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
rhastings@calca.connectionsacademy.o
Rachael Hastings English Language Arts 11
rg
Mentor Email School/District Date
California Connections
zlopezfuentes@calca.connectionsacade
Zamequa Lopez-Fuentes Academy 2/21/2022
my.org
San Juan Capistrano
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 - Facilitates systematic opportunities for students to apply
critical thinking by designing structured inquires into
T - Guide students to think critically through use of questioning strategies,
Promoting critical thinking through complex problems.
T – Applying posing/solving problems, and reflection on issues in content. T – Innovating
1.5 inquiry, problem solving, and S - Students pose and answer a wide-range of complex
S – Exploring S - Students respond to varied questions or tasks designed to promote S - Innovating
reflection questions and problems, reflect, and communicate
comprehension and critical thinking in single lessons or a sequence of lessons.
understandings based on in depth analysis of content
learning.

Emerging: Is
While completing the discussion for this self-
aware of the
assessment, I continued to reflect on my
need to reflect
practice and made changes to this category. I
on teaching
do meet with my PLC and small team group
Reflecting on practice to Begins to engage in reflection on
to reflect on teaching practices and how to
teaching practice support student teaching practice individually
support student learning. Currently,
6.1 in support of learning. Exploring and with colleagues that is
modifications and adjustments are provided
student learning. Reflects focused on methods to support
on a needed basis. Feedback is individualized
individually or the full range of learners.
to support the full range of students. I want to
with colleagues
incorporate supports and activities in lessons
on immediate
that better support student comprehension
student learning
and learning needs.
needs.
Introduction lessons for the beginning of the
school year are planned in accordance with
Emerging:
the school-provided curriculum. As I am
Plans daily
developing lessons and receiving assessment
lessons using
data and additional information about Plans differentiated instruction
available
students, I am actively working to based on knowledge of students’
curriculum and
Using knowledge incorporate results and student interests into academic readiness, academic
information
of students’ lessons moving forward. language, diverse cultural
from district
academic backgrounds, and individual
and state-
readiness, I am aware of CRP and work to mitigate bias cognitive, social, emotional, and
required
language in the classroom. I incorporate various physical development to meet
assessments.
4.1 proficiency, strategies and adjustments during lessons and Applying their individual needs.
cultural contact with students to lessen the chance of
Exploring
background, and bias in the classroom. I am still getting to
Becomes aware Examines potential sources of
individual know my students, and I do not always see
of potential bias and stereotyping when
development to the person behind the camera (students are
areas of bias planning lessons. Uses culturally
plan instruction. not required to show their faces in class).
and seeks to responsive pedagogy in
This also helps me navigate and identify
learn about planning.
where possible bias may occur based on
culturally
stigmatization and inherent biases based on
responsive
name or identifying factors that should not
pedagogy.
enter in lesson planning or assessment.

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

Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 1 of 13
 Informal: collaborative
responses detail what is
Students will be able to define and compare and contrast
Are students ready to begin this describe compare and contrast in writing
writing task? preparation of their essay writing.
Pre Assessment:
How are tasks and instruction Students will be able to write a 3 - Compare and contrast
differentiated to provide all 5 sentence compare and contrast paragraph on “Harrison
students the tools to demonstrate paragraph focusing on the Bergeron” and the short
their mastery of essay organization similarities and differences Post-War Voices: Postmodernism
film “2081”
and structure? between “Harrison Bergeron” and
the short film “2081” Compare and Contrast: how are
Post-Assessment: 4-
How effective is using texts within a literary movement
paragraph essay compare
collaborative small groups to Moving between different lengths similar and different?
and contrast two texts
increase participation and of writing using the same skill set from Unit 1: Modernism
engagement in lessons support will better set students on the path or Unit 2:
student achievement? Will writing to success for their final Postmodernism -
structure and organization be individual four-paragraph reflection and revision of
reflected in student-submitted compare and contrast essay. final submission based
work?
on teacher-provided
individual feedback.

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
I am not able to identify a specific As attendance cannot be
student because attendance at my Live Attendance at my Live Lessons is not required, I have selected FS3
Lessons or watching recordings is not mandatory. I identified FS2 from past based on the student’s level of
mandatory. Also, I am not the EL attendance records and student confirmation that need and my inquiry question
English teacher – I have reclassified they attend English Live Lessons every week. based on student readiness.
English Learner students, but I do not
have any currently identified EL FS2 has an active 504 for anxiety and panic FS3 struggles with writing.
students. disorder. The main concerns addressed in FS2’s FS3 rarely completes readings
504 plan regard social emotional learning and outside of class. This student
concentration. has shared with me that they
This student is a strong and independent have not completed a full 5-
learner. They do not attend lessons live, FS2 attends all lessons and has weekly calls paragraph essay since 9th
but they watch the recordings and have with me. We review the lesson content and grade. I work one-on-one with
weekly one-on-one calls with me for discuss FS2’s assignment completion and this student outside of class to
Performance additional support. questions. FS2 demonstrates grade-level encourage and support writing
Data
understanding and mostly completes work. development and growth.
FS1 demonstrates mastery of learning However, work is commonly submitted Resources will be broken
goals but struggles with English incomplete. We work one-on-one in phone calls down into small chunks with
grammatical conventions and sentence and in Zoom to address FS2’s learning needs academic language definitions
structure. FS1 will engage with and concentration challenges. Resources will be questions to consider (to help
independent outlines and resources. broken down into small chunks with academic guide thinking and mastery).
Resources will be broken down into language definitions questions to consider (to These resources are available
small chunks with academic language help guide thinking and mastery). These to all students; they will
definitions questions to consider (to help resources are available to all students; they will specifically support FS3
guide thinking and mastery). These specifically address the structure and through the use of smaller
resources are available to all students; concentration needs of FS2. Giving specific and steps that support completion
they will specifically address the written small steps helps support concentration and of the final assessment
organization/structure and academic understanding of the task (completed 4-paragraph
language needs of FS1. essay).
Expected Results After consideration of FS1’s submission On first thought and review: I expect that FS2 I expect FS3 to struggle with
trends, I expect FS1 will complete will attend and interact with lesson activities the written assessments. Based
quality work on the final and post- that support their essay completion, but will on FS3’s identified concerns
assessment. FS1 will need additional delay submission of their work. FS2 will and struggles with written
feedback on their academic writing and collaborate with peers in class for pre- work, I expect that FS3 will
language use on the pre-assessment and assessment, but will struggle on individual work need additional tools to break
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 2 of 13
 down each required
component. Once FS3
receives support and a clear
outline for each paragraph, I
expect that FS3 will produce a
grade-level appropriate essay.
I expect that FS3 will not
attend the lesson live and need
rough draft. FS3 struggles with English in the rough draft.
additional encouragement and
conventions in written work. When submitted, I expect that FS2 will submit
support to complete the pre-
I expect that FS1 will do well on the an incomplete rough draft. Work will reflect at
assessment. The rough draft
post-assessment after support on least 1 quote from each text and contrast will be
will be more beneficial for
sentence construction and conventions stronger than the comparison. FS2 will need
FS3 because it is a required
specific to English sentence and essay additional one-on-one support to craft a thesis
submission whereas the pre-
structure. statements and to evaluate their selected texts.
assessment is required during
the lesson only.
Since I cannot require students
to attend my lessons, I will
work one-on-one with FS3 to
increase their written
organization and structure
skills.
Inquiry Lesson Implementation Plan
Directions: that Semester 3 requires a lesson that focuses on use of technology to support teaching and learning.
Administer Post-
Administer Pre-Assessment Deliver Lesson(s) Analyze Results Discuss Results with Mentor
Assessment
Identify dates for activities.
3/8/2022 3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/7/2022 4/14/2022
In the first lesson, students will participate in an informal pre-assessment that addresses their understanding of
what compare and contrast writing entails. The formal pre-assessment will be completed during the POP lesson.
Provide 1-2 sentence summary This lesson focuses on absurdism and satire in the Postmodernist literary movement. Student will come to class
of your lesson plan. having read Kurt Vonnegut’s “Harrison Bergeron”. We will watch the short independent film “2081” (2009)
which is based upon the text. Students will work collaboratively to create a 3-5 sentence compare and contrast
paragraph examining the similarities and differences between the text and film.
In the first lesson, students will patriciate in an informal pre-assessment that addresses their understanding of
what compare and contrast writing entails. The formal pre-assessment is a one paragraph compare and contrast
of “Harrison Bergeron” and the short film “2081”. Students will work collaboratively to construct a full
paragraph that uses facts from both texts to show the similarities and differences between the two.
Throughout the unit, students will expand their written skills in increasing written length. The rough draft of the
Summarize process for final assessment will also be used in analysis of data: Pre-assessment (1 paragraph collaboratively written), rough
administering and analyzing draft outline (focus on 4 paragraphs in support of final assessment success), and the formal assessment. For the
pre- and post-assessments. post-assessment, students will receive individualized feedback on their final assessment to focus on revisions for
demonstration of mastery. In class, we will review the writing process and the importance of revisions and use of
feedback to support success and, ultimately, demonstrate mastery to earn high marks on the formal assessment.
Data will be compared from all formal and informal assessments after the conclusion of the unit. I will use this
data to both address my effectiveness at supporting all students to success and how collaborative efforts and
participation contributed to overall student success.
Semester 3 Only: Identify the
specific technology tools,
applications, links, and/or This section is not required in Semester 2 per the instructions.
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.)
Together We Stand: Using Collabrative Writing in Developmental Increasing Student Engagement using Effective and Metacognitive
Writing Courses Writing Strategies in Content Areas

D'Antonio, M. (Fall 2011). Together we stand: Using collaborative
writing in developmental writing courses. In Education Resource
Information Center. Retrieved from EBSCOhost (EJ1097582).
This article focuses on the collaborative writing focus in my teacher
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017
Smith, K. S., Rook, J., & Smith, T. W. (Sprin 2007). Increasing
student engagement using effective and metacognitive writing
strategies in content areas. In Education Resource Information
Center. Retrieved from EBSCOhost (EJ767742).
Page 3 of 13

inquiry question. The author compiled data from prior pedagogical
research studies that support the use of collaborative “class essay”
writing activities. The author details the use of the “class essay” in her
classroom and notes “the students would have to feel as comfortable and
as supported as possible” (5). This addresses another inquiry question of
mine: Are students ready to begin this writing task?. Students
collaborated in different groups throughout the writing process for
student-centered support, language, sharing of skills and strategies, and
collaborative effort to create an effective essay. The use of collaborative
writing activities yielded increased student comfort and achievement in
individual written assignments.
Colleagues (Summarize how two colleagues have addressed this issue in their classroom. Identify grade level, subject, and summary of ideas.)
11th grade English Language Arts. This colleagues openly offers extra
credit for attending lessons live. This increases attendance numbers, but
they have not seen an overall increase in student participation in lesson
activities. They see a small group of students who consistently
participate (as I do in my own classroom). This teacher does have higher
overall live attendance than I do.
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
This section is not required in Semester 2 per the instructions.
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
The majority of students who attended the lesson live and completed the
compare and contrast paragraph demonstrated mastery of compare and
contrast writing on the post-assessment. Those that attended live but did
not complete the first pre-assessment paragraph mostly demonstrated at
or slightly above-grade-level understanding. Because students are not
required to attend lessons live, those that did not attend the lesson
demonstrate all levels of understanding: below, at, and above grade
level. Looking at the result data, many students did demonstrate
understanding; however, those that attended the lesson live and
completed the pre-assessment paragraph demonstrated higher levels of
understanding than those who did not attend. I spoke with 20 students
who did not attend; of the 20 polled: 7 watched the recording and 13 did
not review the recording. Those that did watch the recording (on
average) demonstrated higher levels of understanding than those that did
not review the lesson recording.
CSTP Element Initial Rating
Promoting critical thinking
T – Applying
1.5 through inquiry, problem
S – Exploring
solving, and reflection
6.1 Reflecting on Emerging: Is
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017
This article examines student cognitive development in relation to
understanding assignments, texts, and their own metacognition.
The authors detail different affective questions and activities that
increase student engagement in the classroom and ownership of
their own learning and work production. The study consisted of 86
students divided into 3 groups: Group 1 (control) -no questions
provided for reflection on work, Group 2 - text and content-
focused questions for written completion, and Group 3 - text-
related questions and metacognitive/affective questions for written
completion. Each group participated in the same lesson and
instruction before completing their assigned journal entries
(questions depend on the group to which the student was assigned.
Overall, including metacognitive and affective questions in
writing assignments did yield higher understanding and scores
than those who did not engage with these types of questions. This
connects to my focus on my inquiry focus in preparing students to
understand their own writing process and goals to be successful in
their final assessment.
11th grade Advanced Placement Language Arts (colleague who
works in the same department as my mentor). This colleague also
offers extra credit for live attendance; however, they only aware
extra credit to students who participate verbally or in written
communications with the whole class. This teacher has high lesson
attendance; however, this is common with Advanced Placement
courses. They do see a larger number of students who participation
and engage with lesson material. It was noted that this strategy can
sometimes become murky due to the level of expected
participation. Expectations are set early and shared frequently that
participation must be insightful, helpful, and respectful.
How Special Emphasis will be Incorporated
This section is not required in Semester 2 per the instructions.
Section 5: Results and Reflection
Pre/Post Assessment Data Analysis Findings for Three Focus Students
My focus students data encompasses a wide range of skills
demonstration as I projected originally. All focus students
completed pre-assessment two, but only two focus students
complete pre-assessment one. Focus student 1 completed the post-
assessment; however, Focus student two and three did not
complete the post-assessment. Focus student two attended the
lesson live and struggled with both the pre and post-assessments.
Focus student one watched the recording of the lesson and
demonstrated mastery of the content and skills in this unit. Focus
student three did well on pre-assessment two with teacher support.
Teacher and FS3 worked one-on-one once a week for a month in
support of student success. FS3 did not complete the post-
assessment, and teacher has not yet been able to get FS3 on the
phone or response by email for additional post-assessment
support.
Evidence/Rational for Rating Suggestions for Moving
Revised Rating
(Summarize from POP Section 3) Forward
To move to INNOVATING level: Consider how to
Teacher asked questions of analysis and evaluation. increase complexity of task beyond a single lesson
T – Integrating
Students answered questions that included all levels of Bloom’s. so that there are continuing opportunities for
S - Integrating
Students created their own math problems. students to engage in inquiry in complex problem.
How could you extend lesson into PBL?
Exploring: Begins to As I continue through the Induction To move to the Applying
Page 4 of 13
 program, I find myself reflecting
more upon my practice with both
level, additional reflection
my mentor and my colleagues. I
and consultation with my
actively reach out to the English 10
PLC, small team, and
team to collaborate and understand
aware of the mentor on areas of
the foundation students receive in
need to reflect adjustment to deepen
English 10 to understand what
on teaching engage in reflection on understanding for all
understanding and skills they come
practice to teaching practice student to achieve high
to English 11 possessing. I also
support student individually and with levels of success is needed.
teaching practice reach out to former and current
learning. colleagues that is I work closely with my
in support of teachers to see if struggles or areas
Reflects focused on methods to team, but I feel that next
student learning. of support I see in English are only
individually or support the full range semester I can better use my
seen in my class or if the student
with colleagues of learners. development and
needs additional intervention and
on immediate understanding of the
support. I work closely with my
student learning curriculum and assessments
English PLC, small team of co-
needs. to better scaffold and
teachers, and my mentor to reflect
develop lessons and
on current and past trends, reflect on
resources for all students to
lesson presentation and success, and
fully access and succeed.
discuss what skills and struggles we
are seeing in English 11.
I am aware of CRP and work to
mitigate bias in the classroom. I
incorporate various strategies and
adjustments during lessons and
contact with students to lessen the
chance of bias in the classroom. I To move to the Applying
am still getting to know my students, level, I feel that I need more
and I do not always see the person attention and focus on
behind the camera (students are not diversity and inclusion in
required to show their faces in the lessons and curriculum.
Emerging: class). This also helps me navigate While I cannot make
Plans daily Exploring: Plans single and identify where possible bias changes the curriculum, this
lessons using lessons or sequence of may occur based on stigmatization semester, I began adding
available lessons using and inherent biases based on name resources and tools into the
Using curriculum and additional assessment or identifying factors that should not lessons for additional access
knowledge of information information on student enter in lesson planning or and visibility in the lessons.
students’ from district academic readiness, assessment. Next semester, I want to
academic and state- language, cultural include these in every
readiness, required background, and lesson so students can see
language assessments. I feel I am fully at this level this and connect to the
4.1 individual semester. In addition to the above
proficiency, development. curriculum more
cultural Exploring evidence, I actively incorporate and holistically. I also want to
background, and Becomes aware address learning goals and informal implement getting to know
individual of potential assessments this semester to monitor you assignments more in the
development to areas of bias Becomes aware of and student academic readiness, first unit of semester A. I
plan instruction. and seeks to potential areas of bias success, and understanding. As I got to know my student
learn about and seeks to learn reflect this semester, I noted that my population more quickly
culturally about culturally student population entered High and wholly this semester,
responsive responsive pedagogy. School in 2020. Students are still but I feel that getting more
pedagogy. progressing to understand the data and information from
analytical and critical reading and the start of the semester will
writing skills they need to be help me plan and implement
successful in 11th and 12th grade. differentiated instruction
Many of my students need better so all students can
additional support and reach high levels of success.
understanding to develop and
demonstrate their understanding of
grade-level and above mastery due
to a year cut short from the impact
of COVID-19 freshman year.

Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 5 of 13
 Special Emphasis ISTE-Educator and ISTE-Student Standards (Semester 3 only)
Results of Incorporation into Lesson Key Learnings and New Skills/Knowledge Developed by Teacher
Special Emphasis ISTE-Educator and ISTE-Student Standards (Semester
Special Emphasis ISTE-Educator and ISTE-Student Standards (Semester 3 only)
3 only) This section is not required in Semester 2 per the
This section is not required in Semester 2 per the instructions.
instructions.
Action Items
Special Emphasis ISTE-Educator and ISTE-Student Standards (Semester 3 only) This section is not required in Semester
2 per the instructions.
For curriculum design, lesson
planning, assessment planning
Projected ideas: Additional time for writing assignments; clarify expectations and group directions before
collaborative activities.
Special Emphasis ISTE-Educator and ISTE-Student Standards (Semester 3 only) This section is not required in Semester
2 per the instructions.
For classroom practice
Projected ideas: Supplemental handouts similar to rough draft outline to support success on both pre-assessments
1 and 2 and post-assessment essay.
Special Emphasis ISTE-Educator and ISTE-Student Standards (Semester 3 only) This section is not required in Semester
For teaching English learners, 2 per the instructions.
students with special needs, and
students with other
instructional challenges Projected ideas: pre-video collaborative discussion (went well this year. I will do this again to support all
students in the classroom), handout to support focus and attention and increase post-assessment practice.
Special Emphasis ISTE-Educator and ISTE-Student Standards (Semester 3 only) This section is not required in Semester
For future professional 2 per the instructions.
development
Projected ideas: Resources building and development support with my PLC and small team.
Special Emphasis ISTE-Educator and ISTE-Student Standards (Semester 3 only) This section is not required in Semester
2 per the instructions.
For future inquiry/ILP
Projects ideas: additional share time in groups and whole-class; handout during video to increase focus and
completion of compare and contrast paragraph. Guided notes for the texts: what to look for and how to critically
interact with the texts in the unit.
Special Emphasis ISTE-Educator and ISTE-Student Standards (Semester 3 only) This section is not required in Semester
2 per the instructions.
For next POP cycle
Projected ideas: Lesson focusing on discussion and student-lead activities to increase deep content
understanding.
Semester 3 Only: Special Emphasis ISTE-Educator and ISTE-Student Standards (Semester 3 only) This section is not required in Semester
For future use of technology 2 per the instructions.
Other Notes
I believe that this ISTE section is confusing. The directions for the ILP are unclear in the Modules and the ILP document. After consultation
with my mentor and reviewing the directions, I am under the understanding that this portion of the ILP document is not to be completed in
Semester 2.I have drafted some projected ideas given the action items detailed in the left-hand column.
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
rhastings@calca.connectionsa English Language Arts
Rachael Hastings 11th
cademy.org American Literature
Pre-Assessment Data Range and Average Post-Assessment Data Range and Average
Because I cannot require live attendance at lessons, many did not I have used both points earned and percentage earned to find
complete the first pre-assessment. I have used the rough draft data the post-assessment data range.
to complete and compare both pre-assessment and post-
assessment mastery demonstration.
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 6 of 13
 Post-assessment data range: 7 - 26 out of 24
Rough draft data range: 5 - 10 out of 10
Class average: 71%
Class average: 7/10 = 70%
PRE-/POST- ASSESSMENT DATA TABLE
Student Pre-Assessment Score Post-Assessment Score Comments
Student did not attend lesson live. Student
watched lesson recording and completed the
pre-assessment independently. Student
needed additional feedback and support to
fully demonstrate mastery. Feedback provided
24/24
regarding paragraph and essay structure and
1. Focus Student: EL 2/2 and 9/10
syntactical awareness. FS1 revised rough draft
100%
awkward sentences and phrases and submitted
final draft demonstrating mastery - 22/24. +2
extra credit for “Harrison Bergeron” paragraph
moved FS1 to earning 100% on the post-
assessment.
FS2 submitted incomplete pre-assessment 1
paragraph. Rough draft needed additional
attention and revision of thesis statement:
original focus only on one text and author.
1/24 After feedback and one-on-one support,
2. Focus Student: 504/IEP 1/2 and 7/10 student submitted extension request for the
4% post-assessment. Student focused on the Unit
2 test per their 504 plan and did meet grade-
level expectations for their in-test essay. FS2 is
still completing the post-assessment essay at
time of writing.
Focus Student 3 did not submit the pre-
assessment or the post-assessment rough
draft. Focus Student 3 did not submit the post-
0/24
assessment. Student shared that they had
3. Focus Student: Teacher Choice 0/2 and 8/10
difficulties maintaining focus and completion
0%
on independent work. Student did not reach
out for additional assistance after the rough
draft.
Student is a strong critical reader and writer.
Teacher and student have discussed student
moving to Honors or AP level next year.
Student earned +2 extra credit for detailed and
complete “Harrison Bergeron” paragraph.
26/24
Student masterfully highlighted three unique
4. MH 2/2 and 10/10
elements for compare and contrast in pre-
108%
assessment 1. Student met extension challenge
in post-assessment to NOT use any
announcement phrases or repeated syntax to
enhance strong and masterful demonstration
of English analytical writing.
Student did well on collaborative discussion,
but submitted incomplete paragraph. Student
noted one difference and one thing they liked
better about the film without connecting this
to the compare and contrast assignment.
Feedback on pre-assessment rough draft
23/24 targeted missing comparison and evidence.
5. ML 1/2 and 8/10 Emphasized connecting and building ideas
95% together to create cohesive and detailed post-
assessment. Student earned 22/24 + 1 extra
credit on post-assessment. Student lost points
for syntax and grammatical convention
demonstration, but on the whole did well on
the commentary and targeted areas provided
in feedback.
6. AJ 2/2 and 10/10 26/24 Student fully participated in lesson and
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 7 of 13
 collaborative work. Student provided detailed
examples and built our peer’s work. Student
used “Harrison Bergeron” as one of their texts
for the final essay. Student built upon their
108%
strong foundation to compare and contrast
“Harrison Bergeron” and Ray Bradbury’s “The
Veldt”.
Student did well on both pre-assessments.
Rough draft was missing a complete thesis
statement. Student submitted post-assessment
24/24 including strong thesis, but needed additional
7. RB 2/2 and 9/10 attention to evidence integration and diction.
100% Student is a strong reader and writer and
demonstrated mastery in the post-assessment.
+2 extra credit for pre-assessment 1 pushed
student to 100% on post-assessment.
Student did not attend lesson live or complete
the first pre-assessment. Student struggles
with evidence integration and organization of
ideas in written work. Student received
additional one-on-one support to fully
15/24 understand the directions and expectations of
8. HP 0/2 and 5/10 the post-assessment. Student submitted
62% summary of the texts for the rough draft. After
feedback and support, student added some
analytical commentary, but needed additional
revisions to meet requirements and show full
grade-level understanding of critical writing
skills. Student is currently revising their work.
Student did not complete either pre-
assessments or the post-assessment. Student
did attend the lesson live and submitted pre-
1/24
assessment 1. Student submitted a summary of
9. GL 1/2 and 0/10
the collaborative discussion instead of compare
4%
and contrast paragraph. Student earned +1
extra credit for their work, but did not submit
the rough draft or completed post-assessment.
Student did not attend lesson live or complete
the first pre-assessment. Student meets with
teacher bi-weekly for additional support and
accommodations. Student struggles with
reading comprehension and writing structure.
16/24
Student currently meets 8th grade reading
10. RB 0/2 and 7/10
level. Additional outline supports and sentence
66%
frames/transitions are provided for student.
Student is being evaluated for additional IEP
supports. Student submitted a summary of the
two texts and a thesis statement listing the
authors and titles.
Student demonstrate grade-level appropriate
understanding and skills. In one-on-one calls
with teacher, student receives support and
encouragement to move student to greater
understanding and skills demonstration.
Student struggles with organization and essay
20/24
structure. Student used the post-assessment
11. PL 1/2 and 9/10
outline for support and applied some of the
83%
teacher feedback from pre-assessment two to
the post-assessment. Student focused on
diction and transitions, but did not fully
integrate evidence and restructure thesis
statement for clarity. +1 extra credit moved
student from 19 (79%) to 20 (83%).
12. CC 0/2 and 5/10 14/24 Student did not attend lesson live or complete
the first pre-assessment. St has an active 504
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 8 of 13
 for anxiety and ADHD. Student struggles to
fully comprehend directions and complete
assessments. Student receives additional
feedback and support to revise and resubmit
work. Student submitted 3 paragraphs of the
required 4. Student did not include evidence
from the text provided to prove thesis. Student
58%
did not connect ideas or write in formal and
objective tone. Student submitted post-
assessment more in line with a book review
detailing their opinion of the story; compare
and contrast skills not demonstrated. Student
has not yet submitted a revised pre or post-
assessment.
Student attended lesson live and completed
the compare and contrast paragraph. Student
engaged in class, but did not complete the
1/24 post-assessment. Student misunderstood the
13. CL 1/2 and 7/10 assignment. Student completed a research
4% essay focusing on their favorite author in the
postmodernism movement. Student is
currently revising to complete the compare and
contrast essay.
Student actively participates and engages
during lessons. Student demonstrate grade-
level understanding without additional
26/24 feedback and support. With teacher feedback
14. JV 2/2 and 10/10 and revision support, student submitted deep
108% understanding and critical writing skills in post-
assessment. +2 extra credit for pre-assessment
one moved student from 24 (100%) to 26
(108%).
Student did well in contrast but struggled with
comparison. Student had a complete final draft
but was missing evidence and analysis for both
19/24
texts in post-assessment. Student included one
15. JH 1/2 and 9/10
quote from each text, but connection and
79%
cohesion was missing to fully prove the thesis.
+1 extra credit moved student from 18 (75%) to
19 (79%).
Student did well in collaborative discussion but
submitted an incomplete pre-assessment one
paragraph. Student used their deep
understanding of “Harrison Bergeron” to
compare and contrast this story and Ray
20/24 Bradbury’s “The Veldt”. Student submitted a
16. PV 1/2 and 10/10 grade-level understanding demonstration post-
83% assessment. Evidence from “Harrison
Bergeron” was detailed and masterful, but
student struggled demonstrating the same
skills when looking at “The Veldt”. +1 extra
credit for pre-assessment one moved student
from 19 (79%) to 20 (83%).
Student did very well during the lesson and
pre-assessment one. Student demonstrated
masterful understanding looking at a text and a
film adaptation of the text, but struggled when
looking at and compare/contrast two different
21/24
texts. Student had a strong foundation in
17. AV 2/2 and 8/10
contrast paragraph – student focused on one
87%
text instead of differences between two texts
(used “Harrison Bergeron” and slipped back to
text vs. film). +2 extra credit for pre-
assessment one pushed student from 19 (79%)
to 21 (87%).
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 9 of 13
 Student did not attend lesson live or complete
the first pre-assessment. In one-on-one
communication student shared that they are
currently distracted from school work. Student
moved from Ukraine at the beginning of the
year and has family and friends still in the
country. Student lost motivation to complete
the assessment because of the current
situation in this area. Student is currently
12/24 working on the post-assessment with teacher
18. AO 0/2 and 7/10 support. Student is not EL but struggles with
50% academic English. Student focused on and
completed an introduction and thesis
statement using standard English with teacher
support and modeling. Student is progressing
with a grade-level understanding of syntax and
language use. This work was used as student’s
pre-assessment two. Student is independently
completing the first body paragraph of the
essay for teacher review and feedback at the
time of this writing.
Student has an active IEP and is currently
demonstrating below grade-level
understanding and reading levels. Student was
provided and supported by teacher and case
manager to complete the compare and
contrast essay. Student did not complete the
essay as directed and supported to do so. In a
one-on-one call with student, student shared
that they were not going to complete the
10/24 essay. When asked for further clarification,
19. NL 0/2 and 5/10 student noted that they do not enjoy the texts
41% from this unit and will not be revising the
submitted assignment. Student did complete a
compare and contrast review of virtual reality
vs artificial intelligence. Student earned points
for the alternate work in alignment with IEP
supports and the directions. Teacher is still
working with student to better support them
to success on this essay. Case manager is also
working with student to meet goal of
completion and success on this essay.
Student did not attend lesson live or complete
the first pre-assessment. Student did well on
both pre-assessment two and post-assessment.
19/24
Additional commentary powerfully discussing
20. AG 0/2 and 7/10
the stylistic choice differences and literary
79%
device similarities to convey the shared topic in
two Beat poems would have moved student to
the B level.
Student is a strong critical thinker and writer.
Student fully engaged during collaborative
26/24
discussion and writing pre-assessment one.
21. ER 2/2 and 10/10
Student demonstrated mastery and
108%
understanding in both pre-assessment two and
post-assessment.
22. JB 0/2 and 8/10 20/24 Student did not attend lesson live or complete
the first pre-assessment. Student submits
83% quality and above grade-level demonstration
when work is completed and submitted.
Student has an active 504 for depression and
anxiety. Student did well on pre-assessment
two and received feedback noting formal tone
and needed balance between both compare
and contrast in post-assessment. Student and
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 10 of 13
 teacher met in Zoom once a week for support
monitoring completion and guided supported
on objective analytical writing.
Student attended lesson live and submitted an
outline for pre-assessment one. Student
17/24
submitted a bullet point outline for pre-
23. EB 1/2 and 6/10
assessment two. Student expanded ideas but
71%
did not fully connect ideas or fully integrate
evidence into post-assessment submission.
Student did not attend lesson live or complete
the first pre-assessment. Student submitted
15/24 incomplete pre and post-assessment. Student
24. SJ 0/2 and 5/10 included a thesis statement and two texts, but
62% student submitted a three paragraph essay
that focused on the contrast and did not
include the comparison.
Student did not attend live or complete pre-
assessment one. Teacher worked one-on-one
with student to support understanding.
0/24
Student focused on two Beat poems and
0/2 and 0/10
submitted a thesis statement, two similarities,
25. SB Resubmission: 18/24
and two differences after due date and original
Resubmission: 7/10
extension request. With additional feedback
75%
and support, student is working to integrate
evidence and revise post-assessment using the
outline for additional support.
Student attended and participated in the
collaborative work during the lesson. Pre-
assessment one submission was incomplete:
no evidence from the text included to support
compare and contrast. Student submitted
18/24 grade-level appropriate compare and contrast
26. DL 1/2 and 7/10
pre-assessment two draft and post-
75% assessment. Student supported thesis
statement with evidence from the text, but
commentary was not fully connected. Tone and
diction slipped between formal and informal
conventions.
Student did not attend live or complete pre-
assessment one. Student is a strong writer and
prefers written communication and expression
24/24 of understanding over verbal. Student
27. MS 0/2 and 10/10
demonstrates mastery and full reading
100% comprehension. Student has an active 504 for
anxiety. Student reviews additional feedback
and support through email and text message.
Student is a strong writer and reader. Student
attended the lesson live, but did not submit
24/24 pre-assessment one. Student demonstrated
28. JL 0/2 and 9/10 strong compare and contrast skills in pre-
100% assessment two. Additional feedback noted
revisions for objective language and formal
tone needed in post-assessment.
29. AA 0/2 and 5/10 15/24 Student greatly struggles with attention and
completion of work. Teacher works with
62% student one-on-one for additional support;
most support comes in discussion and
communication of attention and focus
strategies and regulation techniques. Student
has acknowledged that they do not care if work
is submitted incomplete. Student is outgoing
and communicative. With additional support
and feedback/reminders to complete work,
student can submit grade-level understanding
but they are satisfied with the incomplete post-
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 11 of 13
 assessment and score earned.
Student did not attend lesson live or complete
the first pre-assessment. Student did not
understand the directions and why behind
19/24
historical context and connection to relevance
30. AB 0/2 and 6/10
of texts and skills. Feedback supporting
79%
occasion and author’s purpose was applied in
the post-assessment. Student demonstrated
grade-level understanding.
Student did not attend lesson live or complete
the first pre-assessment. Student
demonstrated grade-level understanding:
some repetition of ideas and missing
19/24 transitions and connections included in pre-
31. RE 0/2 and 7/10 assessment two. Feedback provided to student
79% detailed support and attention needed ot
organization. Student addressed the repeated
words in the post-assessment, but did not
revise or rework repeated ideas to build upon
each other for cohesive post-assessment.
Student did not attend lesson live or complete
the first pre-assessment. Student struggles
with motivation and completion of work.
Student submitted work looking at two texts
and provided some evidence; however, they
16/24
did not compare and contrast the text. Body
32. FD 0/2 and 6/10
paragraph one summarized the first text
66%
selection and body paragraph two summarized
the second text. Student submitted complete
thesis statement but did not follow essay
structure and organization for complete post-
assessment submission.
Student did not attend lesson live or complete
the first pre-assessment. Student is a strong
critical thinker and independent learner.
Student will attend discussions and live lessons
but shared they had a schedule conflict with
33. MG 0/2 and 10/10 24/24
the pre-assessment one lesson. Teacher
encouraged student to watch the recording
and complete pre-assessment 1. Student
demonstrated mastery in both pre-assessment
two and post-assessment.
Student did not attend lesson live or complete
the first pre-assessment. Student needs
22/24
additional support in organization and
34. SG 0/2 and 9/10
structure of ideas. With feedback emphasizing
91%
paragraph structure and transitions, student
demonstrated mastery in the post-assessment.
Student did not attend lesson live or complete
the first pre-assessment. Student follows
directions and models well in rough draft
24/24 outlines. Student needed additional feedback
35. KG 0/2 and 8/10 to focus attention on paragraph structure and
100% transitions within paragraphs to build a
cohesive post-assessment. Student
demonstrated mastery after attention to
feedback and revisions of pre-assessment two.
36. RL 1/2 and 6/10 19/24 Student greatly struggles with reading
comprehension. Student attended the lesson
79% live and enjoyed the short film; student noted
in pre-assessment 1 that “the film was better
because I could see the story.” One-on-one
support provided for thesis statement
completion beyond the provided frame,
discussion and brainstorming of shared topic
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 12 of 13
 and second text. Student demonstrated grade-
level appropriate writing and critical thinking
skills in post-assessment. Earning the +1 extra
credit for pre-assessment 1 submission moved
910111213141516
student to 19/24.

Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 13 of 13