White Paper: INDIVIDUAL LEARNING PLANS FOR ALL STUDENTS

NOT JUST FOR SPECIAL ED ANYMORE: This report examines how states and schools have responded to these demands through schools’ use and implementation of Individual Learning Plans (ILPs).

Individual Learning Plans http://bit.ly/1MfiBms

This report examines how states and schools have responded to these demands through schools’ use and implementation of Individual Learning Plans (ILPs). The National Association for College Admission Counseling (NACAC), in partnership with Hobsons and with analytical support from Coffey Consulting, LLC, initiated this study to more fully understand:

• How ILPs are operationalized in high schools.
• Who is tasked with implementing ILPs in high schools and the scope of their responsibility for assessing the success of ILPs on student outcomes.
• The extent to which ILP requirements contribute to high school students’ college/career readiness and successful transition to postsecondary education and work.

To answer these questions, NACAC oversaw a review of state websites and surveyed a random sample of school personnel at public high schools in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
—
College and career readiness is an increasing priority of secondary schools, school districts, and states. The changing economic and technological landscape has necessitated that schools provide students with the skills to navigate the complex requirements of the 21st century workplace.

This report examines how states and schools have responded to these demands through schools’ use and implementation of Individual Learning Plans (ILPs) and expands upon two prior reports developed by Hobsons in 2009 and 2011.

ILPs are personalized plans developed collaboratively by students and school personnel to set goals that help students focus on their academic and career futures and keep them on track toward these goals.

ILPs are also known as Academic Achievement Plans, Personal Learning Plans, Personal Graduation Plans, or 4-Year Plans. The National Association for College Admission Counseling (NACAC), in partnership with Hobsons and with analytical support from Coffey Consulting, LLC, initiated this study to more fully understand:

1. How ILPs are operationalized in high schools

2. Who is tasked with implementing ILPs in high schools and the scope of their responsibility for assessing the success of ILPs on student outcomes

3. The extent to which ILP requirements contribute to high school students’ college/career readiness and successful transition to postsecondary education and work

 

To answer these questions, NACAC oversaw a review of state websites (Chapter 1) and surveyed a random sample of school personnel at public high schools in all 50 states and the District of Columbia (Chapters 2, 3, and 4). Key findings include:

• Twenty-nine states and the District of Columbia mandated ILP policies or other college and career readiness initiatives.

• In some cases, state-level ILP mandates have not translated into school-level practice. Among survey respondents in ILP-mandated states, 29 percent reported that they did not, in fact, use ILPs. Conversely, many survey respondents from states without ILP mandates (44 percent) reported using ILPs in their schools.

• More than half of survey respondents with ILPs (54 percent) had been using them for more than five years. Nearly one-third (31 percent) had been using ILPs for 10 years or more.

• Almost all survey respondents reported that ILPs were initiated by 9th grade. Nearly 40 percent of schools initiated an ILP in 8th grade.

• Survey respondents indicated a relative lack of involvement in ILP development, implementation, and evaluation among state- and district-level stakeholders, as well as among school administrators and personnel other than counselors.

• According to survey respondents, counselors were most involved with implementation of ILPs and least involved with evaluation.

• Counselor training related to ILP use was lacking. One-third of survey respondents reported receiving training on ILP implementation, 24 percent for ILP design/development. Only 7 percent reported having received training for evaluation of ILPs.

• Nearly three-quarters of survey respondents (74 percent) indicated that tracking of ILP progress ended upon high school graduation, thereby limiting assessments of effectiveness.

• Nearly two-thirds (62 percent) of survey respondents judged that, based on their professional experience, ILPs somewhat or greatly contributed to successful student outcomes.

• Feedback from survey participants pointed to the need for more one-on-one time between counselors, students, and their families.

White Paper: INDIVIDALIZED LEARNING PLANS