Lesson Plans Update — Part 5
The purpose of this message is to remind you of the ground rules for Lesson Plans and Lesson Planning. Every year for the past five years, we go through the fight, where the ‘good idea pixies’ in Central Office or over eager Campus Administrators come up with new ‘good ideas’ to add more bells and whistles that are beyond what is allowed by law. They do gobble up your time and do nothing for your students.
Every year we fight the same fight to keep the ‘good idea pixies’ from running amuck. Every year we win the fight. Last year was particularly contentious, with some in Central Office stating, ‘We don’t care what the Law or the Federation says, we will make them do what we want’. The only reason EPISD stayed within the lanes of the Paperwork Reduction Act (Tex. Educ. Code Section 11.164(a)(6).) was an impending class action grievance.
Looks like this year’s rematch is coming, but we have the Law on our side. So, here are the non-negotiables, what Principals were told and what isn’t allowed by law.
I have included the matrix of allowable items and those not allowable that was prepared by the Texas AFT General Counsel. If you are directed to or told “well a good teacher would” include things beyond the scope of the matrix based on the Ysleta case. Contact us immediately.
NON-NEGOTIABLES
1. Planning is non-negotiable, it is essential to successful instruction.
2. “A unit or weekly lesson plan that outlines, in a brief and general manner, the information to be presented during each period at the secondary level or in each subject or topic at the elementary level.” Tex. Educ. Code Section 11.164(a)(6).”
3. The Ysleta Template Interpretation.
4. The best “proof of planning” are classroom observation and activity during PLCs.
WHAT PRINCIPALS WERE TOLD.
They were given the choice to:
1. Use the EPISD Lesson Planning Template, but select lines could not be required, or;
2. Let teachers use a campus developed tool that works for them and that documents their plan.
WHAT ISN’T ALLOWED BY LAW ON THE TEMPLATE?
1. “BACKWARDS DESIGN/LESSON PROGRESSION” is evaluation which isn’t allowed to be required.
2. Within “DAILY LESSON CYCLE” there are several problems that exceed the allowed.
a. In “Learning Experience/Engaging Activity”:
i. Learning Approach.
ii. Differentiation Method.
iii. Guiding Questions. (That’s evaluation)
iv. Check For Understanding. (That’s evaluation)
b. “Intervention/Extension in its entirety.
3. In lesson overview, Short, Simple and Succinct need to be the “Three S’s” that drive your words if you are directed by your Principal to do it.
WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO?
1. You are going to let me know what your Principal is requiring.
2. If you are threatened with write up or worse for not exceeding what is allowed by law, you are going to contact us ASAP.
3. EP AFT will, situation dependent, either:
a. Try to reason with your Principal and if that fails go to grievance, or,
b. Go straight to grievance.
4. The grievance will be for knowingly and deliberately violating state law.
