










































Pedagogical Practice  
 

Lynn Shafer Willner, Standards Researcher/Developer, WIDA at the University of Wisconsin—
Madison. Email: lynn.willner@wisc.edu (ORCID: 0000-0002-0980-7957) 
 

AI-Powered, Integrated Unit Goals 
and Lesson Objectives for K-12 
English Learners 

GATESOL Journal 
2025, Vol. 34(1), pp. 17–34 

doi:10.52242/gatesol.199 
ISSN: 2331-6845 

 

 
Lynn Shafer Willner 
WIDA at the University of Wisconsin—Madison 
 
 

Abstract 
For the more than five million K–12 students in the U.S. who are classified as English learners 
(ELs) [also referred to as multilingual learners], school success increasingly depends on 
integrated instruction that seamlessly blends three types of educational standards: English 
language development (ELD), foundational literacy, and academic content in English 
language arts (ELA), mathematics, science, and social studies. Recognizing this critical need, 
this article offers research-based guidance and practical planning templates for designing 
concise, standards-aligned unit goals and lesson objectives. To significantly reduce the burden 
of manually aligning multiple sets of educational standards, the author introduces a 
responsible artificial intelligence (AI) workflow that combines structured templates with a 
closed-AI system limited to vetted documents. This innovative approach empowers language 
educators to shift from time-consuming standards retrieval and alignment tasks to more 
collaborative instructional design with content area and literacy colleagues. Ultimately, this 
approach transforms standards-aligned unit and lesson planning, enhancing efficiency and 
allowing these teams to dedicate more time to deeper instructional planning, specifically 
addressing the early literacy needs of K-12 ELs and the disciplinary literacy needs of long-
term ELs (LTELs). This ensures all multilingual learners can receive the targeted, coherent 
instruction essential for academic success. 
 
Keywords 
English language development (ELD), English learners (ELs), multilingual learners, 
integrated unit planning, WIDA, English language arts/literacy, artificial intelligence (AI) in 
education 
 

 
Introduction 
Over 5 million K–12 students in the U.S. are classified as English learners (ELs) (National Center 
for Education Statistics, 2024)1. Academic success for these students increasingly depends on 
instruction that integrates and aligns English language development (ELD), disciplinary content, 
and literacy skills (Blitz, 2025; Uccelli et al., 2015). Within the broader EL category, distinct EL 
student groups face persistent challenges: ELs in Kindergarten and first grade (especially those 
with special education needs) often show slower early reading growth compared to non-EL peers 

 
1 In this article, the terms English learner and multilingual learner are used interchangeably to refer to the same 
group of K–12 students. The Georgia Department of Education, federal policy, and WIDA use English learner to 
link English proficiency levels with assessments of students’ readiness to engage in academic content. WIDA also 
uses multilingual learner to emphasize students’ broader linguistic assets and abilities in the classroom (WIDA, 
2023).  

mailto:lynn.willner@wisc.edu


18 GATESOL Journal 34(1)  
 

(Johnson, 2022), while long-term ELs (LTELs) in middle school (those students who remain in 
EL status for six years or more) may plateau in oral proficiency but lag in their disciplinary literacy 
development, limiting reclassification from EL status and general academic achievement 
(Rhinehart et al., 2024). 

EL language, literacy, and content achievement are impacted by the complexity involved 
in planning instruction that successfully integrates multiple sets of educational standards (Shafer 
Willner, 2023a; Kray et al., 2023). To address these intertwined challenges for Georgia educators, 
this article presents a Georgia-specific case study for integrating three distinct sets of K–12 
instructional standards: Georgia Standards of Excellence (GSE) for English language arts (ELA), 
mathematics, and science, the WIDA ELD Standards Framework (WIDA, 2020), and Georgia's 
newly revised K-12 ELA Literacy Foundations Standards (Georgia Department of Education 
[GaDOE], 2025a). This fragmentation results in disjointed instruction, particularly affecting EL 
subgroups with distinctive needs. 

The differing constructs, formats, and outcomes of these distinct K-12 educational 
standards often create barriers to efficient, cohesive instructional planning. In response, the article 
offers practical solutions for content, language, and literacy educators to align instruction without 
sacrificing clarity or rigor. First, it models a backward design approach (Wiggins & McTighe, 
2005), using standards-aligned unit goals to drive focused, measurable lesson objectives, informed 
by WIDA implementation guidance (Kray et al., 2023). Second, it introduces a closed artificial 
intelligence (AI) system—a platform limited to pre-vetted, standards-based documents—to 
support consistent, efficient generation of unit goals and lesson objectives. By handling time-
consuming administrative tasks, AI gives educators more time for meaningful, collaborative 
planning (Wen & Jiang, 2025), especially vital when addressing the needs of multilingual learners 
or those requiring specialized instruction (García & Kleifgen, 2022; Center for Applied Special 
Technology [CAST], 2024). By streamlining standards-aligned planning, this approach enables 
educators to more systematically address the early literacy needs of K-12 ELs and the disciplinary 
literacy needs of LTELs, ensuring all multilingual learners receive the targeted, coherent 
instruction required for academic success. 

The next sections summarize federal guidance and research on embedding WIDA-based 
ELD Standards within Georgia’s content standards, outline the research base and templates for 
standards-aligned, integrated planning, and point educators to GaDOE correspondence mappings 
that provide expert educator recommendations for content-to-language standards integration. 

 
Requirements and Components of State English Language Development Standards  
K-12 educational standards guide the development of coherent local instruction and assessment 
systems, targeting grade-level expectations. Unlike curricula, which include the specific 
instructional materials, teaching methods, and lesson plans used in classrooms (the 
“how”), educational standards provide broad learning expectations that guide “what” students 
should achieve (Fullan, 2001). This distinction allows local educators the flexibility to design or 
select curricula that best meet their students’ needs while still aligning with state-level shared 
expectations (Shafer Willner, 2023b).2    

 
2 Explicitly supporting the design of instruction that promotes local control is why WIDA refers to its standards as a 
standards framework (Shafer Willner, 2023b). This allows districts leeway to create integrated ELD-ELA-SOR 
curricula while maintaining the integrity of the ELD standards construct. ELD standards are not equivalent to ELA 
standards, but chart a unique, complementary set of targets. 



Shafer Willner 19 
 

The federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA of 2015) requires each state’s ELD 
standards to define the language demands found in the state academic content standards in English 
language arts (ELA), mathematics, and science. For more than two decades, federal requirements 
for ELD standards have been firmly rooted in established ELD research, including Bailey and 
Butler's (2003) academic language framework, Schleppegrell’s (2020) extensive work around the 
language of schooling, and the strong evidence rating reported in the What Works Clearinghouse 
educator's practice guide (Baker et al., 2014). Thus, state ELD standards promote an approach 
called content-based language learning. 

The ELD standards used in Georgia—the WIDA ELD Standards Framework (WIDA, 
2020)—have four components: WIDA Standards Statements, Key Language Uses, Language 
Expectations, and Proficiency Level Descriptors (see Figure 1).   
 
Figure 1 
WIDA ELD Standards Framework Components and Sample Planning Questions 

[Reprinted with permission from WIDA] 
 
WIDA uses these components in the instructional planning process, recommending that educators 
tie together individual language lesson objectives within broader, integrated unit goals (WIDA, 
2020, p. 46).  
 
Evidence-Based Recommendations around Integrated Instructional Planning 
Research and case studies have highlighted that greater attention to collaborative, integrated 
planning produces statistically significant gains in ELs’ vocabulary knowledge, argumentative 
writing, content comprehension, and oral language proficiency (Edelman et al., 2022). During 
integrated instruction, content and language objectives are intentionally paired, an instructional 
design approach advanced by the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) for the past 
several decades (Short, 2017). SIOP primarily emphasizes multimodal scaffolding—such as 
verbal, visual, and hands-on supports—to make academic content accessible to multilingual 
learners while promoting English language development. This EL-focused scaffolding also 
reflects the core principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) (CAST, 2024), that is, offering 
multiple means of representation, engagement, and expression for all learners. 

A related type of content-based language learning draws on a K-12 variant of Systemic 
Functional Linguistics (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014). Here, genre-based pedagogy promotes 



20 GATESOL Journal 34(1)  
 

linguistic scaffolding by explicitly teaching students the language patterns and language features3 
needed to participate in specific academic genres (Martin & Rose, 2007). When language 
objectives utilize genre-based framing, they can effectively support multilingual learners in 
engaging more deeply with academic language (Mahan & Ruiz de Zarobe, 2024). Collectively, 
these findings underscore the importance of incorporating both linguistic and UDL-based 
scaffolding in content-based language instructional planning. 
 
Integrated Unit Goal Design 
Using the unit goal template adapted from Shafer Willner (2023b), educators can first establish a 
content area context for language use, followed by an ELD focus tied to the WIDA Key Language 
Uses (narrate, inform, explain, and/or argue) (see Table 1.) In other words, ELD instruction is not 
decontextualized and generic, but embedded in and shaped by content area contexts.  
 
Table 1 
Template for Integrated Unit Goals 
 

Focus Template 
Integrated Unit Goal 
Template 
for Content-Based 
Language Learning 

In [content area], when learning [essential questions, big ideas/enduring 
understandings, and themes associated with this list of specific content 
standards], multilingual learners will [communicative purpose/Key 
Language Use] using the language for learning in [WIDA Language 
Expectations]. 

  
Example 

In social studies, when learning about "how people in the past helped make 
the world a better place" and the lives of historical figures in American 
history (GA Standard SS1H1, ELA.1.T.SS.2.a, ELA.1.T.RA.IV, 
ELA.1.F.PA.5, ELA.1.F.PA.6, ELA.1.F.P.1), multilingual learners will 
interpret and express informational texts using the language for learning in 
ELD-SI.K-3.Inform, ELD-SS.1.Inform.Interpretive, and ELD-
SS.1.Inform.Expressive4. 

Note: See Table 6 for an AI-generated response using this template. 
 

The process used to map connections between content and ELD standards can be facilitated 
through a new type of WIDA and state resource called standards correspondence5 mappings. State 
panels of expert educators match content and language standards via the WIDA Key Language 
Uses. Not only do these mappings provide educators with planning options, but they also satisfy 
federal peer review requirements (Shafer Willner, 2023a). The 2022 GaDOE content-to-ELD 
correspondence mappings were created by four state-convened educator panels. They have been 
published in the GaDOE Inspire platform, with the ELA-to-ELD standards correspondence 
mapping updated in Summer 2025 (GaDOE, 2025b). Figure 2 shows sample correspondences 

 
3 The term language features refers to elements of a text that contribute to its meaning, style, and purpose, while the 
term language forms refers to observable, structural components of language. This concept is a key distinction 
between the foundational literacy standards in ELA and the focus of language in ELD standards. 
4 The content-to-language relationship is encoded within the WIDA Language Expectation reference code: [WIDA 
Standard Statement] + [Grade Level Cluster] + [Key Language Use] + [Communication Mode]. For example: ELD-
SS.1.Inform.Expressive. This alphanumeric code can also be used in local learning management systems to digitally 
connect integrated planning with curricular resources. 
5 Correspondences are also referred to as alignments, associations, crosswalks, or correlations (Shafer Willner, 
2023a). 



Shafer Willner 21 
 

between GaDOE Grade 1 Social Studies Standards (SS1H1) and WIDA Language Expectations 
(ELD-SI.K-3.Inform and ELD-SS.1.Inform.Expressive)6  
 
Figure 2 
Sample GaDOE-WIDA Standards Correspondence Mapping7 
 

 
[Reprinted with permission from GaDOE] 

 
Creating Integrated Lesson Objectives 
Once broader unit goals have been defined, educators can create three types of lesson objectives 
to guide instruction: (1) discipline-specific academic language, (2) focused language study, and 
(3) ELD-embedded foundational literacy skills. The first two follow 2017 Council for the Great 
City Schools (CGCS) recommendations; the third was created for this article.8  
 

1. Discipline-Specific Academic Language Expansion Lessons. The first type of lesson 
objective targets discipline-specific uses of language (CSGCS, 2017, p. 13). To provide all ELs 
(and their peers) with opportunities to master grade-level cluster Language Expectations—that is, 
the most prominent language uses needed for engagement in ELA, mathematics, science, and 
social studies (WIDA, 2021)—this first type of lesson objective introduces a prominent language 
function for each grade-level cluster supported by either linguistic or UDL scaffolding. Table 2 
provides a template and example for the Language Function, “describe characteristics, patterns, or 
behavior” from the ELD-SI.K-3.Inform Language Expectation. 

 
6 Click on the circled double arrows on the left side of the horizontal menu to reveal the “associations” 
[correspondence matches] between these two sets of standards. 
7 To download the .csv file for the correspondence mapping pictured in Figure 2, click on the three vertical bullets in 
the upper righthand corner of the screen. Choose the "Table" view and  the "Filter" option for "Associations.” 
Ensure both "WIDA" and "Related" checkboxes are selected. Finally, "export" the file. 
8 Please note that the lesson objective samples provided in this article offer standard-related information for lesson 
objectives; educators are encouraged to add more specific, local curricular customizations to their lesson objectives. 



22 GATESOL Journal 34(1)  
 

Table 2 
Standards-Aligned Lesson Objective Template Using a WIDA Language Function  
 

Focus Template 

Lesson Objective 
Using WIDA 
Language Functions 
[for Discipline-
Specific Academic 
Language 
Expansion] 

Within the context of integrated unit goals and for a particular selection of 
content standards (indicated above in Table 1), . . . 

When learning the language for [communicative purpose/Key Language 
Use], multilingual learners will [a Language Function from a Language 
Expectation] using [appropriate linguistic scaffolding and/or UDL 
principles]. 

  
Example 

In social studies, when learning about "how people in the past helped make 
the world a better place" and the lives of historical figures in American 
history (GA Standard SS1H1) . . . 

When learning the language to Inform, multilingual learners will describe 
characteristics, patterns, or behavior using graphic organizers and educator 
modeling. 

Note: See Table 6 for an AI-generated response using this template. 
 

2. Focused Language Study Lessons. A second type of lesson objective, shown in Table 
3, is focused language study. This activity provides multilingual learners with explicit practice in 
how language works in context (CGCS, 2017, p. 13). In other words, during these lessons, 
educators offer explicit instruction on how to use certain language features (e.g., sentences, 
phrases, clauses, word groups) to carry out a specific WIDA Language Function. The increased 
metalinguistic awareness that results from this type of genre-based lesson improves student 
engagement with grade-level disciplinary expectations (Schleppegrell, 2020). 
 
Table 3 
Standards-Aligned Lesson Objective Template for Teaching about a Language Feature for a 
WIDA Language Function  
 

Focus Template 
Lesson Objective 
Using Language 
Features [Focused 
Language Study] 

Within the context of integrated unit goals and for a particular selection of 
content standards (indicated above in Table 1), . . . 

When [a Language Function from a Language Expectation], multilingual 
learners will learn to [Key Language Use], using [Language Features] with 
[multimodality, scaffolding, or UDL support]. 

  
Example 

In social studies, when learning about "how people in the past helped make 
the world a better place" and the lives of historical figures in American 
history (GA Standard SS1H1) . . . 

When describing characteristics, patterns, or behavior, multilingual learners 
will learn to Inform using frequently used multi-word noun groups with 
peer support. 

Note: See Table 6 for an AI-generated response using this template. 
 



Shafer Willner 23 
 

3. Integrating Foundational Literacy Lessons. In 2023, the Reading League (TRL) in 
collaboration with the National Committee for Effective Literacy (NCEL) and the CGCS issued 
complementary, evidence-based guidance around foundational literacy and ELs. Both guidance 
documents recommended that educators: (1) offer explicit language instruction to build decoding 
and academic comprehension skills (TRL/NCEL, 2023); (2) integrate oral language development, 
contrastive analysis, code-based instruction, and meaning-making strategies into literacy lessons 
for ELs (CGCS, 2023, p. 7); and (3) emphasize all five foundational reading skills to support the 
academic progress of ELs (TRL/NCEL, 2023). 
 Supporting the development of local curricula, the third type of lesson objective in this 
sequence uses a dual target model to guide development of ELD-embedded foundational literacy 
skills. This lesson objective ensures ELs have meaningful opportunities to develop literacy skills 
as they build their knowledge about how language works for a particular Key Language Use [genre 
family]. As an example, the Table 4 template answers the question: What sound patterns do ELs 
need to interpret and/or express the words in a multi-word noun group? This example shows how 
a phonemic awareness skill from the newly revised Georgia ELA standards can be embedded 
within a lesson objective related to genre-linked word choice. Foundational literacy lessons should 
be systematic and responsive to student needs. 
 
Table 4 
Standards-Aligned Lesson Objective Template for Integrated ELD—Literacy Lesson Objectives 
 

Focus Template 
Lesson Objectives 
that Integrate ELD 
and Literacy 

Within the context of integrated unit goals and for a particular selection of 
content standards (indicated above in Table 1), . . . 
 
While learning to select and adjust Language Features during an ELD 
lesson, multilingual learners will also practice oral and/or written 
[foundational literacy skill(s) identified in state foundational literacy 
standards] with [appropriate linguistic scaffolding and/or Universal Design 
for Learning support].  

  
Example 

In social studies, when learning about "how people in the past helped make 
the world a better place" and the lives of historical figures in American 
history (GA Standard SS1H1) . . . 

While learning to select and adjust frequently used multi-word noun groups 
during an ELD lesson, multilingual learners will also orally practice 
blending sounds using magnetic letters and a list of target rimes to build 
words in a “Make-a-Word” center. (1.F.PA.5 Onsets & Rimes) 

Note: See Table 6 for three AI-generated responses using this template. 
 

To summarize, effective integrated units are built around intentional alignment across 
content, language, and literacy standards. The next section outlines a process for using AI to 
develop standards-aligned unit goals and lesson objectives. 
  

https://case.georgiastandards.org/391c3abe-c1ec-4a4a-a942-c9e152b35102/5ab86f6f-5eab-4263-b830-c7102f26c164/303


24 GATESOL Journal 34(1)  
 

Instructional Planning Using a Closed Artificial Intelligence System  
Integrated instruction for multilingual learners requires educators to navigate numerous 
complexities, including the alignment of content, language, and literacy standards, as well as the 
differentiation of materials by proficiency, modality, and cultural or linguistic background (García 
& Kleifgen, 2022; CAST, 2024; Kray et al., 2023). Traditionally, this process demands significant 
expertise and time. 

The emergence of user-friendly AI tools, such as ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Microsoft Co-
Pilot, Perplexity, and Claude, now enables educators without technical training to use natural 
language prompts (vs. highly technical Python coding) to automate many routine aspects of 
instructional planning (Yan et al., 2024). By streamlining complex planning tasks, these large 
language models (LLMs) free up time for educators to focus on higher-leverage instructional 
decisions (Wen & Jiang, 2025). 

Despite these benefits, caution is essential. Uncritical reliance on open-access AI can 
expose educators to outputs that may contain bias, outdated information, or even fabricated sources 
(Dziubata, 2024). For this reason, ongoing monitoring and professional guidance remain crucial 
when integrating AI-generated content into educational contexts. 

To address these concerns, closed-AI systems (that is, platforms limited to educator-vetted 
resources) can help ensure greater accuracy and reliability. Tools like Google NotebookLM, which 
operate within secure domains and restrict the LLM’s knowledge base to provided documents 
(Lawton, 2024) can significantly reduce the risk of AI confabulation (i.e., plausible yet fabricated 
citations, factors, or text) (Maleki et al., 2024). Use of closed AI systems can be especially valuable 
for specialized information, such as ELD standards, where precise references are necessary to 
avoid confusion between different resources (e.g., the WIDA ELD Standards Framework vs. 
WIDA Can Do Descriptors). 

Indeed, uploading journal articles such as this one into closed-AI systems can transform 
scholarly writing into actionable templates, making it easier for educators to implement best 
practices. Still, the role of the educator as an active reviewer is irreplaceable: verifying content 
accuracy, ensuring current resources, and continually refining AI interactions are key 
responsibilities (Mosqueira‑Rey et al., 2023; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural 
Organization, 2021). In effect, while AI-powered solutions have the potential to greatly enhance 
instructional planning for multilingual learners, they are most effective when educators leverage 
these tools thoughtfully and maintain a central role in oversight and decision-making. 
 
Using Google NotebookLM to Generate Integrated Unit Goals and Lesson Objectives 
When Georgia educators “seed” a closed AI with vetted standards documents and planning 
templates, the AI LLM can draft unit goals, lesson objectives, and, with ongoing guidance, explore 
initial ideas for activities that braid together Georgia’s state academic content standards, the WIDA 
ELD Standards Framework, and structured-literacy routines in minutes rather than hours. Table 5 
includes a list of steps as well as source documents educators can upload to the closed-AI system. 
It includes a customized prompt designed to focus AI on the templates in this article.   
  



Shafer Willner 25 
 

Table 5 
Using Google NotebookLM for AI-Enhanced ELD Planning9 
 

Step Directions Additional Notes/Resources 
1 Go to Google Notebooks: 

https://notebooklm.google/ 
Use a closed AI system to restrict the range of source 
documents. Add templates to guide and improve the 
structure of responses. 

2 Upload specific state academic 
standards (ELA, math, science, 
social studies). 
Digital versions of Georgia CASE 
standards available at  
https://inspire.gadoe.org/standards  

Consider limiting documents to necessary grade-level 
standards by copying/pasting the standards into a 
document to be saved as a PDF. 

Always follow state and district guidelines about  
materials. GaDOE and WIDA’s educational standards 
are public domain; a few states may restrict the use of 
their state standards with AI. 

Digital versions of all state standards available at: 
https://casenetwork.1edtech.org/ 

3 Upload specific grade-level 
cluster WIDA Language 
Expectations from the WIDA 
ELD Standards Framework, 2020 
Edition and 2025 WIDA 
Language Charts (the streamlined, 
aligned version of the 2020 
WIDA Proficiency Level 
Descriptors). 

Use 2020 WIDA Language Expectations, not older 
standards editions from 2004-2016. Upload only the 
required grade-level cluster (e.g., K, 1, 2-3, etc.).  

• Obtain Language Expectations from the WIDA 
Standards Digital Explorer10: 
http://standards.wida.us 

• WIDA Language Charts (released in May 2025, 
both as PDFs and spreadsheets), found at 
https://wida.wisc.edu/revisingaccess 

4 If available, upload the state’s 
correspondence mapping. WIDA 
also has a correspondence 
mapping [associations] available 
in the table view in its Standards 
Digital Explorer. 

Each state’s correspondence mapping connects 
academic content standards with the WIDA ELD 
Standards Framework. Figure 2 provides a QR code 
for accessing this mapping. [The alt text for this figure 
contains its direct URL, which is very long.] 

5 Upload the PDF of this article. 
The article itself will serve as a 
source document 

This article includes prompts, templates,11 and model 
responses to use when guiding the AI tool. The 
appendix features a 3-week integrated unit template 

 
9 Reminder about Responsible Use of AI: This article's AI prompts, templates, and information are designed for 
public, instructional planning aligned with the WIDA ELD Standards Framework, 2020 Edition, specifically for use 
with non-sensitive content. Educators should avoid using them with student records or personally identifiable 
information (pii) and must ensure compliance with their local AI guidelines (University of Wisconsin–Madison, 
2025). 
10 Kudos to GaDOE staff Angela Ingram and Margaret Baker, who introduced WIDA staff to the Content and 
Academic Standards Exchange (CASE) (1EdTech, 2025), the open access specification used to digitally encode the 
WIDA standards into the WIDA Standards Digital Explorers (WIDA, 2025). 
11  Remember that AI requires ongoing dialogue between the user and the LLM. Over-dependence on 
fixed templates may result in outputs that are repetitive or lack authenticity (Gierl & Lai, 2013). 

 

https://notebooklm.google/
https://inspire.gadoe.org/standards
https://casenetwork.1edtech.org/
http://standards.wida.us/
https://wida.wisc.edu/revisingaccess


26 GATESOL Journal 34(1)  
 

Step Directions Additional Notes/Resources 
which is referenced by the sample AI prompt 
(Churchill & Shafer Willner, 2024). 

6 (Optional) Upload additional 
instructional planning templates. 

Add additional relevant resources or templates. 

7 (Optional) Upload the PDF of the 
CAST Universal Design for 
Learning Guidelines: 
https://udlguidelines.cast.org/. 

Incorporate evidence-based strategies to support 
diverse learning styles. UDL offers multiple means of 
engagement, representation, and action/expression to 
help English learners.  

8 Enter your prompt into the AI 
chat box.   
  

[Beginning of Sample Prompt] 
You are an expert ESOL educator in Georgia. 

Create two options for a 3-week integrated Social 
Studies, ELA, and ELD unit for Grade 1 English 
learners [multilingual learners]. The unit should 
include integrated unit goals and lesson objectives for 
language functions, language features, and 
foundational literacy. Refer to the templates in the 
uploaded copy of this article. 

Its ELD standards should be drawn from the 
uploaded Language Expectations and other 
components of the WIDA English Language 
Development Standards Framework, 2020 Edition. 
The content standards should be drawn from the 
uploaded state standards. Be sure to list the 
alphanumeric codes and full wording of the standards 
below the unit goals and lessons created. 

Literacy objectives and activities might include 
lesson objectives for comprehension, fluency, 
vocabulary, phonics, and phonemic awareness and 
answer the question: What [state ELA standards-
aligned foundational literacy skills] might ELs need to 
interpret and/or express the Language Functions and 
associated Language Features identified for the ELD 
lessons? Increase personalization for students in 
relation to the WIDA Language Charts dimensions 
and proficiency levels. Draw ideas for multimodal 
scaffolding from the CAST UDL Guidelines. 

Before launching the prompt, ask me questions 
about any additional information you may need to 
complete this task. 
[End of Sample Prompt] 

9 Refine the AI response with 
follow-up prompts. 

Use additional prompts to clarify integration of 
content-based language uses and further customize the 
response to meet individual student strengths and 
needs. 

10 Ask AI to improve your prompt. 
Save the newly refined prompt for 
future use. 

End each session with: "Please improve my original 
prompt." 

Note: Recommended source documents, resources, and worked examples mentioned in Table 5 
can be accessed at https://sites.google.com/view/ai-eld-planning/home. 

https://udlguidelines.cast.org/
https://sites.google.com/view/ai-eld-planning/home


Shafer Willner 27 
 

 Reminders About AI Prompts. The prompt in this article provides educators with 
a foundation for building their own standards-aligned prompts. Since AI LLMs determine 
responses based on the most likely next words, their output is inherently variable, not fixed. This 
means even slight changes to a prompt or updates to the LLM itself can produce different, yet 
valid, results. Always review AI-generated content for accuracy and appropriateness before use. 
 
 Sample AI Response. The following provides an excerpt from the Google 
NotebookLM response generated for this article. It spotlights integrated Social Studies, English 
language arts, and English Language Development unit goals for Grade 1, accompanied by 
integrated lesson objectives for discipline-specific academic language expansion, focused 
language study, and Literacy/ELD skill development.  
 
Grade 1 Integrated Unit Draft: American Heroes 
 
Integrated Unit Goal for Content-Based Language Learning: In social studies, when learning 
about "how people in the past helped make the world a better place" and the lives of historical 
figures in American history (GA Standard SS1H1, ELA.1.T.SS.2.a, ELA.1.T.RA.IV, 
ELA.1.F.PA.5, ELA.1.F.PA.6, ELA.1.F.P.1), ELs will interpret and express informational texts 
using the language for learning in ELD-SI.K-3.Inform, ELD-SS.1.Inform.Interpretive, and ELD-
SS.1.Inform.Expressive. 
 
 

ELD-SI.K-3.Inform  
Multilingual learners will… 
• Define and classify objects 

or concepts 
• Describe characteristics, 

patterns, or behavior 
• Describe parts and wholes 
• Sort, clarify, and summarize 

ideas 
• Summarize information 

from interaction with others 
and from learning 
experiences 
 

ELD-LA.1.Inform.Interpretive 
Multilingual learners will interpret 
informational texts in language arts 
by 
• Identifying main topic and/or 

entity and key details 
• Asking and answering 

questions about descriptions of 
attributes and characteristics 

• Identifying word choices in 
relation to topic or content area 

ELD-LA.1.Inform.Expressive 
Multilingual learners will 
construct informational texts in 
language arts that 
• Introduce and define 

topic and/or entity for 
audience 

• Describe attributes and 
characteristics with facts, 
definitions, and relevant 
details 

 

 
SS1H1  Read about and describe the life of historical figures in American history 
ELA. 1.T.SS.2.a Identify and explain the use of descriptive words in texts. 
ELA.1.T.RA.IV. BIG IDEA: Research & Analysis Students use, discuss, analyze, and curate 
texts as they engage in various conversations, activities, and projects about a range of grade-level 
texts and topics. 
1.F.PA.5 Onsets & Rimes Blend and segment onsets and rimes in spoken words. 
1.F.PA.6 Phonemic Awareness Identify and manipulate the individual sounds in spoken words 
1.F.P.1 Phoneme-Grapheme Correspondences Identify and produce phoneme-grapheme 
correspondences. 
 
  



28 GATESOL Journal 34(1)  
 

Table 6 
Sample Language Objectives 
 

 Language Functions 
Lesson 

Language Features 
Lesson 

ELD-Embedded 
Foundational Literacy Lesson 

Week 1: 
Introducing 
Benjamin 
Franklin 

Objective 1: When 
learning the language to 
Inform, English learners 
will learn to define and 
classify objects or 
concepts, with 
appropriate linguistic 
scaffolding, such as 
sentence stems. 

Objective 2: When 
defining and classifying 
objects or concepts, 
English learners will 
learn to select and adjust 
frequently used single-
word noun groups, with 
modeling and guided 
practice. 

Objective 3: While learning to 
select and adjust frequently 
used single-word noun groups 
during an ELD lesson, English 
learners will orally practice 
blending and segmenting target 
phonemes in genre-specific 
words (1.F.PA.6 Phonemic 
Awareness) using pictures of 
the words and colored counters 
for Elkonin [sound] boxes12. 

Week 2: 
Exploring 
Thomas 
Jefferson 

Objective 1: When 
learning the language to 
Inform, English learners 
will learn to describe 
characteristics, patterns, 
or behavior with 
educator modeling and 
the use of graphic 
organizers. 

Objective 2: When 
describing characteristics, 
patterns, or behavior, 
English learners will 
learn to select and adjust 
frequently used multi-
word noun groups with 
peer support. 

Objective 3: While learning to 
select and adjust frequently 
used multi-word noun groups 
during an ELD lesson, English 
learners will practice blending 
sounds using magnetic letters 
and a list of target rimes to 
build words in a “Make-a-
Word” center. (1.F.PA.5 Onsets 
& Rimes)    

Week 3: 
Researching 
a Hero 

Objective 1: When 
learning the language to 
Inform, English learners 
will learn to summarize 
information from 
interaction with others 
and from learning 
experiences through 
small-group research 
projects. 

Objective 2: When 
summarizing information 
from interaction with 
others and from learning 
experiences, English 
learners will learn to 
select and adjust multi-
word noun groups with 
connectors, with 
opportunities for 
independent practice. 

Objective 3: While learning to 
select and adjust multi-word 
noun groups with connectors 
during an ELD lesson, English 
learners will practice 
identifying and producing 
phoneme-grapheme 
correspondences by writing the 
letter in a sand tray or forming 
it with play-doh, and saying the 
sound aloud.   [1.F.P.1 
Phoneme-Grapheme 
Correspondences). 

Due to space considerations, shortened versions are included here. The full response generated for 
this AI prompt can be retrieved from https://sites.google.com/view/ai-eld-planning/home.   
 
  

 
12 Expert educator advice on use of Elkonin boxes to determine the difference between a language development and 
a disability appears on page 16 of the WIDA Focus Bulletin Identifying multilingual learners with specific learning 
disabilities: Data, advice, and resources for school teams (Shafer Willner, 2025). 

https://case.georgiastandards.org/391c3abe-c1ec-4a4a-a942-c9e152b35102/b207e2b2-38ec-4ac9-88b9-c1ffc27196d7/306
https://case.georgiastandards.org/391c3abe-c1ec-4a4a-a942-c9e152b35102/b207e2b2-38ec-4ac9-88b9-c1ffc27196d7/306
https://case.georgiastandards.org/391c3abe-c1ec-4a4a-a942-c9e152b35102/5ab86f6f-5eab-4263-b830-c7102f26c164/303
https://case.georgiastandards.org/391c3abe-c1ec-4a4a-a942-c9e152b35102/5ab86f6f-5eab-4263-b830-c7102f26c164/303
https://sites.google.com/view/ai-eld-planning/home


Shafer Willner 29 
 

Discussion and Recommendations 
ELs’ success in schooling increasingly relies on instruction that integrates ELD, foundational 
literacy, and content standards (Blitz, 2025; Uccelli et al., 2015). To support Georgia educators, 
this article provides research-based guidance and planning templates for concise, standards-
aligned unit goals and lesson objectives. It illustrates how AI prompt frameworks and closed-AI 
systems might automate standards mapping, streamline teacher workflows and support best 
practices in lesson design. Automating routine planning tasks gives educators more time for 
meaningful, collaborative planning (Wen & Jiang, 2025).  In turn, collaborative planning among 
content, language, and literacy educators produces more accessible and challenging content for 
diverse learners (Baker et al., 2014). 

To be effective, AI-powered, integrated unit and lesson planning must be paired with 
training that supports sound instructional decision-making so teachers can thoughtfully prompt, 
evaluate, and customize AI outputs. By combining structured templates with a closed-AI system 
limited to vetted documents, educators can streamline planning by leveraging AI for routine tasks, 
thereby reserving educator expertise for deepening instructional design and directly addressing 
learner diversity and leading to stronger outcomes for ELs. 
 
Future Research Directions 
Integrating foundational literacy into content-based language learning is a critical step toward 
improving outcomes for ELs. Pilot studies might examine how AI tools affect content, language, 
and literacy educators’ collaborative planning time, conversations, the quality of resulting goals, 
objectives, and the broad range of activities, assessments, curricula, and scaffolding involved. An 
iterative cycle of research and refinement is essential to improving both planning practices and EL 
learning outcomes. 
 
References 
 
1EdTech. (2025). Competencies and academic standards exchange (CASE). https://www. 

1edtech.org/standards/case 
Baker, S., Lesaux, N., Jayanthi, M., Dimino, J., Proctor, C. P., Morris, J., Gersten, R., Haymond, 

K., Kieffer, M. J., Linan-Thompson, S., & Newman-Gonchar, R. (2014). Teaching 
academic content and literacy to English learners in elementary and middle school (NCEE 
2014-4012). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute 
of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/WWC/
PracticeGuide/19 

Bailey, A. L., & Butler, F. A. (2003). An evidentiary framework for operationalizing academic 
language for broad application to K–12 education: A design document. Center for the 
Study of Evaluation, CRESST/UCLA. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED483026.pdf 

Blitz, J. (2025). Implementing evidence-based instructional practices for English learners: Using 
research to guide practice. U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language 
Acquisition.   

Center for Applied Special Technology. (2024). Universal design for learning guidelines version 
3.0. https://udlguidelines.cast.org/ 

https://www.1edtech.org/standards/case
https://www.1edtech.org/standards/case
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/WWC/PracticeGuide/19
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/WWC/PracticeGuide/19
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED483026.pdf
https://udlguidelines.cast.org/


30 GATESOL Journal 34(1)  
 

Churchill, M., & Shafer Willner, L. (2024). Road map for implementation of the WIDA English 
language development standards framework. Presentation at the May 2024 New Jersey 
Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages/New Jersey Bilingual Education 
Association Spring Virtual Conference. 

Council of the Great City Schools. (2017). Re-envisioning English language arts and English 
language development for English language learners. (2nd ed.). https://www.cgcs.org/
cms/lib/DC00001581/Centricity/domain/4/darrell/CGCS_ReinvisEngLang_pub_Rev_fin
al.pdf 

Council of the Great City Schools. (2023). A framework for foundational literacy skills instruction 
for English learners: Instructional practice and material considerations. 
https://www.cgcs.org/Page/1577 

Dziubata, Z. (2024). Application of AI technologies in teaching ESL and ESP at agro-technical 
higher educational institutions. Педагогічний дискурс/Pedagogical Discourse, 35, 14-18. 
https://ojs.kgpa.km.ua/index.php/peddiscourse/article/view/1199/1081  

Edelman, E., Amirazizi, S., Feinberg, D., Quirk, M., Scheller, J., Pagán, C., & Persson, J. (2022). 
A comparison of integrated and designated ELD models on second and third graders’ oral 
English language. TESOL Journal, 13(3), e659. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.659   

Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015, Pub. L. No. 114-95, 114 Stat. 1177 (2015). 
Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press. 
García, O., & Kleifgen, J. A. (2022). Educating emergent bilinguals: Policies, programs, and 

practices for English learners (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press. 
Georgia Department of Education. (2025a). Revised Georgia Standards for English Language Arts 

(ELA). https://case.georgiastandards.org/ 
Georgia Department of Education. (2025b). Georgia inspire (Georgia Department of Education 

Learning Standards published in CASE® format). https://inspire.gadoe.org/standards 
Gierl, M. J., & Lai, H. (2013). Instructional topics in educational measurement (ITEMS) Module: 

Using automated processes to generate test items. Educational Measurement, 32(3), 36-
50.  https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12018 

Johnson, A. (2022). Achievement and growth for English learners. Educational Policy, 37(4), 
1044–1069.  https://doi.org/10.1177/08959048211049419  

Kray, F., Daniels, J., Mossgrove, T., Nelson, C., Park, H., & Paton, M. (2023). WIDA 
implementation guide: English language development standards framework. Board of 
Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. https://wida.wisc.edu/resources/
implementation-guide-wida-eld-standards-framework 

Lawton, G. (2024). Attributes of open vs. closed AI explained. TechTarget. 
https://www.techtarget.com/searchenterpriseai/feature/Attributes-of-open-vs-closed-AI-
explained 

Mahan, K. R., & de Zarobe, Y. R. (2025). Scaffolding English language learners. In Z. Tajeddin 
& T. S. Farrell (Eds.), Handbook of language teacher education (pp. 1-33). Springer 

https://www.cgcs.org/cms/lib/DC00001581/Centricity/domain/4/darrell/CGCS_ReinvisEngLang_pub_Rev_final.pdf
https://www.cgcs.org/cms/lib/DC00001581/Centricity/domain/4/darrell/CGCS_ReinvisEngLang_pub_Rev_final.pdf
https://www.cgcs.org/cms/lib/DC00001581/Centricity/domain/4/darrell/CGCS_ReinvisEngLang_pub_Rev_final.pdf
https://www.cgcs.org/Page/1577
https://ojs.kgpa.km.ua/index.php/peddiscourse/article/view/1199/1081
https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.659
https://case.georgiastandards.org/
https://inspire.gadoe.org/standards
https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12018
https://doi.org/10.1177/08959048211049419
https://wida.wisc.edu/resources/implementation-guide-wida-eld-standards-framework
https://wida.wisc.edu/resources/implementation-guide-wida-eld-standards-framework
https://www.techtarget.com/searchenterpriseai/feature/Attributes-of-open-vs-closed-AI-explained
https://www.techtarget.com/searchenterpriseai/feature/Attributes-of-open-vs-closed-AI-explained


Shafer Willner 31 
 

International Handbooks of Education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-
43208-8_19-1 

Maleki, N., Padmanabhan, B., & Dutta, K. (2024). AI hallucinations: A misnomer worth clarifying. 
arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2401.06796 

Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2007). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause (2nd ed.). 
Continuum. 

Mosqueira-Rey, E., Hernández-Pereira, E., Alonso-Ríos, D., Bobes-Bascarán, J., & 
Fernández-Leal, Á. (2023). Human-in-the-loop machine learning: A state of the art. 
Artificial Intelligence Review, 56, 3005–3054. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-022-10246-
w 

National Center for Education Statistics. (2024). English learners in public schools. U.S. 
Department of Education. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgf/english-
learners-in-public-schools 

Rhinehart, L. V., Bailey, A. L., & Haager, D. (2024). Long-term English learners: Untangling 
language acquisition and learning disabilities. Contemporary School Psychology, 28, 173–
185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-022-00420-w 

Schleppegrell, M. J. (2020). The knowledge base for language teaching: What is the English to be 
taught as content? Language Teaching Research, 24 (1), 17-27. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818777519 

Shafer Willner, L. (2023a). WIDA correspondence mapping of the match, breadth, consistency, 
and depth of language opportunities in state K–12 English language arts, mathematics, 
science, and social studies standards (WCER Working Paper No. 2023-3). Wisconsin 
Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin–Madison. https://wcer.wisc.edu/
publications/abstract/wcer-working-paper-no-2023-3   

Shafer Willner, L. (2023b). Save time! Streamline your unit and lesson planning using the WIDA 
Standards Digital Explorer. NJTESOL/NJBE Voices. https://voices.njtesol-njbe.org/
annual-voices-journal-2023/streamline-your-unit  

Shafer Willner, L. (2025). WIDA Focus on: Identifying multilingual learners with specific learning 
disabilities: Data, advice, and resources for school teams.  WIDA and the Board of 
Regents of the University of Wisconsin System.  https://wida.wisc.edu/resources/FB/
identifying-multilingual-learners-specific-learning-disabilities-data-advice-and  

Short, D. J. (2017). How to integrate content and language learning effectively for English 
language learners. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 
13(7b), 4237–4260. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00806a 

The Reading League & National Committee for Effective Literacy. (2023). Understanding the 
difference: The science of reading and implementation for English learners/emergent 
bilinguals (ELs/EBs). The Reading League. https://www.thereadingleague.org/wp-
content/uploads/2023/09/TRLC-ELEB-Understanding-the-Difference-The-Science-of-
Reading-and-Implementation.pdf 

Uccelli, P., Galloway, E. P., Barr, C. D., Meneses, A., & Dobbs, C. L. (2015). Beyond vocabulary: 
Exploring cross-disciplinary academic‐language proficiency and its association with 

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-43208-8_19-1
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-43208-8_19-1
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2401.06796
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-022-10246-w
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-022-10246-w
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgf/english-learners-in-public-schools
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgf/english-learners-in-public-schools
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-022-00420-w
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818777519
https://wcer.wisc.edu/publications/abstract/wcer-working-paper-no-2023-3
https://wcer.wisc.edu/publications/abstract/wcer-working-paper-no-2023-3
https://wida.wisc.edu/resources/wida-eld-standards-framework-2020-digital-explorer
https://voices.njtesol-njbe.org/%E2%80%8Cannual-voices-journal-2023/streamline-your-unit
https://voices.njtesol-njbe.org/%E2%80%8Cannual-voices-journal-2023/streamline-your-unit
https://wida.wisc.edu/resources/FB/identifying-multilingual-learners-specific-learning-disabilities-data-advice-and
https://wida.wisc.edu/resources/FB/identifying-multilingual-learners-specific-learning-disabilities-data-advice-and
https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00806a
https://www.thereadingleague.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/TRLC-ELEB-Understanding-the-Difference-The-Science-of-Reading-and-Implementation.pdf
https://www.thereadingleague.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/TRLC-ELEB-Understanding-the-Difference-The-Science-of-Reading-and-Implementation.pdf
https://www.thereadingleague.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/TRLC-ELEB-Understanding-the-Difference-The-Science-of-Reading-and-Implementation.pdf


32 GATESOL Journal 34(1)  
 

reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 50(3), 337–356. https://doi.org/
10.1002/rrq.104  

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2021). AI and education: 
Guidance for policy-makers. https://doi.org/10.54675/PCSP7350   

University of Wisconsin–Madison. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence general use 
guidelines. https://it.wisc.edu/generative-ai-services-uw-madison/generative-ai-uw-
madison-use-policies/ 

Wen, H., & Jiang, Y. (2025). In-service teachers' perspectives on using AI for lesson planning. In 
R. J. Cohen (Ed.), Proceedings of the society for information technology & teacher 
education international conference (pp. 3044–3048). Association for the Advancement of 
Computing in Education. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/225906. 

WIDA. (2020). WIDA English language development standards framework, 2020 edition: 
Kindergarten–grade 12. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. 
https://wida.wisc.edu/teach/standards/eld  

WIDA. (2021). WIDA English language development standards framework, 2020 edition FAQ 
series: Language expectations. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin system. 
https://wida.wisc.edu/sites/default/files/Website/News/2021/February/WIDA-
StandardsFAQ-LanguageExpectations.pdf 

WIDA. (2023). Understanding multilingual learners. https://wida.wisc.edu/teach/learners 
WIDA. (2025). WIDA language charts: Tying ACCESS scores to classroom instruction. 

https://wida.wisc.edu/revisingaccess  
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Association for 

Supervision and Curriculum Development. 
Yan, L., Sha, L., Zhao, L., Li, Y., Martinez-Maldonado, R.,Chen, G., Li, X., Jin, Y., & Gašević, 

D. (2023). Practical and ethical challenges of large language models in education: A 
systematic scoping review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55, 90–112. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13370  

 
____________________________________________________________________________ 
 

Received: November 5, 2024 | Accepted: August 22, 2025 | Published: October 2025 
 
  

https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.104
https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.104
https://doi.org/10.54675/PCSP7350
https://it.wisc.edu/generative-ai-services-uw-madison/generative-ai-uw-madison-use-policies/
https://it.wisc.edu/generative-ai-services-uw-madison/generative-ai-uw-madison-use-policies/
https://www.learntechlib.org/p/225906
https://wida.wisc.edu/teach/standards/eld
https://wida.wisc.edu/sites/default/files/Website/News/2021/February/WIDA-StandardsFAQ-LanguageExpectations.pdf
https://wida.wisc.edu/sites/default/files/Website/News/2021/February/WIDA-StandardsFAQ-LanguageExpectations.pdf
https://wida.wisc.edu/teach/learners
https://wida.wisc.edu/revisingaccess
https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13370


Shafer Willner 33 
 

Appendix A: Sample Templates for a Three-Week Integrated Unit 
 

This simplified three-week unit template was developed by NJTESOL/NJBE presenter Maggie 
Churchill (Closter Public School District, NJ) and Shafer Willner. It can be used by the AI tool as 
a model for the basic framing of an integrated Social Studies/ELA/ELD unit. The unit unfolds over 
three weeks (reflected in Table A-1), with sequential activities leading to weekly outcomes. 
Formative assessments gauge student reliance on the provided linguistic or UDL scaffolding 
(Table A-2) and occur at the end of Weeks 1 and 2.  
 To gauge end-of-unit language growth throughout the school year, classroom-based 
summative assessments can be utilized for individual end-of-unit assessments. These assessments 
of students’ linguistic growth can reference either the WIDA Proficiency Level Descriptors 
(WIDA, 2020) or the May 2025 WIDA Language Charts (which offer streamlined, aligned 
versions of the PLDs). Educator observations and reflections about formative or summative 
assessment data can be used to inform instructional next steps (WIDA, 2025). 
 
Table A1  
Sample Template for a Three-Week Integrated Unit (Churchill & Shafer Willner, 2024) 
 

Unit Planning 

• Essential Question: Create an essential question, big idea [enduring understanding], or theme that 
connects ELD, content, and ELA/literacy standards, guiding inquiry-based learning and 
interdisciplinary connections. 

• Unit Goals: Create an overarching set of unit goals from which lesson objectives might be pulled. 
• Formative Assessments: Use ongoing formative assessments to measure student progress and adjust 

instruction as needed. 

  Lesson Planning Activity 
Sequences 

Weekly 
Outcome  

Assessments 

Week 1 Lesson: Build the Field 
Build student knowledge to enhance comprehension 
and engagement with complex texts 

• Objective 1: Introduce a Language Function (a 
prominent disciplinary language pattern) 

• Objective 2: Learn to use associated Language 
Features 

• Objective 3: Practice Foundational Literacy Skills 

A
ct

iv
ity

 1
 

 
A

ct
iv

ity
 2

 

 
A

ct
iv

ity
 3

 

 Task or 
Product 

Week 1 Formative 
Assessment: Gauge 
the student’s 
reliance on the 
scaffold and/or 
sentence stem 
provided for this 
task. [See Table A-2 
Model.]  

Week 2 Lesson: Deconstruction 

The process of analyzing a text to understand how its 
meaning is constructed through language 

• Objective 1: Introduce a Language Function (a 
prominent disciplinary language pattern) 

• Objective 2: Learn to use associated Language 
Features 

• Objective 3: Practice Foundational Literacy Skills 

A
ct

iv
ity

 4
 

A
ct

iv
ity

 5
 

A
ct

iv
ity

 6
 

 Task or 
Product 

Week 2 Formative 
Assessment. Which 
version of the chart 
was used to 
complete the task. 
[See Table A-2 
Model.] 

 



34 GATESOL Journal 34(1)  
 

Week 3 Lesson: Co-Construction 

The process of creating meaning through language by 
making deliberate choices about how to organize and 
use linguistic resources to achieve a specific purpose  

• Objective 1: Introduce a Language Function (a 
prominent disciplinary language pattern) 

• Objective 2: Learn to use associated Language 
Features 

• Objective 3: Practice Foundational Literacy Skills 

A
ct

iv
ity

 7
 

A
ct

iv
ity

 8
 

A
ct

iv
ity

 8
 Culminat-

ing 
Activity, 
Essay, or 
Project 

End-of-unit/ 
summative language 
assessment of 
student work using 
the WIDA PLDs [or 
the aligned WIDA 
Language Charts] 

 
 
Table A2 
Formative Assessment Model 
 

Emerging (1)  Developing (2)  Bridging (3) Independent (4) 
Student can complete 
the sentence 
frame/chart after 
working with their 
partner. 

Student relies heavily 
on sentence 
frame/chart when 
sharing. 

Student can complete 
sentence frame/chart before 
working with partner. 

Sharing with partner helps 
to clarify student thinking. 

Student might rely on 
sentence frame/chart when 
sharing with whole group 
(or be reminded to do so). 

Student can complete 
sentence frame/chart 
before working with 
partner. 

Student might share using 
own words; might 
occasionally reference on 
the sentence frame/chart. 

Student can complete 
sentence frame/chart 
before working with 
partner. 

Student can easily 
share using own 
words.   

 
 


	GATESOL Journal2025, Vol. 34(1), pp. 17–34
	AI-Powered, Integrated Unit Goals and Lesson Objectives for K-12 English Learners
	doi:10.52242/gatesol.199
	ISSN: 2331-6845

