Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program

Individualized Learning Plan (ILP)

Revised 11.5.18
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
Maeve Brigantino maevebrigantino@gmail.com Multiple Subject 1st
Mentor Email School/District Date
Old Mission School/ Diocese of
Kristia Lengyel-Leahu klleahu@fullerton.edu March, 2021
Monterey
Section 2: CSTP Areas of Inquiry
Directions: Identify 2-3 CSTP elements for ILP focus. Use most recent CSTP Assessment for Initial Rating. Identify both teacher and student rating for CSTP 1 and 2. See example.
CST
Element Initial Rating Description Goal Rating Description
P
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.
T- Aware of all students' needs and plans instruction that meets these needs.
Planning instruction that T- Aware of student’s academic needs, but has not yet incorporated them in
T– Allows for individual or small group instruction to meet the variety of student
incorporates appropriate all instructional planning or reflection. Differentiation is present in some T – Innovating
4.4 strategies to meet the
Emerging
lessons/subject areas, but not all. S - Innovating
needs and accommodate multiple learning strategies.
S – Exploring S- Given time to work individually, whole group and in small groups in order
learning needs of all students S- Given multiple strategies to complete some assignments, but not all.
to utilize multiple strategies for learning.
Using assessment information T- Has not consistently communicated assessment results with parents or
to share timely and T– students for the purpose of student improvement. Minimal feedback has T- Conferences with students individually or in groups to review assessment
T – Innovating
5.7 comprehensible feedback Emerging been given.
S - Innovating
results and plan for future assessment and instructional growth.
with students and their S – Emerging S- Have seen the results of some assessment, but have not been taught how S- Aware of assessment results and making goals based on these results.
families to use these results and grow from them.

Section 3: Inquiry Focus and Planning (Attach Pre/Post Assessments and Data Collection Tools)
Directions: Your inquiry question should be concise and likely no more than 8-10 words. Your hypothesis should indicate what you expect students to be able to do after the lesson, and it should
be able to be evaluated based on your assessment plan. Note that Semester 3 requires an inquiry question that focuses on use of technology to support teaching and learning.
Inquiry Question Hypothesis Lesson Series Topic Assessments/Data Collection
Will implementing differentiation strategies throughout math
Students will have increased achievement in addition and Pre-unit Checkin-in
lessons, such as small group work and use of math 1 week unit on solving for unknowns in equations to 20.
subtraction to 20, as measured by the end of unit assessment. Post-unit Test
manipulatives, improve the outcomes of students at all levels?

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 1: English Learner Focus Student 2: Student with ILP/504 Focus Student 3: Your Choice
VZ- speaks Spanish at home and English HO- has an IEP with difficulty
TW- excels in reading and writing,
at school. Is fluent in English, but still focusing and some learning
though he has struggled to meet
struggles with academic language at disabilities. He is currently being re-
expectations in math. He struggles
Performance times. She is currently meeting some of assessed to update his IEP. He is
Data
with adding and subtracting past 10,
our math standards and expectations, approaching the expectation in all
while she has struggled in some areas, and is often aided by the use of
areas of math currently, though he
such as working with data and working manipulatives such as a number
has mastered adding and subtracting
with shapes and their attributes. rack.
to 10 when using fingers.
I expect that VZ will benefit from
I expect that TW will benefit from
small group instruction, as she will I expect that being able to learn in a
the reteaching of certain math
be able to ask her questions directly smaller group setting will allow HO
Expected Results content, and will therefore improve
and we will be able to clarify to better focus and retain more
in understanding between the pre
academic language involved in these information.
and post assessment.
math lessons.
Inquiry Lesson Implementation Plan
Directions: that Semester 3 requires a lesson that focuses on use of technology to support teaching and learning.
Administer Pre-Assessment Deliver Lesson(s) Administer Post-Assessment Analyze Results Discuss Results with Mentor

Identify dates for activities.

3/12/21 3/16/21-3/18/21 3/19/21 3/19-21-3/24/21 3/25/21
Provide 1-2 sentence Lessons will begin with whole group instruction, during which time the class will use groups of penguins as
summary of your lesson plan.
an example for addition and subtraction to 20. We will work with our number racks to practice adding and
subtracting according to penguin story problems. After working on a few as a group, students will be sent
out in pairs to complete the remainder of their problems together. My aid will circulate to help the class,
while I pull aside a small group for further instruction and practice together with using the number rack, as
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 1 of 4
 well as white boards and number lines, to add and subtract to 20. I will also take this time to review pre-
assessment results with these students to address any common mis-conceptions or misunderstandings.
There will also be a math game available to challenge partners who finish their worksheets early.
The pre-assessment will be a class-wide “check-point” assessing student’s skills in the area of addition and
Summarize process for
subtraction to 20, as well as story problems. This will be administered whole-class the Friday before the
administering and analyzing
pre- and post-assessments. above lessons. The post-assessment will also be administered whole-class and will focus on similar skills and
topics, with more depth of understanding.
Semester 3 Only: Identify the
specific technology tools,
applications, links, and/or
devices to be incorporated
into the lesson.
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.)
DIFFERENTIATION THROUGH THE WORKSHOP MODEL
DIFFERENTIATION THROUGH MINI_LESSONS AND CENTERS https://repository.library.northeastern.edu/files/neu:cj82m2381/
https://www.edutopia.org/blog/differentiated-instruction-strategies-pbl- fulltext.pdf
andrew-miller
This article, which is a thesis by a graduate student at Northwestern
This article focuses on strategies that can be used to increase University, gives an overview of the use of the “workshop model” in
differentiation in the classroom, specifically through project-based math instruction, as well as providing examples of classrooms in which
learning. I was particularly interested in learning about the use of math this model is being implemented and how it can be implemented. The
stations, or centers, for differentiation. The article stated that it can be a workshop model consists of a whole-class warmup and lesson, before
good idea to “offer mini-lessons or center work to support your students’ students break off for either individual work time or small group time. I
learning, or maybe you show students a variety of resources from which would like to try this model within my current math curriculum. Though
to learn, including videos, games, and readings.” I also read about every teacher approached the workshop model differently, a few in this
differentiation through formative assessment which I would like to do. I article stated that stations work for their class and that they can allow
would like to use small group time with my students to check for students structure while at the same time giving them independence and
understanding of the content we are learning. some choice.

Colleagues (Summarize how two colleagues have addressed this issue in their classroom. Identify grade level, subject, and summary of ideas.)
FIRST GRADE GENERAL EDUCATION: Another first grade teacher, who I
worked with last year, set up her daily math time so that her students
SECOND GRADE GENERAL EDUCATION: The second grade teacher at my
rotated through “stations”, allowing her to work in a small group with
school has an aid in her classroom, who helps with differentiation in the
each student at least once per day. She would begin by working with the
classroom. Her aid often pulls students outside to work one on one or in
group who needed the most help, reteaching the math lesson to them
small groups, reteaching specific subject areas or lessons and giving
and working on the worksheet as a group. Meanwhile, other groups
additional guidance. This is what I would like to do with my students
were beginning the math worksheet, and would get her help with
when pulling them aside to reteach math concepts.
anything they had struggled with when it was their time to come to her
station.
Special Emphasis: ISTE Standards (Semester 3 only)
Directions: Identify at least one ISTE-Educator and at least one ISTE- Student Standards that are the primary focus of your project. Explain how these standards will be incorporated.
Special Emphasis Focus How Special Emphasis will be Incorporated

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-Assessment: 20 of the 25 students in my class (80%) met the
lesson objective and mastered the skill of effectively adding and
subtracting to 20, while 5 of the 25 students (20%) are still
approaching this objective.
Post-Assessment: 21 of the 25 students in my class (84%) met the
lesson objective by the time we reached the end of unit post
assessment, while 4 of the 25 students (16%) are still approaching
the objective.
Pre/Post Assessment Data Analysis Findings for Three Focus Students
Pre-Assessment:
Focus Student 1: Focus student one received a 100% on the pre-
assessment and met the lesson objective. She added and
subtracted to 20 effectively.
Focus Student 2: This student only received a 10% on the pre-
assessment and struggled to understand the content.
Focus Student 3: Focus student 3 received a 50% on this
assessment, understanding simpler addition and subtraction but
struggling to do so in the context of a word problem.

Post-Assessment:
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 2 of 4
 Focus Student 1: This student still showed mastery of both
addition and subtraction to 20, receiving a 90% on the post-
assessment.
Focus Student 2: On the post-assessment, focus student 2
showed much improvement, receiving a 95% on this assessment.
With the help of small group work and math manipulatives, this
student was able to master addition and subtraction to 20.
Focus Student 3: This student showed some improvement,
receiving a 75% on this assessment. He does, however, still need
re-teaching and additional scaffolding when it comes to working
with addition and subtraction in word problems.
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
thinking through T – Applying Teacher asked questions of analysis and evaluation.
T – Integrating complexity of task beyond a single lesson so that there are
1.5 inquiry, problem S– Students answered questions that included all levels of
S - Integrating continuing opportunities for students to engage in inquiry in
solving, and Exploring Bloom’s. Students created their own math problems.
complex problem. How could you extend lesson into PBL?
reflection

I was able to incorporate the

Planning instruction that
incorporates appropriate
4.4 strategies to meet the
learning needs of all students
Using assessment information
to share timely and
5.7 comprehensible feedback
with students and their
families
Results of Incorporation into Lesson
strategy of small group instruction
and the workshop model of
I would like to continue to
teaching to aid students who have
incorporate small group work into
continually struggled with mastery
T– T- exploring my lesson planning to ensure that
Emerging in math. This was an effective
S – Exploring S- applying each student is able to work at the
strategy, as the additional one on
appropriate level and be given the
one support and use of scaffolds
scaffolds when needed.
and manipulatives allowed
students to better understand the
materials.
I was able to use assessment data
from the pre-assessment to
determine which students needed I would really like to set up a
T– T- exploring to be a part of my small group consistent method for
Emerging
S – Emerging S- exploring instruction, and how they needed communicating assessment data
aid. I also communicated post- with students and families.
assessment data with families
when necessary.
Special Emphasis ISTE-Educator and ISTE-Student Standards (Semester 3 only)
Key Learnings and New Skills/Knowledge Developed by Teacher

Action Items
For curriculum design, lesson
planning, assessment
planning

For classroom practice

For teaching English learners,

students with special needs,
and students with other
instructional challenges
For future professional
development

For future inquiry/ILP

For next POP cycle

Semester 3 Only:
For future use of technology

Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 3 of 4
 Other Notes

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
Maeve Brigantino maevebrigantino@gmail.com Math First
Pre-Assessment Data Range and Average Post-Assessment Data Range and Average

10% to 100%, average: 84% 65% to 100%, average: 92%

PRE-/POST- ASSESSMENT DATA TABLE

Student Pre-Assessment Score Post-Assessment Score Comments
1. Focus Student: EL 100% 90% Lesson objective mastery was maintained
2. Focus Student: 504/IEP 10% 95% Lesson objective mastery was improved
Lesson objective mastery was somewhat
3. Focus Student: Teacher Choice 50% 75%
improved, though some reteach is still required
4. ZA 100% 100%
5. AB 80% 100%
6. LB 90% 65%
7. EB 90% 100%
8. KB 90% 85%
9. RD 90% 90%
10. CE 100% 100%
11. BF 50% 100%
12. JG 60% 90%
13. CH 80% 90%
14. CI 100% 100%
15. DJ 100% 100%
16. KM 90% 85%
17. SM 90% 95%
18. NM 100% 100%
19. FM 100% 90%
20. MM 40% 75%
21. ER 100% 90%
22. CS 90% 100%
23. NS 90% 95%
24. SS 100% 75%
25. SV 100% 95%
910111213141516

Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 4 of 4