Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program

Individualized Learning Plan (ILP) –

Semester 2
Updated Dec 2023
Directions:
● The ILP should be completed with Mentor input.
● Cells will expand as needed.
● When submitting completed ILP to instructor, please include copies of all instructional resources, including
Google Survey used for assessment of audience satisfaction.
Section 1: New Teacher Information
New Teacher Email Subject Area Grade Level

Katelyn Wilson katelynmwilson1414 Mathematics 3rd

@gmail.com
Mentor Email School/District Semester/year

Allysha Neebe aneebe@abidingsav Abiding Savior Lutheran School 2nd Semester/ 2024
ior.com
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
Using
knowledg
e of
students’
academic T -I currently use all curriculum
readiness, provided for the third grade level.I
language have begun to implement student
T– T–
proficienc interest and background into lessons by
emerging exploring T-
4.1 y, cultural adding examples of items students are
S– S- S -.
backgrou interested in like Minecraft or sports.
emerging exploring
nd, and S -some students’ backgrounds and
individual language proficiency is implemented
developm into the planning of lessons
ent to
plan
instructio
n.
Planning
instructio
n that
incorpora
tes
appropria T- I incorporate some strategies like additional time and
shortening assignments. However, I want to work on students
4.4
te T-emerging being able to access the content by meeting their learning goals T-exploring T-
S-emerging from their IEPs. S-exploring S-
strategies S- Some students have strategies to meet their learning needs,
to meet but not all students' needs are being met.

the
learning
needs of
all
students
Adapted from FOTIP 2017 Page 1 of 6
 Section 3: Inquiry Focus and Planning
(Attach Pre/Post Assessments and Data Collection Tools)

Inquiry Focus Inquiry Question Pre-Assessment Post-Assessment Expected Results

Based on your selected
Pose measurable and
CSTP elements, identify a
observable question in What will you use as What will you use as
focus of inquiry (e.g., How do you expect
terms of students (e.g., your baseline your post/final
group discussion, student performance to
what impact will assessment of student assessment of student
differentiation, change?
strategy X have on performance? performance?
motivation…)
student achievement?)
What impact will
Use of a chart to
differentiated
organize student data to
assignments/teaching I expect students to
implement
modalities have on score at least a 70% or
differentiation in lessons Pre-Test Scores Post-assessment scores
student higher on the
for all students to meet
achievement/understan post-assessment.
their learning needs.
ding of the selected
math lesson?
Special Emphasis- Instructional Strategy
Directions:
● Identify at least one instructional strategy you will incorporate into lesson (e.g., differentiated instruction,
small groups…)
● Explain how this strategy will be incorporated.
Special Emphasis Focus How Special Emphasis will be Incorporated

I plan to incorporate this by providing different teaching modalities during the lesson by using visuals like
anchor charts, hands on by using cubes, and reviewing my organizer of student learning needs to
Differentiated Instruction implement any additional supports for students to be successful during the lesson (movement breaks,
specific seating, etc.).

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.
● 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 language learner Focus Student 2: Student with Focus Student 3: Your choice
ILP/504 plan
Performance Data Prior to the lesson, FS1 scores an Prior to the lesson, FS2 Prior to the lesson, FS3
average of 90% on math scores an average of 80% scores an average of 75%
assessments and 90% on math on math assessments and on math assessments and
homework. an 85% on math 80% on math homework.
homework.

Adapted from FOTIP 2017 Page 2 of 6

 Expected Result I expect FS1 to score at least an 85% I expect FS2 to score at I expect FS3 to score at
or higher on the post-assessment. least an 80% on the least a 75% on the
post-assessment. post-assessment
Inquiry Implementation Plan
Discuss Results
Administer Administer Analyze Results
Deliver lesson with Mentor
Identify name and pre-assessment post-assessment
date for activities.
3/18 3/19 or 3/20 3/20 or 3/21 3/22 3/27

Provide 1-2
In this lesson, students will be learning division facts for 3 and 4. I plan to provide differentiation of the lesson by using math manipulatives, a
sentence summary fun Numberock video to engage students, and an anchor chart to teach the division facts.
of your lesson plan
Summarize
process for Prior to the lesson, I will provide a fact assessment of the division facts for the numbers 3 and 4 to see what the students already know. After
administering and teaching the lesson, I will provide the same fact assessment to the students. I will compare the scores from their pre and post- assessments to
analyzing see what students now know of their division facts after the lesson, and what students are still struggling and need additional support.
assessments
Section 4: Inquiry Research and Exploration
Directions:
● Locate and read two research articles that have informed inquiry focus.
● In first box, provide title, URL or citation,
● In second box describe what you learned and how it applies to your inquiry project
- The first article discusses how teacher involvement in responding to student differences
positively impacted student learning. This can apply to my inquiry as I am working on meeting
students' learning needs which are all different. By reading this article I learned the more I am
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1118715.pdf aware of their differences the more I can implement and use them in lessons to help students
succeed in their learning goals.
https://pure.rug.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/22252004/Differe - The second article discusses ability grouping as a way of differentiation. By grouping students
ntiation_within_and_across_classrooms_in_druk.pdf based on ability you are able to tailor the lesson to meet where each group is at in their
learning. The article does state that regrouping is needed as student learning / understanding
is always changing. I am trying something similar to this with my inquiry where I have students
grouped in pods of varying abilities.
Directions:
● Talk to two colleagues about how they have addressed similar issues.
● In first box, list their names, grade level/content area, …
● In second box, summarize the conversation and what you learned.
- Julie uses many different strategies for differentiation. She uses audio tests for students to
listen to the test being read aloud, she grades the work students are able to complete, uses
sentence starters, and adjusts paragraph writing lengths based on student ability. What I notice
Julie McCree, 3rd grade is that she really focuses on student ability and meets where they are at in their learning.

Allysha Neebe, Kindergarten/ former 5th grade teacher - “I use centers to differentiate in a small group setting. I have also used videos for the kids to
watch and I have adjusted question depth and type embedded in the video. I have also
assigned different assignments to different students. I have also used assignment menus to let
kids choose a variety of assignments. And I usually guide students to certain choices.”
Section 5: Results and Reflection
Directions:
● Record Pre- and post- assessment data into Pre/Post Assessment Data Table at end of document
● Include copies/images of pre/post assessments/directions and the Pre/Post Assessment Data Table with
submission.
● Discuss the findings of your data analysis for whole class and focus students
● Revise the rating for the CSTP inquiry focus, explain the revised rating, and share some ideas for continued
growth.

Post Data analysis findings for whole class Post Data analysis findings for focus students

Adapted from FOTIP 2017 Page 3 of 6

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

Special Emphasis Instructional Strategy

Results of Incorporation into Lesson Key learnings or new skills developed by teacher

Action Items (some may not be applicable)

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 supporting
others/departmen
t/
school/district

Other

Other Notes and Comments

Adapted from FOTIP 2017 Page 4 of 6

 Fullerton Online Teacher Induction
Program
Individualized Learning Plan (ILP)

ASSESSMENT DATA
Updated Dec.2023

Directions:
● Record student pre and post scores in this table.
● Do not use student’s actual names.
New Emai Subject Area Grade Level
Teacher l

Pre-Assessment Data Range and Average Post-Assessment Data Range and Average

Adapted from FOTIP 2017 Page 5 of 6

 PRE-/POST- ASSESSMENT DATA
TABLE
Student Pre-Assessment Post-Assessment Comments
Score Score
1. Focus Student: EL
2. Focus Student: 504/IEP
3. Focus Student: Teacher
Choice
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.

Adapted from FOTIP 2017 Page 6 of 6