high school individual learning plans (ilps)

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

|

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.

What Is An Individual Learning Plan?

|

Study of Individual Learning Plans (ILPs)

|

Study Questions

• 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?

|

Methodology: State ILP Policy Scan

• 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

|

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)

|

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: High School Survey

|

Characteristics of Schools Using ILPs

|

Percentage of Schools Using ILPs, by School Enrollment Size

50-249 250-499 500-749 750-999 More than 1,0000%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%62%

59%54% 52%

55%

School Enrollment Size

Perc

enta

ge o

f Sch

ools

Usi

ng IL

Ps

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

|

|

Percentage of Schools Using ILPs, by Student Eligibility for Free or Reduced-Price Lunch


Note: N = 1,562

0-24% 25%-49% 50%-74% 75% or more0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

54%58% 59% 59%

Percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch

Perc

enta

ge o

f Sch

ool U

sing

ILP

s

|

|

Percentage of Schools Using ILPs,by School Funding Level


Note: N = 1,517

Less than $8,000 $8,000-$11,000 $11,001-$14,000 More than $14,0000.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

55.8%

69.5%

39.5%44.7%

Percentage of Schools Using ILPs

Scho

ol F

undi

ng L

evel

per

Stu

dent

|

|

Distribution of Counselor Caseloads for Survey Respondent Schools Using ILPs

41.3%

50.9%

7.7%

250 students251 - 500 studentsMore than 500 students

Source: NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices.

|

ILP State Mandate Status Compared to ILP Use

ILP Status from Survey ResponsePercentage that Use ILPs Percentage that Do Not Use ILPs

State-Mandated ILP PolicyYes 67 29No 44 53


• 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.

|

|

Features of ILPs

|

Timespan for School Use of ILPs


Note: N = 905

1-2 years 3-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years

Not sure0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

14%

19%

23%

31%

13%

Number of Years Using ILPs

Perc

enta

ge o

f Sch

ools

|

|

Grade Level When ILPs Are Initiated


Note: N = 904

Before 6th grade

6th grade 7th grade 8th grade 9th grade 10th-12th grade

Not sure0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

5%

13% 12%

38%

27%

2%4%

Grade When ILPs Are Initiated

Perc

enta

ge o

f Sch

ools

|

Most Common ILP ElementsPercentage 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


|

|

ILP Implementation

Types of ILP Training Provided for Survey Respondents Using ILPs

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

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

44%

33%

28%

24%

22%

19%

13%

7%


|

Stakeholders Involved in Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of ILPs


Design/Development Implementation Evaluation0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

62%

79%

50%

32%

39%

21%26%

18%14%

34%

9% 11%

Counselor School District State

Perc

enta

ge o

f Sch

ools

Rep

ortin

g In

volv

emen

t of E

ach

Stak

ehol

der

|

Percentage of Schools Where Students/Families Meet at Least Once Per Year with School Personnel about the ILPs, by Grade Level


Before 9th Grade 9th Grade 10th Grade 11th Grade 12th Grade0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

58

91 91 91 89

42

60 6165 63

Students Families

Grade Level When Meetings Occur

Per

cent

age

of S

choo

ls

|

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.

12th Grade

11th Grade

10th Grade

9th Grade

Before 9th Grade

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

33

24

19

19

10

21

24

24

24

9

36

43

48

49

39

12

10

10

9

41

Several times each term Once each term Once each academic year Never, not sure, n/a

|

|

ILP Effectiveness and Best Practices

Counselors’ Views of ILPs’ Contribution to Student Outcomes

15%

46%

12%

24%

3%

Greatly improvesSomewhat improvesDoes not improveNot sureNo response

Source: NACAC and Hobsons, 2015. Individual Learning Plans for College and Career Readiness: State Policies and School-Based Practices

|

|

Effective ILPs Practices:Survey Respondent 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

|

Improving ILP Effectiveness:Survey Respondent 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

|

Implications of ILP Study Results

|

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

|

For More 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• [email protected]

Contact Hobsons Staff• [email protected]

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

http://www.nacacnet.org/research/research-data/nacac-research/Documents/NACACILPReport.pdf

mailto:[email protected]


|

• 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 [email protected]

How to Use These Slides
