ELP Strategies Integrated Instruction Lesson Assignment
A field-by-field walkthrough of the Week 6 summative template — what each section is asking for, how to write it well, and the mistakes that cost marks. No filler. Just what you need to get it done right.
📚 Need a professionally completed SEI 506 lesson plan? Our education specialists are ready.
Get Expert Help →What the Week 6 Assignment Is Actually Asking For
The SEI 506 Week 6 Summative Assessment asks you to design a complete integrated instruction lesson that weaves English Language Proficiency (ELP) strategies into content-area teaching — in Social Studies, Math, or Science. You fill out an 11-field template. Every field has a specific purpose. This guide shows you exactly what goes in each one.
The key word in the assignment title is integrated. The lesson isn’t about ELP in isolation and it isn’t a standalone content lesson. It’s both at once. Your ELP standard and your content-area ELA or content standard have to be working toward the same learning goal inside the same lesson. If they’re sitting in separate rows with no visible connection, you haven’t integrated them — you’ve listed them.
The template is straightforward but the fields trip people up in specific, predictable ways. The ELP standard coding format is one. Aligning the learning objective to both standards simultaneously is another. The four lesson outline sections — explicit, guided, independent, assessment — are the bulk of the work, and they need to be specific enough that someone else could pick up your plan and teach it.
Grade Level + Content Area
These set the frame for every other decision. Your ELP standard coding, your ELA standard, your vocabulary complexity — all of it flows from grade and subject.
ELP Standard Coding
The most technical field. Requires a specific format from p.13 of the 2019 ELPS Guidance Document. Grade + standard number + sub-skill + full verbiage.
ELA Standard Coding
Pick the ELA standard that connects naturally to what your content lesson is doing. This is where the integration lives on paper.
Learning Objective
One sentence. Measurable. Hits both the language goal and the content goal. Students + action verb + condition + criteria.
Differentiation + Supports
Show you know how ELLs at different proficiency levels need different scaffolds. Specify by level — not just “use visuals.”
Lesson Outline (4 Sections)
Explicit instruction, guided practice, independent practice, and assessment + feedback. Each needs concrete, teachable steps — not vague descriptions.
How to Write the ELP Standard Coding Correctly
This is the field most students get wrong. The template tells you to refer to page 13 of the 2019 English Language Proficiency Standards Guidance Document (Arizona Department of Education) for the correct format. That document is publicly available at the ADE website. The format includes four pieces: grade level, standard number, sub-skill, and the full verbiage of the standard.
The 2019 Arizona ELP Standards are organized around five language domains — Reading, Writing, Listening, Speaking, and Language — and within those, standards are numbered. Each standard can have sub-skills noted by a letter or additional descriptor. You need all four elements. Leaving out the verbiage or writing a paraphrase instead of the actual standard language is an error markers will catch.
| Component | What It Means | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Grade | The grade level of your lesson | Grade 4 |
| Standard Number | The numbered ELP standard from the 2019 ELPS document | Standard 2 |
| Sub-Skill | The specific sub-skill letter or descriptor within that standard | Sub-skill b |
| Verbiage | The exact wording from the standard document — copied, not paraphrased | “Read informational texts to identify main idea and key details using context clues.” |
How to Find the Right ELP Standard for Your Lesson
Start with your content goal — what are students doing in the lesson? Reading a text, listening to an explanation, discussing in groups, writing a response? That action maps to a language domain. Then look at the 2019 ELPS document and find the standard in that domain that matches what students will actually be doing linguistically. Don’t pick a standard because it sounds good on paper. Pick the one that describes the real language skill your lesson requires. The tighter that fit, the more coherent your lesson plan looks to the marker.
Aligning Your ELA Standard to the ELP Standard
The ELA Standard Coding field follows a parallel format: grade, strand, standard number, and verbiage. For Arizona, these come from the Arizona English Language Arts Standards. For other states, use the applicable state ELA standards or Common Core if that’s what your program is using — check your course materials if you’re unsure.
The purpose of having both an ELP and an ELA standard in the same lesson isn’t just compliance. It’s the theoretical backbone of sheltered English immersion. You’re teaching language through content. So the ELA standard tells you what students are doing with text or language, and the ELP standard tells you how they’re developing English proficiency while doing it.
The Format for ELA Standard Coding
Include: Grade level + ELA strand abbreviation + standard number + exact verbiage. For example: Grade 4, RI.4.2 — “Determine the main idea of a text and explain how it is supported by key details; summarize the text.” Don’t abbreviate the verbiage or write your own version of it. Copy the actual standard language.
Writing a Learning Objective That Actually Does the Job
A learning objective is one sentence. It describes what students will be able to do by the end of the lesson — not what the teacher will do, not what the lesson covers, not a restatement of the standard. It has to be measurable, which means it needs a concrete action verb and some indication of the expected performance level or condition.
For an integrated lesson, the objective has to capture both the language dimension and the content dimension. That doesn’t mean two objectives crammed into one awkward sentence. It means choosing a verb and a task that are genuinely bilingual — where the language skill and the content skill are the same act.
Students will identify the main idea and two supporting details from an informational science text by completing a graphic organizer using academic vocabulary from the word wall.
— Example of an integrated ELP + content learning objective: language (identify, academic vocabulary), content (main idea, science text), measurable condition (graphic organizer), supported scaffold (word wall)| Element | Purpose | Weak Version | Stronger Version |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Who is doing the learning | “The lesson will…” | “Students will…” |
| Action Verb | Observable, measurable behavior | “understand” | “identify,” “explain,” “compare,” “construct” |
| Content | What they’re doing it with | “the topic” | “the main idea of an informational text about ecosystems” |
| Condition / Scaffold | How — especially for ELLs | (often omitted) | “using a graphic organizer and sentence frames” |
Avoid These Objective-Writing Mistakes
- Using “understand” or “learn” — neither is measurable
- Writing the objective as a restatement of the standard verbatim
- Forgetting to connect language and content — if it could work for a monolingual classroom without modification, it’s not integrated
- Making it so broad it covers three lessons instead of one
Differentiation Strategies and Supports for ELLs
This field is where a lot of students write something generic like “use visuals and provide sentence frames.” That’s a start, but it’s not enough on its own. Differentiation for ELLs means accounting for different proficiency levels — entering, emerging, developing, expanding, bridging — and specifying what support looks like at each level, or at least at a few distinct points along that spectrum.
Think about what students at different levels actually need to access the lesson. A student at the entering level may need a bilingual glossary, picture-labeled vocabulary cards, and a partially completed graphic organizer. A student at the expanding level might need sentence frames with academic vocabulary and peer discussion prompts. A student approaching bridging might need extended writing opportunities and challenge questions. Same lesson. Different access points.
Entering / Emerging
Bilingual glossaries, picture-word vocabulary cards, sentence starters with fill-in-the-blank structure, pre-filled graphic organizers, native language support where appropriate.
Developing
Sentence frames with academic vocabulary choices, partially completed organizers, visual supports for text, structured partner discussion roles, word banks for writing tasks.
Expanding / Bridging
Open-ended sentence prompts, extended writing or discussion tasks, peer review protocols, academic language challenge questions, opportunities to justify and elaborate.
Universal Scaffolds
Word wall with visuals, think-pair-share structures, clear visual lesson agenda, chunked instructions given one at a time, modeled examples before student practice.
Be Specific, Not General
Instead of “use graphic organizers,” write: “Provide a two-column graphic organizer with the headers ‘Main Idea’ and ‘Supporting Details’ partially pre-filled for entering and emerging ELLs, with academic vocabulary from the word wall printed at the bottom of the page.” That specificity tells the marker you know what you’re doing. According to TESOL International Association, effective ELL differentiation requires proactive planning for language demands — not reactive adjustment after the lesson starts. (TESOL, 2018, The 6 Principles for Exemplary Teaching of English Learners.)
The Four Lesson Outline Sections — What Each One Requires
These four sections make up the instructional heart of your lesson plan. They follow a logical sequence: you model, students practice with support, students practice alone, and you assess. Each section has a specific question it’s answering. Don’t mix them up or let one bleed into another.
Explicit Instruction — What you model, step by step
The template asks: What step-by-step procedures will you model in the instructional portion of this lesson?
This is the “I do” phase. You’re not describing the topic. You’re describing exactly what the teacher does to model the skill. Think aloud protocols, demonstrating the graphic organizer while narrating your thinking, reading the first paragraph and showing students how to identify the main idea before they try it themselves.
Write this as steps. Step 1: Introduce the vocabulary using the word wall and visuals. Step 2: Read the first paragraph of the text aloud, pausing to think aloud about which sentence states the main idea. Step 3: Model how to record the main idea on the graphic organizer using a complete sentence with the provided sentence frame. That’s the level of specificity this section needs.
Guided Instruction — What students do together, with support
The template asks: What learning activity will students do in a group setting that allows them to practice and apply what they have learned?
This is the “we do” phase. Students are working in pairs or small groups. The teacher is circulating, prompting, supporting — not re-teaching from the front. Describe the actual activity: what students are reading, discussing, or producing. Include how ELP supports function during this phase — are students using sentence frames? A word bank? Structured discussion roles?
A jigsaw, a paired reading with a shared graphic organizer, a structured academic controversy — whatever it is, name the structure and describe the task clearly enough that the activity is recognizable and teachable.
Independent Practice — What students do on their own
The template asks: What learning activity will students do individually that allows them to practice and apply what they have learned?
This is the “you do” phase. Students work alone. The task should be achievable without teacher support because the explicit and guided phases have already prepared them. But scaffolds — sentence frames, word wall, graphic organizer template — are still available.
Describe the actual product: reading a second text and completing a graphic organizer independently, writing a paragraph using the sentence frame, answering constructed response questions about the text. The independent practice task is also usually what you assess — so it should align with your learning objective directly.
Assessment and Feedback — How you evaluate and respond
The template asks: What formative assessment will you use to evaluate students? How will you provide feedback to students?
Two questions in one field. Answer both. Formative assessment means during or immediately after the lesson — exit tickets, graphic organizer review, observation notes, thumbs up/down comprehension checks. Not a unit test. Not a quiz next week.
Then explain specifically how feedback works: Do you mark the exit ticket and return it with written comments? Do you use a two-star-and-a-wish protocol? Do you pull a small group based on what you see in their organizers? Be concrete. “Provide feedback” isn’t an answer — it’s a placeholder.
Every Template Field — What to Write and What to Avoid
Here’s the full template reproduced with guidance for each row. Use this as a checklist before you submit.
Integrated Instruction Lesson Template — SEI 506 v4
Week 6 Summative AssessmentCommon Errors in the SEI 506 Week 6 Assignment
| ❌ Common Error | Why It Costs Marks | ✓ The Fix |
|---|---|---|
| ELP standard coding format is wrong or incomplete | The template explicitly links to p.13 of the ELPS guidance document — ignoring that format signals you didn’t read the instructions | Open the ADE ELPS Guidance Document, go to p.13, and follow the format exactly: grade, standard number, sub-skill, full verbiage copied verbatim |
| ELP and ELA standards don’t align | The whole point of the assignment is integration — misaligned standards mean there’s nothing integrated about the lesson | Pick standards that describe the same cognitive and language task. If students are identifying main idea in informational text, both standards should live in that same space |
| Learning objective isn’t measurable | Verbs like “understand,” “appreciate,” or “learn about” can’t be observed or assessed — markers know this and penalize it | Use Bloom’s action verbs: identify, compare, explain, construct, summarize, justify. Then add a measurable condition (graphic organizer, written paragraph, exit ticket) |
| Differentiation is generic — “use visuals” — without level-specific detail | SEI 506 is specifically about ELL differentiation. Vague answers suggest surface-level understanding of ELP strategy | Specify at least two proficiency levels and describe what the scaffold looks like concretely for each. Different organizer templates, different sentence frame complexity, different vocabulary support |
| The four lesson outline sections blur together | Guided and independent practice often get merged, or explicit instruction becomes a topic description rather than a modeling sequence | Explicit = teacher models step by step. Guided = students practice together with teacher circulating. Independent = students work alone. Assessment = you collect data and respond. Keep them separate and specific |
| Assessment section only answers one of the two questions | The template asks what formative assessment you’ll use AND how you’ll provide feedback — answering only one leaves the second criterion unaddressed | Name your assessment tool (exit ticket, graphic organizer review, observation checklist) and separately describe exactly how you’ll communicate feedback to students and when |
| Content area is ELA instead of Science, Math, or Social Studies | The template explicitly limits the choice to three content areas — choosing ELA misunderstands the sheltered instruction framework | Pick one of the three specified content areas. The ELA standard codes a language standard; the content is delivered through Science, Math, or Social Studies |
Pre-Submission Checklist
- ELP standard coding includes grade, standard number, sub-skill, and exact verbiage from the 2019 ELPS document
- ELA standard coding includes grade, strand, standard number, and exact verbiage
- Both standards address the same language and cognitive task
- Learning objective uses a measurable verb and specifies a condition or scaffold
- Differentiation strategies name at least two ELL proficiency levels with distinct supports
- Resources listed are specific enough that someone else could gather them
- Explicit instruction is written as numbered teacher-modeling steps
- Guided instruction names a collaborative structure and describes the student task
- Independent practice gives students a concrete, individual product to complete
- Assessment field answers both: the assessment tool AND the feedback method