Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 5

Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program

I​ndividualized​ ​L​earning​ ​P​lan ​(ILP)

Revised 12.1.17
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
Megan Donoff miss.donoff@christcm.org Multiple Subject Third
Mentor Email School/District Date
Leah Tornow mrs.tornow@christcm.org Christ Lutheran Costa Mesa 2/26/18
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.
CSTP Element Initial Rating Description Goal Rating Description
T - Guide students to think critically through use of questioning T - Facilitates systematic opportunities for students to apply critical thinking by
Promoting critical
strategies, posing/solving problems, and reflection on issues in content. designing structured inquires into complex problems.
thinking through inquiry, T – Applying T – Innovating
1.5 S - Students respond to varied questions or tasks designed to promote S - Students pose and answer a wide-range of complex questions and problems,
problem solving, and S – Exploring S - Innovating
comprehension and critical thinking in single lessons or a sequence of reflect, and communicate understandings based on in depth analysis of content
lessons. learning.

5.4 Using Uses data from available assessments to

assessment Uses data from assessments provided establish content-based learning goals for
data to by site and district to set learning goals class and individual students in single
establish for the class lessons or sequences of lessons.
5.4 Emerging
goals and to Plans instruction using available Plans differentiated lessons and
plan, curriculum guidelines modifications to instruction to meet
differentiate, students’ diverse learning needs.
and modify
Incorporates differentiated
Planning instructional strategies into ongoing Plans instruction using a wide range of
instruction planning that addresses culturally strategies to address learning styles and
that responsive pedagogy, students’ meet students’ assessed language and
incorporates diverse language, and learning needs learning needs. Provides appropriate
appropriate and styles. support and challenges for students.
4.4 Applying Integrating
strategies to
meet the Uses assessments of students’ learning Integrates results from a broad range of
learning and language needs to inform planning assessments into planning to meet
needs of all differentiated instruction. students’ diverse learning and language
students needs.

Section 3: Inquiry Focus and Planning ​(Attach Pre/Post Assessments and Data Collection Tools)
Inquiry Question Hypothesis Lesson Series Topic Assessments/Data Collection
English Grammar: Before selecting this area as a
Standard addressed: L.3.1. focus, I used the student’s
Demonstrate command of the MAP score as a pre
-By use of Kagan Cooperative conventions of Standard assessment to determine
Learning Strategies, all students English grammar and usage which areas of focus are
How will leveled cooperative will be actively engaged in when writing or speaking. This needed. For the purposes of
learning groups based on learning which will improve will be a trimester review of this ILP, I will use the pinpoint
pre-assessment data improve student outcomes identifying nouns, verbs, assessment MobyMax to
student learning in a Language -By grouping based on adjectives, and determining preasses students using the
Unit? pre-assessment, students will past, present, and future. Language Skill checker.
gain an better understanding of Lesson series will begin Timeline: Monday March 5
adjectives. Monday March 5 and go for pre assessment.
through March 22. Pre I will use this same
assessment Monday March 5. assessment as the
Intense review will be from post-assessment on Thursday
March 7 through March 16th. March 22.

Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 1 of 5
Post assessment done and
analyzed by March 22.

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
Charlee: This student struggles to work
This student scored very poorly on cooperatively. She tends to refuse to
Currently, I do not have an ELL. I have
her MAP assessment and tends to help her partners, insisting she works
selected a student whom although
rely heavily on her partners in group better alone. She is younger than
English is a first language, she
work. She tends to not read most students in the class and
struggles to use it appropriately in
directions and instead asks those next behaves as such. I chose her because
English expression both verbally and
Performance Data
to her to explain what she is I want to see her cooperatively
supposed to do. learning improve and I believe Kagan
strategies will help with this.
MAP Score: RIT 178
MAP Score: RIT 180
Language Skill Checker Score:
Language Skill Checker Score: MAP Score: RIT 180
8 Failed Skills, 0 Passed Skills; 0%
7 Failed Skills, 1 Passed Skills; 12% Language Skill Checker Score:
Moby Grade Level: 2.2
Moby Grade Level: 2.5 5 Failed Skills, 3 Passed Skills; 37%
Current Grade in Grammar: C
Current Grade in Grammar: C Moby Grade Level: 2.3
Current Grade in Grammar B-
I expect to see this student working
cooperatively and getting along with
Expected Results
I expect to see higher post test scores I expect to see higher post test scores
her peers. I expect to see her
and more engagement in lessons. and more engagement in lessons.
listening and waiting to speak rather
than talking over her partners.
Inquiry Lesson Implementation Plan
Administer Pre-Assessment Deliver Lesson(s) Administer Post-Assessment Analyze Results Discuss Results with Mentor
Identify dates for
March 6, 7, 8, 13, March 22
activities. March 5, 2018 March 24-25 March 26
14, 15, 20, 21
My plan is to implement a series of lessons that use Kagan Cooperative Strategies to teach Language Concepts .
Provide 1-2 sentence
summary of your lesson
Students will focus on two strategies a week, working cooperatively in groups. based on current mastery level
plan. according to MAP and MobyMax assessments.

Pre and Post-Assessments will be electronic and paper based. FIrst students will complete the MobyMax
Language Skills Checker. The results will determine students’ current placement in the program and allow the
Summarize process for computer to check for missing skills . Then students will take a written paper and pencil test which will be given
administering and
analyzing pre- and at the beginning and end of the unit. The first set of results will show benchmarks and allow us to set goals. It
post-assessments. will show me what students already know so I can build upon prior knowledge and make sure we are mastering
standards and meeting goals.

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.)

Kagan, S. ​A Brief History of Kagan Structures.​ San Clemente, CA: Kagan -EL Magazine Measuring What Matters Vol. 75 Feb 2018​ see "3 Key
Publishing. Questions on Measuring Learning" by Jay McTighe.
Kagan Online Magazine,​ Spring 2003. ​www.KaganOnline.com This is a journal I receive monthly with updates on the educational field. It
was not a part of my Google scholar search but
“Different structures could be used to create a set or closure for a lesson, ​is a scholarly journal which
to generate higher-level thinking or mastery of high consensus content, to has inspired my focus on assessment. It is one of the reasons I chose this
particular CSTP for my inquiry.
help students share information, or bond as a team or class.“
There is an article in there on assessments and how to measure what
matters. Attributes discussed in this article that are often overlooked as
This article is an overview of Kagan strategies. I’m familiar with similar needing measurement in the classroom include leadership skills, ability to
techniques but not these specific strategies. work in a team, communication skills, problem-solving skills, strategic
planning skills. All of these skills can be nurtured and assessed through
Kagan Cooperative Learning Strategies I intend to implement with this POP
Cycle and Teacher Inquiry process.

Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 2 of 5
Colleagues ​(Summarize how two colleagues have addressed this issue in their classroom. Identify grade level, subject, and summary of ideas.)
Fourth Grade/Multiple Subject:
“I assess grammar two ways. The first is how the students perform on the
curriculum-based tests. As this is my first year at this grade level, I am
relying on the textbook a little heavier than I have done in the past down
Fifth Grade/Multiple Subject:
in Primary/Kindergarten. I also use the students' written work to see if
“The main assessment of grammar is through use of the practice book,
they are transferring skills to other areas. I like to use rubrics for grammar
which is either graded together in class, or turned in and graded by me.
usage and mechanics. I find that the students still need guidance with
We occasionally make posters or do activities that students contribute to.
run-on sentences and indenting for paragraphs.
Grammar use is integrated throughout all classroom writing, and in fifth
grade, work without mostly correct usage, punctuation and capitalization
On the flip side, my students excel at getting thoughts down on paper.
is returned for correction before grading. Occasionally unit tests are
They are so quick to put their thoughts in writing, they sacrifice
given, using questions in the English book.”
punctuation and spelling.
Her most-used Kagan strategy is "Sage and Scribe" which she uses for
With Fourth Graders this year, I have found peer editing to be very
math reviews. She also likes Quiz-Quiz-Trade which is a strategy that is
powerful. They tend to have good critical eyes for each others' writing.
useful for studying for a test as a whole class and getting familiar with
They pair up, read their partner's essay, then on a separate piece of paper
possible test questions.
using a checklist, they write down suggestions to improve the writing. The
essays go back to the owners along with the suggestions. The owners can
then look over the suggestions and decide which ones they would like to

Special Emphasis: Instructional Strategy, ISTE ​Standards​, NBPTS Core Propositions

Special Emphasis Focus How Special Emphasis will be Incorporated
MAP- My MAP scores were used to select area of my area of
(Language Studies) and used to support my selection of student
Kagan Cooperative Learning Strategies groups .
Technology: MobyMax Pre-Assessment; Language Skill Checker MobyMax- Language Skill Checker used as pre assessment and
Technology: MAP Assessment; Learning Continuum selection of student groups
Kagan Strategies- Strategies will be used to build cooperative
learning skills and ensure all students are engaged.
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
Pre Assessment Data:

Focus Student 1 (Naomi)

Pre Assessment Data:
MAP Mean RIT: 178
Language Paper Test: 24/40
MAP Overall Score: Mean RIT 198.3
Language Skill Checker Score:
Standard Deviation 12.9
8 Failed Skills, 0 Passed Skills; 0%
Norm Grade Level 196.8
Moby Grade Level: 2.2
Language Paper Test: Mean 32/40; Highest 39/40, Lowest 11/40
Focus Student 2 (Charlee )
MAP Score: RIT 180
Mean RIT: 180
Language Paper Test: 29/30
Language Skill Checker Score: Mean 4 Failed Skills, 4 Passed Skills;
Language Skill Checker Score:
7 Failed Skills, 1 Passed Skills; 12%
Moby Grade Level Mean 3.4
Moby Grade Level: 2.5
Post Assessment Data:
Focus Student 3 (Laura)
Grammar Final Review:
Mean RIT: 180
Mean 33.5/40; Highest 40/40; lowest 24/40
Language Paper Test: 38/40
Adjectives Final Paper Test:
MAP Score: RIT 180
Mean 52.4/55; Highest 55/55, Lowest 43/55
Language Skill Checker Score:
5 Failed Skills, 3 Passed Skills; 37%
Pre Assessment Data for ILP
Moby Grade Level: 2.3
Focus Student 1: Pre Test: 60%
Focus Student 2: PreTest: 72%
Post Assessment Data for ILP
Focus Student 3: PreTest: 95%
Focus Student 1: Review Final 24/40; Final Test: 100%
Focus Student 2: Review Final 29/40; Final Test: 98%
Focus Student 3: Review Final 38/40; Final Test: 96%
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 3 of 5
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?
5.4 Using My evidence includes using Create more differentiated
data to assessment data to form groups and assignments to meet levels based on
establish gather background knowledge, pre assessment. Take advantage of
5.4 learning goals Emerging Integrating pre/post testing, and warm-up small group instruction. Use spiral
and to plan, activities to review previously taught review of concepts and integrating
and modify
material. I also used pretest data to adjectives into other writing
instruction evaluate who needed extra support. prompts.
I used Kagan strategies, developed an
interactive learning wall, and used
that technology to support learning. My
incorporates lessons involved color coding to
Have students reflect on their pre
4.4 appropriate Applying Integrating support students who work best with
strategies to and post test score.
assisting visuals. We played games to
meet the
learning needs increase engagement. Students who
of all students needed more one on one assistance
were sent to the resource teacher.
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
Though my original focus were the Cooperative Learning
strategies, the interactive learning wall I created was my biggest
The Kagan Cooperative Learning strategies I implemented resulted
take away. It was something I developed as our lessons unfolded
in higher scores and better engagement of a wider range of
mostly as a way to document evidence for BTSA. It ended up
having such amazing results with my students it made me wish it
was my original intention when designing this unit.
Action Items
For curriculum design,
lesson planning,
Incorporate student reflection into the process of lessons and assessment.
assessment planning

For classroom practice Incorporating Kagan strategies into general teaching practice.
For teaching English
learners, students with
Continued use of interactive wall as resource for students. Continue exploring heterogeneous grouping learned
special needs, and
students with other from Kagan.
instructional challenges
For future professional
development Look into additional cooperative learning strategies.

For future inquiry/ILP See how different grouping strategies impacts their learning

For next POP cycle See how I can translate success from this teacher inquiry and implement it into my science studies.


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.

Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 4 of 5
Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program
I​ndividualized​ ​L​earning​ ​P​lan ​(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
Miss Megan Donoff miss.donoff@christcm.org Multiple Subject Third
Pre-Assessment Data Range and Average Post-Assessment Data Range and Average
Data Range: 11-40; 27%-100% Data Range: 42-55; 76%-100%
Average: 83% Average: 94 %
Student Post-Assessment Score Comments
1. Focus Student: EL Naomi 24/40 60% 55/55 100% Focus student improved
2. Focus Student: 504/IEP
29/40 72% 54/55 98% Focus student improved
3. Focus Student: Teacher Focus student improved not only her score
Choice 38/40 95% 53/55 96% but her collaborative and social skills during
Laura this unit.
4. Keaton 39/40 97% 55/55 100%
5. Remi 32/40 80% 54/55 98%
Student decreased most likely due to two
6. Nina 39/40 97% 51/55 92% absences. Having missed these two lessons
made the final more of a challenge for her.
7. Maddie 25/40 62% 49/55 89%
8. Cora 37/40 92% 52.5/55 95%
Student decreased. Not certain why this
score dropped so dramatically. She tends
9. Faye 38/40 95% 42/55 76% to be a high achieving student. Perhaps
there is some confusion in the formatting
of the final versus the pretest.
10. Sophia 34/40 85% 49/55 89%
Student improved exponentially. This
11. Greysen 11/40 27% 52/55 95% student received assistance from our
school’s resource teacher.
12. Harper 39/40 97% 51/55 92%
This student in particular grew so much
during this unit. Her score not only
improved, but so did her ability to explain
13. Celeste 31/40 77% 49/55 89%
her choices and teach others who were
finding the lessons challenging. The Kagan
Strategies worked very well for her.
14. Sofie 37/40 92% 52/55 95%
15. Aiden 36/40 90% 51/55 92%
16. Blake 39/40 97% 54/55 98%
Although her score dropped a few
percentage points, I would state that this
was mostly due to understanding
17. Lola 40/40 100% 53/55 96%
formatting of the paper test. She tends to
buzz through things quickly and not read all
the directions.

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