Individual Performance Plan (IPP)
Individual Performance Plan (IPP) — Examples
This packet includes examples of Individual Performance Plans (IPPs) for pre-service teachers (interns and student teachers). All names have been replaced with pseudonyms so no real student, cooperating teacher, field supervisor, or coordinator can be identified. The names used below — Kallie Fields, Adam Reyes, Jordan Blake, and Morgan Ellis — are invented. Staff are referred to by role (Cooperating Teacher / CT, Field Supervisor / FS, Cohort Coordinator) rather than by name. The goal-and-evidence structure, tone, and level of detail mirror real IPPs so coordinators and supervisors can use these as models.
Instructions for Creating an IPP
When to start one
An IPP isn't triggered by a single bad day — it documents a pattern that shows up over time. Throughout the placement, the Field Supervisor (FS) and Cooperating Teacher (CT) should already be giving the preservice teacher timely, written feedback, and should be keeping each other informed as concerns come up. If either the FS or CT has an ongoing concern, it should be raised promptly with the Cohort Coordinator or program, rather than held until it becomes a crisis.
Key trigger: a rating of "Needs Improvement" (NI) on any component marked with an asterisk (*) on either the formative or summative assessment should prompt an IPP. Asterisked components are the essential, non-negotiable items for the placement level; an NI on one of them is what elevates a concern from informal feedback to a formal, documented plan.
Note: You do not need to wait for an NI rating to begin an IPP. If a pattern of concern is already visible, it's better to be proactive than reactive for the preservice teacher — starting the conversation and the documentation early gives them more time and support to improve.
In practice, this almost always means one (or both) of two areas: communication and professionalism.
Communication — initiating and maintaining contact with the CT, FS, and coordinator; sharing lesson plans by the required due date; responding clearly and fully to questions; giving adequate notice before absences or schedule changes.
Professionalism — attendance and punctuality; following school/community norms for dress and demeanor; performing assigned duties promptly; reflecting on and acting on feedback from the CT and FS.
Who's involved
The IPP itself is an agreement between the Cohort Coordinator and the preservice teacher. The CT and FS contribute feedback and evidence, and the Director reviews and signs, but the CT/FS do not sign the document.
Cooperating Teacher (CT) and Field Supervisor (FS) — document concerns as they arise and provide feedback used to build the IPP; they do not sign it.
Kelly Cruise, a member of the EPS team, will help draft the IPP and provide feedback throughout the process, with support from the Educator Preparation Services and input from the Cohort Coordinator, CT, and FS.
Katie Tackett, the Director, will read the IPP, give feedback if needed, and sign it.
Preservice teacher (intern or student teacher) — reviews and signs; a signature acknowledges the document was seen, not that the person agrees with it.
Before drafting: gather evidence
Pull together the documentation that already exists — observation notes, informal notes, and the relevant criteria on the short or long formative assessment form — so concerns are grounded in specifics (dates, direct quotes from communications, attendance logs) rather than general impressions. This is also what keeps an IPP fair: it should reflect a pattern the preservice teacher has already had a chance to hear about, not a surprise.
Structuring the document
Across the examples in this packet, IPPs share a common structure. Use it as a checklist:
Header — name and date.
Evidence of a pattern — a short paragraph naming the program/placement and stating that this IPP responds to a pattern (not an isolated event), and where the data comes from (coordinator, FS, CT feedback).
Criteria from the evaluation — pull the specific communication and/or professionalism criteria from the summative or formative assessment that are at issue, especially any marked with an asterisk. Group by cluster (e.g., Learning Environment; Professional Practices and Responsibilities) as the formal assessment does.
Evidence + Growth Expectation, paired goal by goal — for each component of concern, write a factual Evidence statement (what happened, when, who observed it) immediately followed by a Growth Expectation (what the person needs to do differently, stated as a concrete, checkable action — not just an attitude).
Timeline and Support Provided — list who is doing what and by when (e.g., weekly check-ins, a specific person setting up a planning meeting, a review point at mid-term). This is where the plan becomes actionable rather than just a list of complaints.
Consequences — state plainly, in the program's own language, what happens if the pattern doesn't improve (e.g., risk to course grade, risk to continuing in the Professional Development Sequence, hours requirements).
Signatures — Coordinator, the PST, EPS Director and date, with a line clarifying that the preservice teacher's signature only confirms they've seen the document.
Tips for good evidence and growth-expectation writing
Be specific and dated. "Missed three observations in October" is checkable; "often absent" is not.
Tie each piece of evidence to a named component from the assessment, so it's clear the concern maps to an actual standard, not a personal preference.
Write growth expectations as actions the person controls and that someone else can verify (a plan submitted by a specific day/time; an arrival time; a communication channel) — not vague goals like "be more professional."
Keep the tone factual rather than evaluative — describe what happened and what's expected next, and let the evidence itself carry the weight.
If the concern is new information the preservice teacher hasn't heard before, that's a sign the IPP is premature — concerns should already have been communicated informally first.
Example 1 — Pre-IPP Note (Earliest-Stage Documentation, Professionalism)
Pre-IPP for Jordan Blake (Meeting held via video call)
For Intern II — Needs improvement in the following area:
Professionalism
Absences and tardies; inconsistent communication with the Cooperating Teacher; not staying actively engaged with students; leaving the placement site for extended breaks
Care-counselor and academic-support resource information was shared with Jordan at this meeting.
Note: A pre-IPP like this is often the first, brief documentation step before a full IPP is drafted — it captures that a professionalism concern was raised and resources offered, ahead of the more detailed goal/evidence/growth-expectation format shown in Examples 2–4.
Example 2 — Single-Issue IPP (Communication Only, Short Form)
Morgan Ellis
Sample Date
This Individual Performance Plan for Morgan Ellis documents performance rated "Needs Improvement" per the long formative assessment. During a meeting held ahead of the midterm three-way conference (Morgan, the Field Supervisor, the Cohort Coordinator, and the Cooperating Teacher), concerns were raised specifically about professional communication. Two supports were identified for the CT and FS to provide going forward.
Goal: Communicates with campus cooperating teacher, team members, and administrators; communicates with university field supervisor and faculty
Evidence: Communication about schedule changes and absences has not consistently reached the CT and FS in a timely way, and lesson plans have not always been shared far enough in advance for meaningful feedback before formal observations.
Growth Expectation: If an emergency absence or tardy will occur, notify the CT and FS immediately through one shared channel (text 6 a.m.–9 p.m., email after). Weekly short-format lesson plans are due in the shared folder every Monday by 8 a.m., with enough detail that the CT and FS can give feedback before the lesson is taught.
Timeline and Support Provided:
The CT will set a standing weekly planning meeting with Morgan to review upcoming lessons.
The FS will check in weekly by phone to answer questions and confirm logistics.
Morgan will respond to texts/emails from the CT and FS within 24 hours.
Requirements: Failure to demonstrate consistent improvement, as evidenced by anecdotal observations from the CT and FS/Coordinator, may result in failure to successfully complete internship requirements.
_________________________________ _________________________
Cohort Coordinator University Preservice Teacher
_________________________________ _________________________
Director of EPS Date
(Student's signature does not imply agreement, only that the student has seen this document)
Example 3 — Combined Communication + Professionalism IPP with Attendance Log
Kallie Fields
Sample Date
This Individual Performance Plan for Kallie Fields documents skills and performance currently rated "Needs Improvement" according to Intern I standards, per the short formative assessment. Areas marked with an asterisk are essential for all interns; a rating of "Needs Improvement" or "Unacceptable" in any of them is of major concern and becomes an automatic goal for the following semester.
During a midterm three-way conference conference (Kallie, the Field Supervisor, and the Cooperating Teacher), concerns were raised about attendance, tardiness, professional dress, and professional communication. Four goals were generated to support Kallie in meeting Intern I expectations.
Evidence of Needs-Improvement Performance and Growth Expectations
Goal 1: Communicates clearly; shares lesson plans with CT and FS by due date
Evidence: The Cooperating Teacher reported that Kallie was unclear about assignment requirements and deadlines, including scheduling an observation that had to be rescheduled. Written communication with the Field Supervisor and Coordinator was often incomplete, and lesson plans were not shared by the required date.
Growth Expectation: Kallie will communicate all required assignments and dates with the CT, submit plans at least two days in advance, and respond fully to questions from the CT, FS, and Coordinator.
Goal 2: Follows dress/demeanor norms; is present and prompt; maintains communication
Evidence: Attendance records over several weeks show repeated absences and inconsistent arrival times relative to the agreed 7:30 a.m. start, including one full-day absence without notifying the CT, FS, or Coordinator. Dress (leggings, sweatshirts) did not consistently align with the school's casual-but-professional norm, though improvement was noted after the conference.
Growth Expectation: Kallie will arrive by 7:30 a.m. on days she attends, log arrival/departure accurately, dress to the campus standard, and complete all required placement hours by the end of the semester.
Timeline and Support Provided:
The CT will track arrival time and professional dress daily for a two-week period.
The CT will give written feedback after each teaching interaction.
The FS will hold a weekly phone check-in with Kallie.
Kallie will respond to texts/emails from the CT, FS, or Coordinator within 24 hours.
Kallie will make up missed hours on a fixed schedule until required hours are met.
Consequences: Failure to demonstrate consistent improvement, as evidenced by anecdotal observations from the CT and FS/Coordinator, may result in failure to successfully complete internship requirements.
_________________________________ _________________________
Cohort Coordinator University Preservice Teacher
_________________________________ _________________________
Director of EPS Date
(Student's signature does not imply agreement, only that the student has seen this document)
Example 4 — Comprehensive Communication + Professionalism IPP (Narrative-Heavy)
Adam Reyes
Sample Date
This Individual Performance Plan for Adam Reyes documents performance rated "Needs Improvement" per the short formative assessment. Areas marked with an asterisk are essential for all interns. Across a midterm and a final triad conference, concerns were discussed regarding attendance, tardiness, and professional communication, and several goals were generated to support Adam.
Goal 1: Communicates with cooperating teacher, field supervisor, and coordinator
Evidence: On one occasion, Adam requested an additional observation to demonstrate improved planning, agreed to submit the lesson plan a day ahead, then did not have it ready by the agreed time; the FS and Adam ultimately wrote it together the night before. The next morning, Adam canceled the observation shortly before it was scheduled to begin, citing feeling overwhelmed, which required the CT to step in on short notice.
Growth Expectation: If an emergency absence or tardy will occur, notify the CT and FS immediately through one shared channel (text 6 a.m.–9 p.m., email after 9 p.m.). Confirm logistics with both CT and FS ahead of each formal observation. Lesson plans are due at a set time in advance; if a plan is not submitted, the FS will not come to observe, which may extend the placement end date.
Goal 2: Is present and prompt; performs duties promptly; maintains communication
Evidence: Adam has been reflective and self-aware in conversations about professionalism, describing a longstanding tendency to overshare and a pattern of running late that predates this placement. The FS's formative notes describe Adam as consistently warm and invested with students, but unreliable with scheduling, arrival time, and follow-through on paperwork — for example, joining an orientation session partway through after oversleeping, then explaining the lapse afterward.
Growth Expectation: Use a calendar and timers to manage time. Communicate with the CT and FS within their stated working hours, reserving off-hours contact for true emergencies. Be on time daily and prepared with lesson materials before the due date.
Timeline and Support Provided:
The Coordinator shared information about the university's care-counseling and academic-support resources, which are free and available to all interns.
For the next placement: discuss working hours and communication norms with the new CT at the outset.
Respond to texts/emails from the FS within 24 hours.
Be on time daily; have all lesson plans reviewed by the CT and FS ahead of the due date.
Requirements: Failure to demonstrate consistent improvement, as evidenced by anecdotal observations from the CT and FS/Coordinator, may result in failure to successfully complete internship requirements.
_________________________________ _________________________
Cohort Coordinator University Preservice Teacher
_________________________________ _________________________
Director of EPS Date
(Student's signature does not imply agreement, only that the student has seen this document)