focus How Special Emphasis will be Incorporated
ISTE student standard 1a. I articulate and set personal learning
At the end of each self-assessment, students will set a personal
goals; develop strategies leveraging technology to achieve them;
goal for where they would like to be at the time of the next
and reflect on the learning process itself to improve learning
assessment, and what they will do to achieve that goal.
Section 5: Results and Reflection
Directions: Record Pre- and post- assessment data into Pre/Post Assessment Data Table (see end of document). Include copies/images of pre/post assessments/directions and the Pre/Post
Assessment Data Table with submission.
Pre/Post Assessment Data Analysis Findings for Whole Class Pre/Post Assessment Data Analysis Findings for Three Focus Students
My student who is an English learner showed some minor
improvements in listening and reading, and a more significant
Listening scores maintained their high average, while reading
improvement in writing. While he still frequently makes errors,
slightly improved. Listening and reading continue to hold higher
he has shown more restraint in code-switching.
scores than writing, which is to be expected as comprehension
skills tend to develop more quickly. Writing scores saw the biggest
My student with an ILP/504 requested in her self-assessment to
increase. Those students who filled out their self-assessment
take the next reading and writing assessments separately from
earnestly and thoroughly saw the greatest improvement.
the class, during the study hall periods during the week. She had
more time to work and felt less self-conscious asking me
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 2 of 5
questions. As a result, her scores improved.

My third student was more realistic with himself and his

expectations on his second reflection. His listening and reading
scores held steady, while his writing slightly improved.

Initial Evidence/Rational for Rating

CSTP Element Revised Rating Suggestions for Moving Forward
Rating (Summarize from POP Section 3)
Promoting critical To move to INNOVATING level: Consider how to increase
Teacher asked questions of analysis and evaluation.
thinking through T – Applying T – Integrating complexity of task beyond a single lesson so that there are
1.5 Students answered questions that included all levels of Bloom’s.
inquiry, problem S – Exploring S - Integrating continuing opportunities for students to engage in inquiry in
Students created their own math problems.
solving, and reflection complex problem. How could you extend lesson into PBL?

Teacher used students’ self-
analyzing To move to INNOVATING: Consider
assessment as well has her own
assessment finding ways to include even more
Applyi observations from the assessment
5.2 data from a Integrating forms of assessment (peer
ng to draw conclusions about student
variety of assessment, various formative
performance and inform further
sources to assessments, etc.)
involving all
To move to INNOVATING: Increase
students in
Teacher used this activity to involve opportunities for self-assessment
all students in self-assessment with across more activities besides
assessment Applyi
5.5 Integrating plans for improvement, and had summative assessments. This is a
, goal- ng
students keep these records in a great idea and these ACTFL
setting, and
portfolio to monitor progress. proficiency levels can be integrated
in more ways.
Special Emphasis (Skills, Themes, ISTE Standards·Teachers, NBPTS Core Propositions (if applicable)
Results of Incorporation into Lesson Key Learnings and New Skills/Knowledge Developed by Teacher
When students assessed themselves against the proficiency
standards, they were able to see more clearly where their Teacher developed skills such as monitoring students using Go
weaknesses were. Keeping their results in a document on their Guardian and using updated Google Classroom features to
Google Drive made them easily accessible and they were able to check student progress/make comments on their Google Docs
reference them to see where they could improve. As a result, writing as they work.
scores improved upon second assessment.
Action Items
For curriculum design, lesson Plan units and assessments with the goal of moving up the proficiency scales. Help students come up with a
planning, assessment plan for their own goals for the unit and how they will achieve them. It looks like they’re ready for more of a
planning challenge in their assessments. Keep pushing them!

For classroom practice Keep doing what you are doing, and find more opportunities for students to self-assess
For teaching English learners,
students with special needs, Remember to go slowly! Everyone will benefit from you taking your time. The path to proficiency is not a
and students with other race, especially for these students.
instructional challenges
For future professional
Find more CI trainings to attend to get new ideas for upper levels.

For future inquiry/ILP Focus on backwards planning and building units that you can focus on student goals.

For next POP cycle Next POP cycle I’d like to see what a “regular” day in your combined 3 and 4-AP class looks like.

Other n/a
Other Notes

Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 3 of 5
Pre-/Post- Assessment Data Table follows this document.
Include copies/images of pre-/post- assessments/directions and the Pre/Post Assessment Data Table with submission.

Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program

Individualized Learning Plan (ILP)
Revised 5.1.17
Directions: Record student pre and post scores in this table. Do not use student’s actual names.
New Teacher Email Subject Area Grade Level
Rebecca Alder World Language - French 9-12
Pre-Assessment Data Range and Average Post-Assessment Data Range and Average
listening assessment- range: 4 average: 18
listening assessment- range: 6 average: 18 reading assessment- range:4 average: 18
reading assessment- range: 5 average: 17 writing assessment- range:8 average: 17
writing assessment- range: 9 average: 16
Reflection Documents
Student Pre-Assessment Score Post-Assessment Score Comments
Listening and reading scores
listening- 17 reading- 16 writing-
1. Focus Student: EL listening-16 reading-15 writing-11 slightly improved. Writing
showed progress
Student made large gains in
2. Focus Student: 504/IEP listening-16 reading-15 writing-16 listening-18 reading-18 writing-17 listening and reading when given
more time and individual help
3. Focus Student: Teacher Choice listening-18 reading-19 writing-17 listening-18 reading-20 writing-17
4. Ashley listening-17 reading-17 writing-16 listening-17 reading-17 writing-16
5. Jordan listening-18 reading-17 writing-15 listening-20 reading-18 writing-17
6. Paula listening-19 reading-18 writing-17 listening-18 reading-18 writing-17
7. Jan listening-16 reading-17 writing-16 listening-17 reading-17 writing-16
8. Alexa listening-20 reading-19 writing-17 listening-18 reading-18 writing-17 listening wasn’t as good this time
9. Lauren listening-19 reading-17 writing-17 listening-20 reading-18 writing-17
10. Justin listening-18 reading-16 writing-17 listening-18 reading-17 writing-17
11. Adam listening-19 reading-20 writing-19 listening-19 reading-20 writing-18
12. Isaac listening-20 reading-20 writing-18 listening-20 reading-20 writing-18
13. Kate listening-20 reading-19 writing-18 listening-19 reading-19 writing-19
14. Caitlyn listening-17 reading-16 writing-15 listening-17 reading-17 writing-16
15. Abe listening-18 reading-18 writing-18 listening-20 reading-20 writing-18
16. Mary listening-20 reading-17 writing-14 listening-18 reading-18 writing-16
17. Fred listening-18 reading-15 writing-14 listening-18 reading-17 writing-15
18. Midge listening-18 reading-16 writing-16 listening-18 reading-16 writing-16 No change, not much reflection
19. Andrew listening-20 reading-20 writing-18 listening-20 reading-20 writing-20
20. Alex listening-19 reading-18 writing-17 listening-19 reading-19 writing-17
21. James listening-19 reading-18 writing- 17 listening-19 reading-19 writing-18
22. Edward listening-17 reading-16 writing-16 listening-18 reading-17 writing-16
23. Yolanda listening-14 reading-17 writing-11 listening-16 reading-16 writing-13 more effort shown
24. Chris listening-18 reading-18 writing-16 listening-18 reading-18 writing-16
25. Natalia listening-19 reading-18 writing- 16 listening-20 reading-19 writing-17
26. Taylor listening-17 reading-18 writing-17 listening-18 reading-18 writing- 17

Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 4 of 5
27. Matt listening-16 reading-16 writing-11 listening-17 reading-17 writing-12 lots of switching to Spanish
28. Audrey listening-19 reading-18 writing- 17 listening-18 reading-18 writing-18
29. Emmett listening-20 reading-20 writing-18 listening-20 reading-20 writing-19
30. Leslie listening-17 reading-16 writing-16 listening-16 reading-16 writing-16
31. Adrian listening-16 reading-17 writing-17 listening-18 reading-18 writing-18
32. Brandon listening-20 reading-18 writing-16 listening-19 reading-18 writing-17
910111 21314 1516

Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 5 of 5