High School Individual Learning Plans (ILPs)
Denunciar
Compartilhar
•2 gostaram•1,437 visualizações
Recomendados
![Naviance Class of 2015 [Infographic]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/150527navianceclassof15150806-150908132956-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=384&fit=bounds)
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
![College Admissions: What Do Admissions Directors Consider? [Infographic]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/151030hobsonsiheadmissionsinfographicfinal-151102155538-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=384&fit=bounds)
Mais procurados(20)
![College Admissions: What Do Admissions Directors Consider? [Infographic]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/151030hobsonsiheadmissionsinfographicfinal-151102155538-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=768&fit=bounds)
![The 2015 Inside Higher Ed Survey of Community College Presidents [INFOGRAPHIC]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/150421communitycollegepresidentsurvey1505141-150514134714-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=768&fit=bounds)
Similar a High School Individual Learning Plans (ILPs)
Similar a High School Individual Learning Plans (ILPs) (20)
Mais de Hobsons
Mais de Hobsons(19)
Último
Último(20)
High School Individual Learning Plans (ILPs)
- 1. High School Individual Learning Plans R e s e a r c h b y t h e N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n f o r C o l l e g e A d m i s s i o n C o u n s e l i n g i n c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h H o b s o n s State Requirements and Counseling Practice
- 2. | Personalized plans developed collaboratively by students and school staff • Personalized plans developed collaboratively by students and school staff to set goals that focus students on their academic and career aspirations and keep them on track. • Other names for ILPs: Academic Achievement Plan, Personal Learning Plan, Personal Graduation Plan, Four-Year Plan. • Not the same as Individualized Education Program (IEP), which is for students who receive special education services. WhatIsAnIndividual Learning Plan?
- 3. | Study of Individual Learning Plans (ILPs)
- 4. | StudyQuestions • What are state-level policies related to ILPs? • How are ILPs operationalized and implemented? • Can any best practices be identified? • What barriers impede optimal implementation of ILPs? • To what extent do ILP requirements contribute to high school students’ college/career readiness and successful transitions?
- 5. | Methodology: StateILPPolicyScan • Update and extension of information published by Hobsons in 2009 and 2011 • Procedure – Review of state department of education websites – Follow-up emails to education department representatives – ILP database compiled by U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Disability Employment Policy • (At the time of this study, based on February 2013 update) • Information Collected – State-level mandate? Delivery mechanism – Type of plan or activity Assessment findings – Agencies involved Frequency of ILP review
- 6. | Alaska Iowa Oregon Arizona Kentucky Rhode Island Colorado Louisiana South Carolina Connecticut Maryland South Dakota Delaware Michigan Tennessee District of Columbia Minnesota Vermont Georgia Missouri Virginia Hawaii Nevada Washington Idaho New Jersey West Virginia Indiana New Mexico Wisconsin States with Mandated Individual Learning Plans (as of August 2015)
- 7. | 915 survey respondents use ILPs • Survey of public high school counseling offices administered in February/March 2015 • Stratified random sample: 10,000 U.S. public schools – oversampling of schools in states with ILP mandates • 1,626 responses received; 915 survey respondents reported using ILPs Methodology: HighSchoolSurvey
- 8. | Characteristics of Schools Using ILPs
- 9. | Percentage of Schools Using ILPs, by School Enrollment Size 62% 59% 54% 52% 55% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 50-249 250-499 500-749 750-999 More than 1,000 PercentageofSchoolsUsingILPs School Enrollment Size Sources: NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices; U.S. Department of Education’s Common Core Data (CCD), 2012-13. Note: N = 1,573 |
- 10. | Percentage of Schools Using ILPs, by Student Eligibility for Free or Reduced-Price Lunch Sources: NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices; U.S. Department of Education’s Common Core Data (CCD), 2012-13. Note: N = 1,562 54% 58% 59% 59% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0-24% 25%-49% 50%-74% 75% or more PercentageofSchoolUsingILPs Percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch |
- 11. | Percentage of Schools Using ILPs, by School Funding Level Sources: NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices; U.S. Department of Education’s Common Core Data (CCD), 2012-13. Note: N = 1,517 55.8% 69.5% 39.5% 44.7% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% Less than $8,000 $8,000-$11,000 $11,001-$14,000 More than $14,000 SchoolFundingLevelperStudent Percentage of Schools Using ILPs |
- 12. | DistributionofCounselorCaseloadsforSurveyRespondentSchools UsingILPs 41.3% 50.9% 7.7% 250 students 251 - 500 students More than 500 students Source: NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices.
- 13. | ILPStateMandate StatusCompared toILPUse ILP Status from Survey Response Percentage that Use ILPs Percentage that Do Not Use ILPs State-Mandated ILP Policy Yes 67 29 No 44 53 Source: NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices. • 29 percent of survey respondents located in states identified as having ILP mandates during the state policy scan reported that they do not use ILPs. • Many survey respondents from states without ILP mandates (44 percent) reported using ILPs in their schools. |
- 15. | Timespan for School Use of ILPs Source: NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices. Note: N = 905 14% 19% 23% 31% 13% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 1-2 years 3-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Not sure PercentageofSchools Number of Years Using ILPs |
- 16. | Grade Level When ILPs Are Initiated Source: NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices. Note: N = 904 5% 13% 12% 38% 27% 2% 4% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Before 6th grade 6th grade 7th grade 8th grade 9th grade 10th-12th grade Not sure PercentageofSchools Grade When ILPs Are Initiated |
- 17. Most Common ILP Elements Percentage of Schools Progress toward high school graduation (e.g., high school courses taken) 88 Completion of high school course plan of study 81 Career interest identified 77 Participation in dual enrollment (college) courses 65 Self-assessment of interests, strengths, aptitudes, etc. 48 Completion of pre-college entrance examinations (ACT’s PLAN, EXPLORE, etc.) 44 Student resume completed 43 Completion of college entrance examinations (ACT, SAT) 41 Extracurricular non-athletics 37 Volunteerism 34 Extracurricular athletics 30 Awards 29 Work experience (e.g. apprenticeship, internship, job shadowing) 29 FAFSA completion 23 College application submission 20 Postsecondary financial plan 20 Participation in personal financial literacy courses/workshops/activities 18 Other financial aid application completion (e.g., scholarships and grants) 16 Source: NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices. |
- 19. Types of ILP Training Provided for Survey Respondents Using ILPs 44% 33% 28% 24% 22% 19% 13% 7% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% No Training Implementing ILPs Communicating with students about their ILPs Designing/developing ILPs Communicating with families about ILPs Best practices in using ILPs Communicating with teachers about ILPs Evaluating ILP implementation Source: NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices. |
- 20. Stakeholders Involved in Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of ILPs Source: NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices. 62% 79% 50% 32% 39% 21% 26% 18% 14% 34% 9% 11% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Design/Development Implementation Evaluation PercentageofSchoolsReporting InvolvementofEachStakeholder Counselor School District State |
- 21. Percentage of Schools Where Students/Families Meet at Least Once Per Year with School Personnel about the ILPs, by Grade Level Source: NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices. 58 91 91 91 89 42 60 61 65 63 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Before 9th Grade 9th Grade 10th Grade 11th Grade 12th Grade PercentageofSchools Grade Level When Meetings Occur Students Families |
- 22. Frequency of Meetings Between School Personnel and Students, by Grade Level Source NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices. 33 24 19 19 10 21 24 24 24 9 36 43 48 49 39 12 10 10 9 41 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 12th Grade 11th Grade 10th Grade 9th Grade Before 9th Grade Several times each term Once each term Once each academic year Never, not sure, n/a |
- 23. | ILP Effectiveness and Best Practices
- 24. Counselors’ Views of ILPs’ Contribution to Student Outcomes 15% 46% 12% 24% 3% Greatly improves Somewhat improves Does not improve Not sure No response Source: NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices |
- 25. | EffectiveILPsPractices: SurveyRespondent Observations • Focus on career and college guidance • Consistent, continual review of ILPs by students, staff, parents • Individual student meetings, often with parents • Graduation course plan and requirements • Develop ILPs early
- 26. | Improving ILPEffectiveness: SurveyRespondent Observations • More time with students/smaller student-to-counselor ratio • More access to technology • More student, parent, staff buy-in • More staff, resources, training, and funding • More use in the classroom and by teachers • Broader range of ILP elements/more student-driven ILPs • Better guidance from school, state, and/or district • More data, tracking, and evaluation
- 27. | Implications of ILP Study Results
- 28. | Implications/Observations • About 1/3 of survey respondents had used ILPs for 5 or fewer years – Not enough time to assess effectiveness of ILP • At 29 percent of schools, ILPs were initiated in 9th grade or later; 38 percent initiated in 8th grade – Outcomes could be improved by starting earlier • 44 percent of counselors using ILPs reported receiving no training – High need for counselor training • Nearly ¾ of survey respondents did not track student outcomes beyond high school graduation – Access to post-high school outcomes would improve ability to evaluate ILP process • Counselors were more involved with ILP implementation than with ILP design and evaluation – School districts would benefit from utilizing counselor expertise in designing ILPs • At 35 to 40 percent of schools, parents did not meet annually with school staff about student ILPs – Parent involvement could improve student engagement with the ILP process
- 29. | ForMore Information Read the Full Report • https://www.hobsons.com/resources/entry/individual-learning-plans-improving-student-performance- industry-report • http://www.nacacnet.org/research/research-data/nacac-research/Documents/NACACILPReport.pdf Contact NACAC Research Staff • research@nacacnet.org Contact Hobsons Staff • mary.docken@hobsons.com
- 30. | • This master slide deck is made publicly available to support dissemination to interested stakeholders. • Some or all of these slides may be used into your own presentation. – You are encouraged to add information about the use of ILPs in your school or district for context or comparison. – If you include the state scan and/or survey results, please include the corresponding methodology slides (#5 and #7). – Attribute findings from the study to NACAC/Hobsons and include a link to the full report. • Questions? Contact research@nacacnet.org HowtoUseTheseSlides
Notas do Editor
- These questions represent the original intent of the study. The scope of the study and limitations related to the survey methodology affected the degree to which each question could be answered. For example, only a few states had done evaluations of ILPs at the time of this study. Also, most schools do not track students beyond high school graduation and lack the capacity to study effects of ILPs in their schools. In addition, many schools had not used ILPs for enough time to follow a cohort through to graduation. However, there were enough responses to the survey to discern common themes related to best practices.
- Hobsons published a summary of state-level policies related to ILPs in 2009 and 2011. The scope of this study was to update those state scans and collect additional information about how ILPs are implemented in high schools through a national survey of school counseling offices. The procedures for collecting state-level policies about ILPs followed a hierarchy of sources based on ease of access and likelihood of obtaining the most accurate and up-to-date information: state department of education web sites, emails to education department representatives, and an ILP database compiled by the U.S. Department of Labor. A complete table summarizing the information collected for each state is included in the full report (available for free download on the NACAC and Hobsons websites).
- Listed here are states that were found to have mandated ILP policies at the state level. The state scan found that all states have some type of college and career readiness initiative, but not all are mandated at the state level. In other states, control of the initiatives might be handled at a more local level (most commonly by school districts).
- The survey was administered in February and March of 2015, with a stratified random sample of 10,000 U.S. public high schools. Of the 1,626 responses received, 915 survey respondents said they use ILPs.
- Schools with a total enrollment of fewer than 250 students were significantly more likely to use ILPs in comparison with schools enrolling 500 or more students. This finding could be the result of having more staff capacity to implement ILPs.
- The percentage of students who received free or reduced-price lunch was used as a proxy for low-income status and an indicator of the socioeconomic status of the school and student body. The only significant difference that was found is represented by the line on this graph. Schools with the lowest proportion of low-income students were least likely to use ILPs. This finding may be because schools with higher proportions of low-income students have more need for ILPs in supporting college and career readiness.
- Schools with lower per-student funding levels were more likely to use ILPs. The reason for this finding may be similar to the free and reduced-price lunch finding. Perhaps schools that are in lower-funded areas have a greater need for ILPs to support students.
- Data for counselor caseloads were not available for schools in the survey sample who did not use ILPs. Rather than comparing ILP schools to non-ILP schools, this pie chart shows the distribution of counselor caseloads among those survey respondents who use ILPs (n=915). The categories were chosen because 250 is the maximum number of students per counselor recommended by the American School Counselor Association. Among survey respondents using ILPs, the vast majority have counselor caseloads of 500 students or fewer, and more than 40 percent have 250 students or fewer. Given that the national average counselor caseload for all public schools is nearly 500, results indicate that this group of survey respondents have the benefit of lower caseloads than many schools.
- An interesting finding arose when comparing the ILP policy based on the state scan to ILP usage as reported in the survey. Results indicated that 29 percent of schools in “mandate states” did not use ILPs. This was an unexpected finding that is open for speculation. Administrators and other leaders at these schools may be unaware of the state mandates, or they may lack the resources to comply. The results also indicated that 44 percent of schools in “non-mandate states” are using ILPs. This was less surprising since the state scan revealed that many states and districts have college and career readiness initiatives that are not mandated at the state level.
- School counselors were asked to report the number of years using ILPs. About 1/3 had used ILPs for 5 years or less. More than half (54 percent) had used ILPs for at least 6 years.
- Most schools initiated ILPs with students in the 8th or 9th grade. Very few began ILPs in 10th grade or later. This is considered a positive finding.
- Counselors were asked to select among a list of features to indicate what is included in the ILP used at their schools. Features are listed here based on the percentage of schools including the feature, with the most chosen feature first.
- In framing the survey structure, the ILP process was conceptually dividing into three phases: design, implementation, and evaluation. The next set of slides will focus primarily on implementation but will also show the extent to which various stakeholder are involved in each phase.
- When asked what type of training, if any, counselors received related to ILPs, the most common response (44 percent) was no training. Among those who received some type of training, it was most often related to implementation of ILPs. Only 7 percent of counselors reported receiving training related to ILP evaluation. These findings are in line with those on the next few slides showing the ways in which counselors are most involved in the ILP process, as compared to other stakeholders.
- For each phase of the ILP process (design, implementation, evaluation), counselors were asked to indicate which stakeholders (counselors, schools, districts, states) were involved. Results, as presented here, indicate that counselors are more likely than other stakeholders to be involved in each phase. However, while 80 percent of counselors are involved in the implementation phase, fewer are involved in the design and evaluation phases. Conversely, states are most likely to be involved in the design phase, which likely relates back to the states where ILPs are mandated at the state level. (These results may be skewed to some extent, since the vast majority of surveys were completed by counselors, and they are more likely to lack awareness of involvement at the district, and particularly, the state level.)
- Counselors were asked to report how often students and families met with school personnel to discuss ILPs at each grade level. When constructing the survey, once per year was the baseline expectation. The graph here shows (for students and families separately) the percentage of schools where meetings occur at least once per year. At about 90 percent of schools, these meetings occur with students at least once per year beginning in 9th grade. For parent meetings, the percentage of once-per-year meetings is much lower, but still approaching two-thirds.
- This slide provides more detail about how often ILP meetings with students occur and whether the frequency increases as students progress toward high school graduation. The most common meeting frequency across all grade levels is once each academic year. However, 43 percent of schools have meetings at least once each term for 9th and 10th graders. That number increases to 48 percent in 11th grade and 54 percent in 12th grade. The large percentage of “never, not sure, n/a” responses for “before 9th grade” are likely a function of high school counselors not knowing details about ILP implementation for earlier grades.
- Let’s talk about ILP effectiveness and best practices from the survey. It was beyond the scope of this study to look at specific post-high school outcomes for students at ILP schools compared to non-ILP schools. Among schools that use ILPs, no correlations were found between high school graduation or college enrollment rates and specific ILP elements. Survey responses from counselors were used to identify common themes related to best practices for the use of ILPs.
- When asked to provide opinions based on experience, 15 percent of counselors thought that ILPs greatly improved the outcomes of students in their schools, and another 46 percent selected somewhat improves. About one-quarter were not sure.
- The items listed here emerged as common themes from open-ended survey responses.
- The items listed here emerged as common themes from open-ended survey responses.
- Observations and implications gleaned by the study authors when looking at the study results as a whole.
- How to use these slides … Please also let us know when and where you are presenting these results. We’d love to help you spread the word!