Components of a lesson planning template
Lesson plans can follow a number of different organizational structures depending on your content, grade level, and institutional norms. Some schools/districts may not buy into lesson planning at all in favor of more organic and interest-oriented classrooms. The lesson plan template I've designed takes into account many current trends you will likely encounter in American literacy classrooms. These include alignment to Common Core State Standards, explicit identification of learning targets, and organizing activities using a gradual release of responsibility. You should know these are all controversial topics. And you should know that I know that too. However, one way to better articulate your own position regarding any of these issues is through firsthand knowledge of the inherent shortcomings. Therefore, I will encourage you to plan with these components in mind and bring a critical lens to your reflection and analysis.
Common core state standards
The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are currently used in the state of Michigan to describe, "what a student should know and be able to do at the end of each grade" (corestandards.org). It is important to know that these standards are intended to guide instructional outcomes. They do not explicitly tell you what to teach, as often the focus of your content remains pretty open. They also do not tell you how to teach, as this is left to the discretion of individual districts. However, they do represent a particular point of view on how to organize literacy instruction, including the notion that literacy instruction can be organized along a progression. They also support a vision of teaching that that places the teacher as manager of the learning environment directing students toward predetermined learning goals. While it is important to understand why the CCSS can be seen as controversial, we will be using these standards within our lesson planning this semester as you will most likely be required to plan with them at your practicum site.
![]()
|
The following introduction from the book Pathways to the Common Core (Calkins, Ehrenworth & Lehman, 2012) gives a brief overview and background to understanding how the standards work. After skimming this article, you should take a few minutes to explore the Common Core website to get a feel for where information is located. In particular, note that there are different sections to address literature, informational text, foundational skills of reading, and secondary content literacies.
|
writing learning objectives
What does it look like to unpack a standard into learning objectives (I Can Statements)? The following language stems provide some guidance for getting started. Once you have selected your standards, use these stems to help you think through creating learning objectives. We are using student-friendly language which means your objective should begin with "I can..." and should be phrased from the perspective of your students. Avoid overly complex language. Try to make your objectives simple and manageable. Finally, think carefully about the verbs you use in your objectives as these should provide actionable ways that students can demonstrate their knowledge and skills within your lesson activities.
Unpacking Standards into Learning Targets
(Sweeney & Harris, 2017, p. 31)
|
Using learning targets is about Sweeney & Harris (2017), p. 26
|
You can use this resource from UNC Charlotte to help find strong verbs for your objectives. Bloom's Taxonomy provides a really clear structure for thinking about how the depth of learning progresses as you move from more surface level understandings to deeper levels that engage greater creativity and problem-solving on the part of students. Typically, lessons that introduce new ideas start at the surface level and as students gain confidence and skill in the area of study the objectives should challenge them to move to deeper levels. Think about the context of your lesson within the greater scope of student learning as you decide which verbs are appropriate.
Gradual release of responsibility (GRR)
This framework popularized by Fisher & Frey is very common for literacy instruction that utilizes think-alouds or mentor texts to ground modeling during a mini-lesson. This modeling is then followed by guided practice and collaborative work before branching into independent application. Keep in mind that GRR is not always appropriate or ideal. It runs counter to exploratory learning that begins with student questions and discovery prior to teacher elaboration. It also posits that while the end goal is for students to take ownership of their learning that teachers still retain ultimate control of the process and dissemination of knowledge and skill-building over time. However, the GRR brings attention to the complexities of teaching by helping teachers to be more explicit in scaffolding student learning in relation to goals. GRR works particularly well within the Backward Design framework. You will likely hear references to GRR and see it in action within your practicum experiences, so we will be incorporating this framework into our classroom planning template.