KIPP NYC MIDDLE/HS ANNOTATED LESSON PLAN

The KIPP NYC Annotated Lesson Plan is a guide that KIPP NYC has developed over the years. It is intended
to provide guidance and structure, while providing teachers with ample room for the intuitiveness,
creativity, and freedom necessary to maximize student learning.

Aim:
 Are we beginning with the end (aim) in mind? Are we being extremely clear what we want our students to
know/be able to do by the end of the lesson and then designing activities and selecting materials to help
us accomplish this goal?

Potential pitfall to avoid is starting with the activities and materials and then just attaching an aim to it.

 Are our aims specific and doable in the allocated time? Is it bite-sized enough to ensure student success?
Have I broken up complex skills into bit-sized, do-able aims?

 Along the lines of the above, are our lessons focused on the essential content items/facts/ideas and skills
that are essential to accomplishing the aim? Are we avoiding unproductive ‘tangents’? Are we overloading
the students with ‘unessential’ information in which the critical ideas are being lost (the ‘less-is-more’
line)?

 Are we checking (throughout the lesson as well as at the end) to see if the kids are learning what we want
them to be learning (accomplishing the aim)? What are the ways that we are going to check for
understanding? What products will our students have at the end of class to demonstrate that they are
mastering the aim? How will our students show us that they are mastering the aim?

 Are we using student data from tests, homework and independent practice to guide the development of
our aims?

 Are our aims aligned with the state standards, scopes/sequences, state exams, teacher generated tests?

 Are we utilizing a variety of HOTS verbs in our aims as a way of pushing ourselves to push the KIPPsters to
higher levels of thought, questioning and understanding? Potential Pitfall: a) starting at too high of a level
b) never reaching a high enough level

 Are we picking the most effective and efficient way to teach the standard?

 Do we have just 1 aim per lesson? This would mean that we would have 2-3 aims in a 90 minute block and
perhaps even 2 aims in a 45 minute class?

 Are we at least occasionally formatting our aims differently, including the use of a question as an aim?

 Do we have our aims written clearly on the board? Do we spend time during class going over the aim with
students? Do we cycle back to the aim during closure/summary to ensure that all students have mastered
the aim?

 How do we measure the students’ mastery of the aim everyday? In other words, how do we determine
who needs review and who is ready to move on?

Agenda:
 Do we have a consistent and engaging agenda?

 Do the KIPPsters know how to transition from each part of the agenda?
  Do we write the agenda on the board before class starts?

 Can the KIPPsters explain what each part of the agenda means, why the class is doing that agenda item,
and what the expectations for that agenda item are?

 Do we spend time going over the agenda with our classes? Do we do that in a way that builds
enthusiasm/excitement for the class?

Opening Routine (Everything before the actual lesson begins) = Entrance + Do Now + HW check + ???
 Is our “Do Now” motivational, short (less than 5 minutes), related to the aim or spiraled to previous aims,
self-explanatory, organized/neat/consistent?

Potential pitfall here is having an opening routine (including checking homework) that takes too long. A
best guess on this is an opening routine (Completing the do now, checking the do now, reviewing
homework, etc… of around 5-8 minutes in a 45 minute class and 14-18 minutes in a 90 minute class.

Potential pitfall II – Kids not knowing what to expect when they walk into class. The opening routine
should have a large measure of consistency and must set the tone for the entire period and must
immediately move the kids into their academics.

 Does our "Do Now" provide strategic, cumulative review? Are we using student data to ensure that all
students can be successful on the "Do Now"?

 Does our "Do Now" require all students to have the necessary materials for class? Does it start the class in
a way that sets a positive, rigorous feel to the class?

 Do we have a mechanism for quickly grading/checking our "Do Now" activities?

Cumulative Review (which should be integrated daily into the various elements of the lesson)–
 Does our cumulative review systematically cover all the skills/standards that we have previously taught?

 Are we using student data to pick the right standards for cumulative review?

 Are our students consistently successful on cumulative review activities?

 Are we using a different mode for review than we have for our lesson?

 Are we varying the ways in which we do cumulative review from lesson to lesson?

 Do we use cumulative review both in stand alone sections as well as spiraled throughout our lessons?
This includes reviewing material from earlier in the lesson as well as previous lessons.

 Have we prepared our vocabulary, algorithms, questions, homework, to review in advance?

 Are we able to fire them off in a rapid pace, developing quick recall and memorization?

 Have we created a technique for ensuring that every student is participating? (such as earn your seat,
ticket rewards, mandatory answering etc.)

Motivation/Purpose/Hook/Catalyst:
  If we consider each lesson as its own universe then this is the primordial force that gets everything going.
If we consider each lesson as a firecracker then this is lighting the fuse. If we consider each lesson a giant
snowball rolling down a hill then this is the initial push. 

 This should be the hook that contextualizes what the kids are about to learn and focuses the students’
attention either by linking the aim to the ‘real-world,’ the kids’ lives, a prior lesson, some made-up
mnemonic anchor, etc….

 Is our motivation directly connected to the aim, interactive, interesting, and varied in style/tone/etc from
lesson-to-lesson and day-to-day?

 Is my motivation/purpose/hook/catalyst in a different modality than my Do Now, Cumulative Review, and

Guided/Independent Practice?

 Is my motivation SHORT and QUICK

GUIDED and INDEPENDENT practice

Madeline Hunter basically described Guided Practice and Independent Practice as a four-step instructional process.
1) Watch how I do it (modeling/guided practice)
2) Doing it together (guided practice)
3) I’ll watch you do it and praise and correct immediately (guided practice)
4) You’ll do it alone (independent practice)

Guided Practice (I-We and We):

 Are we overtly modeling our thinking for the KIPPsters in a step-by-step manner?
 Do students have the opportunity to watch us do(model)/think through the skill/problem/activity/
concept/examples enough times so that they have enough confidence to do some together (we) and then
by themselves (you)?

 Do we have a mechanism for knowing when to go from Guided(I-We) to Guided(We)?

 Are we providing opportunities for clear, directed, and organized student note taking. This is a critical part
of each lesson. Students need effective notes so that they can review and study the material on their own.
The KIPPsters should be able to flip through their notebooks and have an accurate and thorough guide to
everything that we have taught.

 Do our students’ note-pages reflect the spiral, sequence, and variety of what is happening in our classes?

 Are we effectively using the black board to model, organize, demonstrate concepts as well as reach our
visual learners?

 Are we planning/scripting activities/questions that differentiate by level of difficulty, depth, spiraling, and
learning style?

 Are we deliberately planning key questions that move students across the various levels of critical thinking
during GP? Are we scripting these questions as needed? Are we actually asking these questions?

 Are we aware of our ‘Ratio’ during all parts of Guided Practice, Mini-Lessons, etc..?

Guided Practice (We):

 Are our Guided(we) problems/activities at the same level of difficulty as our Guided (I-we) activities?

 Do we have enough Guided(We) problems/activities so that the KIPPsters can confidently tackle
problems/activities on their own?
  Does our Guided(I-We and We) do the following:
-- Use all of the learning styles (Having the students write notes and complete written activities
are one of the best/only ways to ensure that we are reaching our visual and tactile learners.)
-- Consistently asking students how they are getting their answers and why their answers are
correct
-- Consistently asking other why and higher order thinking questions. Potential Pitfall: Losing
focus on the aim and falling into the so-called interesting tangent phenomenon.
-- Spiral to prior learning
-- Introduce concepts in a step-by-step and easiest-to-hardest fashion

Are we constantly checking for student understanding and correcting any misconceptions?
Some possible ways of checking for understanding include:
-- Individual oral response
-- Whole class oral response
-- Visual answers, i.e. “raise you hands if…”
-- Written work
-- Completing a task/experiment/etc…
-- Conferencing (Individual or Small Group)
-- Group sampling (a portion of the class/cooperative group/etc..)

 Is our guided practice helping the students achieve understanding as well as mastery of the aim?

 Do we know when to move from GP to IP?

Potential Pitfall -- Holding the entire class up when a really small number of kids are confused and will be
better helped in a smaller group during IP. Similarly, moving ahead when the vast majority of the class is
still confused.

 Are we planning/scripting activities/questions that differentiate by level of difficulty, depth, spiraling, and
learning style?

 Are we deliberately planning key questions that move students across the various levels of critical thinking
during GP? Are we scripting these questions as needed? Are we actually asking these questions?

 Are we aware of our ‘Ratio’?

Sustained, Structured, and Rigorous Independent Practice (You):

 Does our independent practice logically follow and build upon the guided practice? (Spiraled) Are our students
asked to do problems/tasks/etc at the same level as in the GP?

 Are there very few hands in the air during Independent Practice? Is almost every student in the class able
to do the work by him/herself?

 Does our independent practice help the students achieve understanding/mastery of the aim?

 Are students given enough “at-bats” to ensure mastery?

 Are we deliberately planning key questions that move students across the various levels of critical thinking
during IP? Are we actually asking these questions?

 Are we ‘quiet’ during this time and not talking to the entire class but working on an as needed basis with
individual students or a small group?
  Are we circulating among the KIPPsters during this time to check for understanding and so that we can
help any students who are struggling with the independent work?

 Are we planning/scripting activities/questions that differentiate by level of difficulty, depth, spiraling, and
learning style?

 Are we using this time effectively to differentiate instruction? (ie – working with a small group or an
individual)

 Are we deliberately planning key questions that move students across the various levels of critical thinking
during IP? Are we actually asking these questions?

 Are we providing sufficient sustained, structured, and rigorous time (at least 12-15 min. in a 45 minute
class and at least 25+ minutes in an 75+ minute class) for independent work so that students are able to
complete more than just 1 or 2 questions/examples/etc…

 Are we actively measuring student mastery during IP?

Structured, Deliberate and Rigorous Feedback

 How are we ensuring that we are providing each student structured, deliberate and rigorous feedback on
their academic progress on a regular basis (both during class time and equally importantly during non-
class time)?

 Are we planning exactly who is receiving (and why they are receiving) feedback during the course of every
lesson, every week, and every unit?

 Are we providing structured, deliberate and rigorous feedback in a variety of differentiated ways
throughout every part of the lesson, every part of the week and throughout the course of a unit?
-- Whole group
-- Small group (Heterogeneous and Homogeneous)
-- Individual
-- peer to peer (are we teaching the kids how to give feedback to each other?)
-- orally
-- written

 Are we keeping track of the type of structured, deliberate, and rigorous feedback we provide?

 What data are we using to ensure that the feedback we are providing is helping the kids?

Evaluation/Final Checking for Understanding/CLOSURE/summary (How do we know that 90% or more of our
students learned what we just taught):
 Are we directly referencing the aim and asking students to show (one more time) that they have mastered
the aim?

 Are we completing this portion of the lesson as an intentional whole class activity?

 Do we make sure to do a summary DAILY before my closing routine?

 Are we re-enforcing the major points learned, reviewing the thought patterns we just created, and
reviewing cues for remembering the information? (This can take the form of accountable talk)

 Do we need to create a subsequent re-teaching activity?

 Do we need to create a subsequent enrichment activity?

  Are we varying our evaluation technique from lesson to lesson?

Note: A technical definition of closure reads as follows: “Closure is the act of reviewing and clarifying the key
points of a lesson, tying them together into a coherent whole, and ensuring their utility in application by securing
them in the student’s conceptual network.” Just in case you were interested 

Homework:
 Are we totally confident that all students can do the homework INDEPENDENTLY and SUCCESSFULLY?

 Are we providing additional independent work to help our students master the aim?

 Is our homework tied to the lesson or a springboard for future lessons

 Is it clear, self-explanatory, and doable in time?

 Are we using student data to strategically assign homework that systematically reviews all the skills
students have mastered to this point in the year?

 Did we write the homework on the board? Did we give students the chance to write the homework down
and/or put it away properly?

 Have we created an efficient system for checking, collecting, monitoring, holding students accountable for
HW?

Note: Homework should never be used as a punishment or a reward.

Differentiation: Questions to Consider While Planning

 Do we know our own preferred learning styles? Do we know our own preferred teaching strategies, styles
and activities? Are we regularly and effectively varying our teaching strategies, styles and activities?

 Do we know the learning styles of all of our students? Do we know the academic strengths and
weaknesses of all of our students?

 Are we assessing during and after each lesson, and in such a way, that we know the level of each of our
students? How do we know each student’s level of mastery of the day’s aim?

 Are we using student data from tests, homework and independent practice to guide the development of
our subsequent aims, activities, and assessments?

 Are we providing enough time for our independent practice so that we can effectively use this time to
work with a group of students (low, middle, high, mixed, etc…)?

 Are we effectively using peer tutors/groups to maximize the time we can spend with a group of students
during class?

 Are we planning activities/assignments (in class and hw) that sufficiently spiral and differentiate by level of
difficulty, depth, and learning style?

 Are we planning and structuring our class/week/unit time to allow us to sufficiently spiral and
differentiate by level of difficulty, depth, and learning style to ensure that all students master the
necessary material?
  Are we planning/scripting questions that differentiate by level of difficulty, depth,
 spiraling, and learning style?

 Are we creating weekly/unit assessments that are appropriately spiraled, scaffolded, and differentiated?

 How are we using our time during our weekly/unit assessments? Are we appropriately re-teaching our
lowest-skilled students?

 Are we effectively structuring/changing our student seating and grouping so that all of our students have
the opportunity of being helped/challenged by their peers?

 Are our students aware of their academic strengths, weaknesses, and learning styles? Are our students
able to monitoring their own progress? Are our students learning how to learn effectively both in their
preferred learning style and in other learning styles?

 Are our students getting enough feedback and in multiple ways? Are we providing enough structured,
sustained and rigorous independent practice?

 Are we scheduling time for pre-teaching skills to our lowest-skilled students as often as possible?

 Are we effectively using peer tutors/groups to maximize the effectiveness of our out-of class remediation
and enrichment?

 Are we providing our lowest skilled students with the time they need both in class and out of class
(morning, lunch, electives, after 5:00 p.m., Saturdays, etc) to be successful? Are we finding help from
other teachers, students, outside tutors, parents, etc…to provide this help whenever
possible/appropriate?

 Are we making at least some time on a daily basis to ‘push-in’ to other classrooms and assist lower-skilled
students, challenge the higher-skilled students, etc…?

 Are we explicitly rewarding/displaying examples of student growth?

 Are we effectively differentiating for behavior? What are we doing for the kids who are not responding to
what is working for the majority of the kids?

 On a basic level, Tammi Sutton asked the following summary question when it comes to differentiation,
“Would you be excited to be a student in your class?” Tammi then challenged us to add the following to
this question… “Would I be excited to be a student in this class…if I could not read…if I was the highest
skilled student in the school….if I had ADHD?...”

 Tammi raised an interesting second challenge as well – are we effectively differentiating for academics
and behavior without lowering our expectations? In other words, are we acting in the spirit of the
Stockdale Paradox – this kid may be struggling with X and Y but with the right support from people A, B, C,
etc… they will be successful? Of course, part of our jobs then becomes enlisting/organizing the help of
peoples A-Z (and beyond )?

Final Thoughts
 Are we teaching and living with the James Baldwin Quote in mind? “The children are always ours, every
single one of them…..Children have never been very good at listening to their elders, but they have never
failed to imitate them.”
 How effective are our transitions between the individual parts of each lesson and from lesson to lesson?
Are our routines from transitions and opening routines working?
 Are we combining our enthusiasm with a Persistent, Insistent, and Consistent emphasis on SSLANTing
(Smile, Sit-up, Listen, Ask/Answer Questions, Nod, Track the Speaker), quality of
work/effort/behavior/being nice that will lead to future success in and after school?
 Are we varying questioning techniques and questions throughout each lesson as well as lesson to lesson?
 How aware are we of our own pacing and timing? Are we ‘reading’ our students for signs of confusion,
frustration, and boredom and adjusting accordingly both in-class and in our future planning? Are we
isolating whether these reactions are a result of planning, delivery, level, or organization issues on our
parts or behavior issues on the part of the individual student/s?
 Are we combining our enthusiasm with a Persistent, Insistent, and Consistent emphasis on quality of
work/effort/behavior/being nice that will lead to future success in and after school?
 How’s our balance of addressing student behavior issues individually-on-the-side vs. stopping lessons to
discuss issues as a whole class? Are we doing BOTH effectively? Are we using a variety of approaches and
techniques?
 Are we explaining and having students explain ‘why’ both the academic and character standards matter?