Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program

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

Revised 6.1.17
Directions​: The ILP should be completed with Mentor input. Complete blue cells prior to classroom implementation. Complete orange cells after POP Cycle is completed. Cells will expand as
needed. When submitting completed ILP to instructor, please include copies/images of pre/post assessments/directions and the Pre/Post Assessment Data Table.
Section 1: New Teacher Information
New Teacher Email Subject Area Grade Level
Charles Oestreicher charlesoestreicher@csu.fullerton.edu
English Language Arts 11
Mentor Email School/District Date
Dr. Amy NIgro anigro@fullerton.edu University-based mentor 8 October 2020
Section 2: CSTP Areas of Inquiry
Directions: ​Identify 2-3 CSTP elements for ILP focus, including at least one as required: Semester 2 – CSTP 1/2/3; Semester 3 – CSTP 4/5/6; Semester 4 -all. Use the most recent CSTP
Assessment for Initial Rating. Identify both teacher and student rating for CSTP 1 and 2. See example.
C
S Element Initial Rating Description Goal Rating Description
T
P
T - Facilitates systematic opportunities for students to apply critical thinking
T - Guide students to think critically through use of questioning strategies,
Promoting critical thinking by designing structured inquires into complex problems.
1. T – Applying posing/solving problems, and reflection on issues in content. T – Innovating
through inquiry, problem S - Students pose and answer a wide-range of complex questions and
5 S – Exploring S - Students respond to varied questions or tasks designed to promote S - Innovating
solving, and reflection problems, reflect, and communicate understandings based on in depth
comprehension and critical thinking in single lessons or a sequence of lessons.
analysis of content learning.

Developing and Establishes short- and long-term curriculum Plans differentiated instruction that provides
sequencing plans for subject matter concepts and essential systematic opportunities for supporting and
long-term and related academic language and formats that extending student learning based on
4
. short-term T-Applyin support student learning. T- comprehensive information on students.
instructional g innovating
3
plans to support Engages students in the analysis of bias,
student learning stereotyping, and assumptions.

Using available Uses technology to design and implement Uses a wide range of technologies to
technologies to assessments, record and analyze results, and design, implement, and analyze
assist in communicate about student learning with assessments and provides for an in depth
5
assessment, T-Applyin administration, colleagues, families, and T-
and ongoing communication regarding
. g innovating
6 analysis, and students. Ensure that communications are
student learning to all audiences.
communication received by those who lack access to
of student technology.
learning
Section 3: Inquiry Focus and Planning ​(Attach Pre/Post Assessments to ILP)
Inquiry Focus Inquiry question Pre-Assessment Post-Assessment Expected Results
Based on your selected CSTP Pose measurable and observable question in What will you use as your baseline What will you use as your final How do you expect student performance
elements, identify a focus of terms of students (e.g., what impact will assessment of student assessment of student to change? Use percentages to describe
inquiry (e.g., group discussion, strategy X have on student performance as actions/performance? actions/performance? anticipated growth.
differentiation, motivation…) measured by Y?)
What impact will increased use of higher-order
Use of analysis, synthesis, and There will be a 20% increase in the average exam
questions (teacher talk, worksheet, and student
evaluation questions + student problem Previous examination scores New chapter exam score for students who participated in class and
problem generation) have on student performance as
generation successfully completed the worksheet.
measured by chapter exam?

Using technology to What impact will increased Students’ written Formative written Average score for each class
make lessons more use of interactive technology responses in formative assessment in response section will rise from C+/B-
student-centered and have on student engagement assessments to texts from to a prompt or question range to B/B+ range,
increase students’ and performance, as the previous learning unit about a text in the new roughly a 15-25% increase
responsibility for measured by scores on a learning unit.
their own learning written formative
assessment?
Focus Students
Directions: ​Identify three focus students for your inquiry. Identify special characteristics of the students and include performance data. Explain why you have selected them for this inquiry
focus. Do not use actual names of students. (Note: At least one focus student should be an English learner and at least one must have an ILP/504 accommodation. The third is your choice, but
please identify someone that poses an instructional challenge.) Identify expected results for each focus student.
Focus Student 2: Student with
Focus Student 1: English Learner Focus Student 3: Your Choice
ILP/504
Noyna: Reticent in class with lower Deedee: Personal and family Ping: Good English ability, generally
Performance level of English ability compared to issues which may affect attentive and responsive in class; has a
Data peers; good attitude towards learning attendance, timeliness, and tendency to drift off-task and engagement
performance; teachers have
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 1 of 5
 and work ethic, always remains been notified by school varies depending on the nature of the
on-task, attentive, and engaged. counselors that she may require activity.
more time/attention/resources
due to these. Near-native English
fluency and excellent written
work; orally responsive in class;
sometimes disengages mid-task
when she feels inadequately
challenged.
She will speak out and interact orally She will enjoy, be engaged by, She will remain focused and engaged
with peers during main activity; and remain on-task throughout throughout main activity, and reflect
Expected writing in post-assessment will reflect the main activity; enjoyment of comprehension of core concepts and
Results greater comprehension of core main activity will result in attention to detail in post-assessment.
concepts and improved mechanics. greater focus and attention to
detail in post-assessment.
Inquiry Lesson Implementation Plan
Administer Pre-Assessment Deliver Lesson(s) Administer Analyze Results Discuss Results with Mentor
Post-Assessment
Identify dates for
activities. Wed., Nov. 4,
Mon., Nov. 2, 2020 Tue., Nov. 3, 2020 Thu., Nov. 5, 2020 Sat., Nov. 7, 2020
2020
“Characterization Speed Dating”: Students are randomly assigned character roles which they will play
Provide 1-2 sentence throughout the lesson as they interact with classmates one-on-one in a “speed dating” format of two-minute
summary of your lesson rounds; students do not know one another’s characters and must use observation to guess what characters
plan. their classmates are playing. Students will summarize character observations in 3 words, which will be
compiled into word clouds and presented in-class.
Summarize the process Pre-assessment: (formal) analytical essay on literary devices, characterization, and theme in “The Lottery”
for administering and (informal) responding to video clips from movies “Cool Hand Luke” and “Dr. No”
analyzing pre- and Post-assessment: Analytical 3-column characterization chart of Mrs. Mallard in Kate Chopin’s “The Story of an
post-assessments.
Hour”
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.)
“How to Use Technology in the Classroom: Benefits and Effects” “9 Unique Ways to use Technology in the Classroom”
https://drexel.edu/soe/resources/student-teaching/advice/how-to-use-t https://www.goguardian.com/blog/technology/9-unique-ways-to-use-t
echnology-in-the-classroom/ echnology-in-the-classroom/
A rundown of what/who/how why regarding integrating technology with Concrete, specific ideas for introducing technology into lessons and
lessons, with specifics for elementary, middle, and high school students. activities.

Colleagues ​(Summarize how two colleagues have addressed this issue in their classroom. Identify grade level, subject, and summary of ideas.)
Kittiya Lu, ELA grade 11 William Kloster, ELA grades 10-11
Introduced me to “speed dating” characterization activity, and is a Like me, seeking ways to increase students’ engagement and
proponent of increased use of technology to make lessons more responsibility for their own learning by making lessons more
engaging and student-centered; is a native speaker of students’ first student-centered and reducing teacher talk time.
language (Thai) and has an enhanced perspective on ELL needs.
Special Emphasis: Instructional Strategy, ISTE ​Standards​, NBPTS Core Propositions
Special Emphasis Focus How Special Emphasis will be Incorporated
public speaking skills The main activity in the observed lesson will have students
talking to students with the teacher serving as
moderator/orchestrator; the teacher will be collecting data and
observing student engagement and performance, while talking
and interrupting student interactions minimally.
Section 5: Results and Reflection
Directions:​ Record Pre- and post- assessment data into P
​ re/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
Comparing average % between pre- and post-assessment, Focus Student 1, the ELL, improved a full letter grade, which may
whole-class performance declined slightly, 1.2%. There were be reflective of feedback I gave her on her pre-assessment. Focus
56% fewer As on the post-assessment than the pre-, and 60% Student 2, ILP/504, was absent for several days the week of the
more Bs; Cs, however, declined pre- vs. post- 50%. Both post-assessment and thus has not yet submitted it. Her absence
assessments had one F for non-submission, making them a was related to her ILP issues and, in coordination with the
non-factor in the discrepancy. However, in the pre-assessment, school’s counseling staff, she has been given more time to
Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 2 of 5
 aside from the one F, the lowest grade was a C; for the complete her work. Focus Student 3’s performance was
post-assessment, the lowest grade besides the F was a D. consistent pre- and post-, and with her work as a whole this
semester; the key to improving her focus and engagement may
One explanation for the decline may be the texts focused on in be seating her to minimize distractions, as well as better
the assessments. The pre-assessment text was Shirley Jackson’s differentiating instruction.
“The Lottery,” while the post-assessment text was “The Story of
an Hour” by Kate Chopin. “The Lottery” uses simpler vocabulary
and sentence structure than “The Story of an Hour” and thus
may have been more accessible and easier to analyze for a class
of near-100% ELLs.
Initial Evidence/Rationale 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?

Students were randomly assigned Assign students their character roles

character roles, which they played the day before the main activity, in
throughout the lesson as they order to give them time to prepare;
interacted with classmates this will maximize their time to
Developing one-on-one in two-minute rounds. interact while “in character” during
and They used observation to guess what the main activity.
sequencing characters their classmates were
long-term playing and then wrote three-word Further adjust and expand structure
and
T- descriptions of each character they to make this activity a mini-unit of
4.3 short-term Applying
T - Integrating
instructional interacted with. Their descriptions 2-3 lessons; Day 1 for the main
plans to were compiled and students used the activity, Day 2 and if needed Day 3
support data to create word clouds about for debriefing with word clouds and
student their characters; then they guessed guessing classmates’ characters.
learning which character each person was
playing based on the clouds and their Focus more on students reflecting
interactions during the main activity. and writing about what their
classmates did that was effective in
communicating character.
Using Successfully integrated new Increase student responsibility for
available technology into the main activity and collecting and interpreting data
technologies debrief: Data collection using Google during main activity and debrief;
to assist in T- Forms, and interpretation and build on word clouds debrief and
5.6 assessment, Applying
T - Integrating
analysis of data using online word analysis; incorporate a final writing
analysis, and
communicati cloud generators. task to summarize what the
on of student students have learned throughout
learning the 2-3 lesson mii-unit.
Collaborating The main activity, use of Google Discuss further with grade-level
with
Forms, and word cloud debrief are all colleagues and FOTIP mentor how
colleagues and
the broader ideas gathered from collaborating to expand on main activity, further
professional T- with colleagues and FOTIP mentor incorporate technology, and
6.3 community to Applying
T - Integrating
conversations. increase student responsibility
support
teacher and
throughout.
student
learning
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
Public speaking: Students had to talk with peers one-on-one Importance of advance prep, designing activities that can
throughout in a semi-public format. Result was that all students engage multiple styles of learners, and multi-stage debriefing
participated and appeared almost unanimously to be engaged; after main activity; incorporating technology to make students
most seemed to enjoy using their imagination to create characters, more active and responsible for their own learning and
as well as the opportunity to perform. increase complexity of main activity.

Individualized Learning Plan, Fullerton Online Teacher Induction Program (FOTIP), 2017 Page 3 of 5
 ISTE Standards-Teachers: ​4b. I collaborate and co-learn with students to
discover and use new digital resources and diagnose and troubleshoot
technology issues. ​My experience with guiding the students in using
Google Forms to collect data and word clouds to interpret and analyze
data was largely successful and showed me that there is potential to
expand this within the speed dating mini-unit and apply what I learned
from incorporating these technologies into other learning activities.
Importance of monitoring student performance and gathering
assessment data during and after activities in which
technology is being introduced; paying attention to what
technologies students respond best to and that elicit best
results in assessments.

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
Other
Action Items
Further adjust and expand structure to make characterization speed-dating activity a mini-unit of 2-3 lessons;
Day 1 for the main activity, Day 2 and if needed Day 3 for debriefing with word clouds and guessing
classmates’ characters.
Assign students their character roles the day before the main activity, in order to give them time to prepare;
this will maximize their time to interact while “in character” during the main activity.
Continue emphasis on advance prep to facilitate activities under COVID restrictions related to seating and
resources; allow for the possibility that the regular classroom will not be available and so have a backup plan
for any complex activities that may need to be relocated.
The performance and public speaking aspects of the main activity appealed to students across a broad range
of English ability levels. It also seems suited to drawing out and engaging students who are normally reticent
and/or prone to distraction.
Continue strategic collaboration with colleagues; this improved the activity from last year and can help make
it more engaging and complex going forward.
How can technology be used to make students’ role in their own learning more active and increase their
responsibility?
Ideally, the next POP Cycle in Spring 2021 will not be interrupted by COVID lockdown, as was Spring 2020.
Thailand seems to have contained the spread of coronavirus and things have returned to normal here;
nevertheless, I will allow for the possibility of returning to online teaching and completing the POP Cycle using
video conferencing tools.

Other Notes
The main speed-dating activity had to be relocated from the regular classroom due to desk arrangements to prevent the spread of
the coronavirus. This necessitated some advance prep and adjustment; assigning students their characters the day before would
have helped even more and will be done in the future.

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

Charles Oestreicher charlesoestreicher@csu.fullert Secondary English 11

on.edu
Pre-Assessment Data Range and Average Post-Assessment Data Range and Average
Class Average: 83.2% Class Average: 82%
Total As: 9 Total As: 4
Total Bs: 10 Total Bs: 16
Total Cs: 4 Total Cs: 2
Total Ds: 0 Total Ds: 1
Total Fs: 1 Total Fs: 1
PRE-/POST- ASSESSMENT DATA TABLE
Student Pre-Assessment Score Post-Assessment Score Comments
She showed the greatest improvement of the
1. Focus Student: EL C+ (77.5%) B+ (88%) focus students. I gave her targeted feedback on
the pre-assessment, designed to guide her as
well as increase confidence in her abilities.
She has not yet completed the post-assessment
due to absence/family issues; by arrangement,
2. Focus Student: 504/IEP A (95%) F (0%)
she will receive reduced credit for late
submission.
Her performance remained consistent, as did
her focus and engagement issues. She is
3. Focus Student: Teacher Choice A- (90%) A- (90%) frequently answering questions from weaker
students adjacent to her desk, who move their
seats to be near her; I have changed the seating
arrangement to address this.
Student 04 TC C+ (78%) B+ (88%)
Student 05 JH B+ (88%) B (85%)
Student 06 JK B (86%) B+ (88%)
Student 07 DK B+ (88%) B (85%)
Student 08 NK A (94%) A (97%)
Student 09 NK A- (90%) B+ (87%)
Student 10 WK A- (93%) B+ (87%)
Student 11 AK B- (80%) B+ (88%)
Student 12 TL A- (93%) B+ (88%)
Student 13 TL B- (81%) B- (80%)
Student 14 TL B (86%) C+ (78%)
Student 15 PM B+ (88%) B+ (88%)
Student 16 JM B+ (88%) B+ (87%)
Student 17 AN B (86%) B+ (87%)
Student 18 WN F (0%) D (68%)
Student 19 SP C (75%) B- (80%)
Student 20 YP A- (93%) A (97%)
Student 21 SS B (84%) B- (80%)
Student 22 BS A (95%) A- (90%)
Student 23 PT C+ (78%) C+ (78%)
Student 24 CW A- (90%) B (85%)

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