# Plan Lesson > Plan a single class lesson using Understanding by Design (UbD) — backwards design from learning targets → evidence of understanding → learning activities. Use when the teacher says "plan a lesson", "design a lesson", "help me think through a class", "what should I teach for X", or wants pedagogical scaffolding before deciding what students will do. Produces a conversational UbD brief (Stages 1–3 scaled for one class session) and offers handoff to `post-lesson-page` when ready to materialize on Canvas. Does NOT create any Canvas artifacts itself. - Skill: `awesome-town/plan-lesson` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add awesome-town/plan-lesson` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/awesome-town/plan-lesson/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - Author: awesome-town (https://skillmd.com/u/awesome-town) - Updated: 2026-09-22 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/awesome-town/plan-lesson --- # Plan Lesson Think a single class session through using **Understanding by Design (UbD)** — start with what students should understand, design how you'll know they got there, then build the activities that get them there. Lesson-scaled: 1–2 learning targets, one formative check, one class arc. Produces a UbD brief in chat; offers handoff to `post-lesson-page` when the teacher's ready to materialize it on Canvas. > **This skill writes nothing to Canvas.** It's a pedagogical thinking partner. Posting is a separate skill (`post-lesson-page`) the teacher can run once the brief is locked. ## When to use A teacher is figuring out what to teach for a single class session and wants a framework. Common phrasings: * "Plan a lesson on the water cycle for DSGN 9 — help me think through it" * "I'm teaching prototyping tomorrow, not sure how to structure it" * "Design a lesson on parallel circuits using UbD" * "What's a good way to frame this watershed lesson?" * "Help me think backwards from what I want students to understand" ## When NOT to use * **The teacher already knows what they're teaching and just wants it on Canvas.** That's `post-lesson-page`. Don't make them think backwards if they don't want to. * **Multi-class units or modules.** That's `plan-module` (which has its own UbD path scaled to multi-lesson arcs). * **Assessments / tests / projects.** That's `plan-assessment` for the page, `post-quiz` for the actual Canvas Quiz object. * **Whole-course scaffolding.** That's `plan-course`. ## Prerequisites * canvas-mcp **v0.3.16 or later** installed if you want school defaults (class period length, current academic week) pulled via `get_school_info`. The skill works without canvas-mcp for pure ideation, but will have to ask the teacher for period length and module context every time. * No Canvas writes happen in this skill. No `published: false` worry, no draft creation — this is a chat-only working document. ## Workflow ### 1. Establish context Confirm with the teacher (asking only for what's missing): * **Lesson topic / focus.** What's the lesson about, in one phrase. If they gave a working title, use it; otherwise propose one. * **Class duration.** **First**, call `get_school_info` once at the start of step 1. If `academic_calendar.class_period_minutes` is set, use it silently as the default (e.g., Franklin = 50 min). Only ask if the school config doesn't specify a period length AND the teacher didn't either. * **Where does this lesson sit?** Standalone, or part of an existing Canvas module / unit plan? If part of a module, optionally call `list_modules(course_identifier)` + `get_page_content` on the module's outcomes page to pull the module's enduring understandings and essential questions — the lesson should advance those, not invent new ones. * **Which Canvas course?** Only needed if you'll pull module context or call `list_competencies`. If the teacher is purely ideating without a course in mind, skip this — you don't need a course to think about a lesson. Don't over-confirm. If the teacher said "plan a 60-min lesson on prototyping for DSGN 9," you have topic, duration, and course — move on. ### 2. Stage 1 — Desired Results For a single lesson, scope is smaller than a module. Identify: **Learning targets** (1–2 statements, SWBAT form — "Students will be able to…"). Specific, observable, achievable in one class. Distinguish for the teacher: | Not this | But this | | ----------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Topic: "watersheds" | Target: "SWBAT diagram the path of water through a local watershed" | | Fact: "watersheds drain to oceans" | Target: "SWBAT explain why endorheic basins don't drain to oceans" | | Activity: "build a watershed model" | Target: "SWBAT predict how land use changes affect downstream water quality" | **Essential question** (1, sometimes 2). The open-ended question students wrestle with during this class. Often borrowed from the module's essential questions — pick the one most relevant to today's targets. If standalone (no module), draft one. **Enduring understanding(s)** (1, sometimes 2). The big idea this lesson builds toward. Almost always borrowed from a parent module if there is one; if standalone, draft one but don't overreach — a single lesson advances an EU, it doesn't deliver it. **Competency alignment.** Call `list_competencies` if a course is set and the school config has one. Pick **1–2 competencies** this lesson naturally exercises through the targets + planned activity. Don't shoehorn — a vocab-memorization lesson doesn't target Systems Thinking just because the topic is ecosystems. **For conventional content** (Algebra topics, US History units, standard Biology, world languages): draft these for the teacher to react to. Claude has reasonable pattern-matching here. **For unconventional or teacher-designed content** (transdisciplinary projects, school-specific curriculum, novel framings): don't assume. Share initial ideas as conversation starters, let the teacher shape direction. **Stage 1 checkpoint** — show the teacher: ``` ## Stage 1: Desired Results **Learning targets** (SWBAT): 1. [...] 2. [...] **Essential question:** [...] **Enduring understanding:** [...] **Competency focus:** [Knowledge-Based Reasoning, Systems Thinking, ...] ``` Wait for the teacher to confirm or revise before moving to Stage 2. This is the foundation — getting it right matters more than speed. ### 3. Stage 2 — Evidence of Understanding At the lesson scale, design **one** formative check that tells the teacher whether students hit the targets. The check should: * **Match the targets.** If the target is "explain why endorheic basins don't drain to oceans," the check needs students producing an explanation — not multiple choice. * **Fit inside the class period.** 3–10 minutes typically. Exit tickets, mini-demos, quick-writes, peer explanations, artifact checks, observation rubrics. * **Be specific.** "I'll see if they got it" is not a formative check. "I'll collect a 2-sentence written response to *'Why does the Great Salt Lake have no outflow?'* and look for mention of evaporation + closed-basin geography" is. Format the formative check: * **What it is** (exit ticket / quick-write / observed demo / mini-artifact / discussion prompt) * **When in the lesson** (last 5 min? mid-class transition? continuous observation?) * **Success signal** (what a student who hit the target produces vs. one who didn't) If the lesson feeds a graded summative arc (unit test next week, project due Friday), note the connection but don't design the summative here — that's `plan-assessment`'s job. **Stage 2 checkpoint** — show the teacher: ``` ## Stage 2: Evidence of Understanding **Formative check:** - Type: [exit ticket / quick-write / ...] - When: [end of class / mid-class / ...] - Prompt or task: [...] - Success signal: [what a student who hit the target produces] - Miss signal: [what a struggling student produces] **Connection to summative** (if any): [...] ``` Wait for confirmation before Stage 3. If the formative check feels mismatched to the targets, push back — that's the most common UbD failure mode at the lesson scale. ### 4. Stage 3 — Learning Plan Plan the arc of the class session — phase-by-phase activities that get students from where they walked in to where the targets land. Match the rough total to the duration confirmed in step 1. Format as a timed sequence: ``` 0:00–0:05 Hook: [what gets students into the question] 0:05–0:15 Activator: [activate prior knowledge / surface misconceptions] 0:15–0:35 Main investigation: [the heart of the lesson] 0:35–0:50 Consolidation: [synthesis, discussion, structured talk] 0:50–0:55 Formative check (from Stage 2) 0:55–1:00 Closing / preview next class ``` Per phase, capture: * **Name + minutes** (so total adds up to the class length) * **What students are doing** (active verbs — investigating, comparing, defending, building, sketching, arguing) * **What the teacher is doing** (modeling, observing, questioning, scaffolding — not always lecturing) * **Materials / prompts / links** (only if known — leave TBD otherwise) **Sequencing principles:** * Hook → exploration → consolidation → check → close. UbD prefers students encountering the question *before* receiving the answer. * Active beats passive. If a phase has students "listening to the teacher explain X," ask whether they could discover X instead. * Less direct instruction than feels natural. 10–15 min of teacher talk per 60 min is plenty for most secondary classes. * Make space for student talk + iteration — turn-and-talks, peer feedback, draft-revise cycles. * Don't pack the schedule. Buffer time matters; ambitious pacing that requires perfection will fail. * The formative check from Stage 2 has a slot in the timeline — show it explicitly. **Stage 3 checkpoint** — show the teacher the timed sequence. Wait for confirmation. ### 5. Compose the full UbD brief (when useful) If the three Stage checkpoints are still clearly visible above in the chat, you can skip a redundant restatement and go directly to step 6 — the brief already exists in the conversation. Compose a single block when **either** of these is true: - The conversation has drifted (many turns since Stage 1, the teacher may not see it scrolling back), OR - The teacher will likely hand off to `post-lesson-page` — having one copy-pastable artifact makes the handoff cleaner. The composed form when you do present it: ``` # Lesson Plan — [Title] *[Course] · [Date or Week] · [Duration] min* ## Stage 1: Desired Results **Learning targets (SWBAT):** 1. [...] 2. [...] **Essential question:** [...] **Enduring understanding:** [...] **Competency focus:** [...] ## Stage 2: Evidence of Understanding **Formative check:** [type] — [prompt or task] - When: [...] - Success signal: [...] ## Stage 3: Learning Plan | Time | Phase | Students do | Teacher does | |---|---|---|---| | 0:00–0:05 | Hook | [...] | [...] | | ... | ... | ... | ... | ``` ### 6. Offer the handoff Ask the teacher — present three options, not just one: > Two paths from here: > > - **Post to Canvas now** — hand the brief to `post-lesson-page`. Fills the school's lesson template (targets → `to` slot, formative → `assessment` slot, learning plan phases → `tasks` slot) and creates the draft page. > - **Build the materials first** — if the lesson needs cards, handouts, hook images, exit-ticket slips, etc., I can draft those before we put anything on Canvas. The page can wait. > - **Leave it in chat** — you copy the brief and iterate on your own. Branch on the answer: * **Post to Canvas** → invoke the `post-lesson-page` workflow, passing the brief as established context. `post-lesson-page` should skip its own Stage-1-style thinking step (everything's done) and go straight to template slot rendering. The competency alignment and module context already exist. * **Build materials first** → ask which materials are needed and draft them in chat. Don't volunteer to write files — keep the materials as chat output the teacher can copy. Offer to chain into `post-lesson-page` after materials are locked. * **Leave it in chat** → confirm the brief stays where it is. If the teacher mentioned specific materials in step 1 ("we'll need case cards," "I want hook images for the opener"), default to offering the materials path first. ## Common mistakes to avoid * **Don't draft EUs and EQs from scratch when the lesson belongs to an existing module.** Borrow from the module's outcomes page. A lesson advances a module-level EU; it doesn't reinvent one per class. * **Don't over-scale Stage 2.** One sharp formative check beats a four-part assessment rubric at the lesson level. If you're tempted to add a summative here, that's `plan-assessment`'s territory. * **Don't write activities (Stage 3) before targets and evidence (Stages 1–2).** That's the whole point of backwards design. If the teacher resists and just wants to brainstorm activities, push back gently once — "We'll plan the activities, but we'll get there faster if we know what students should be able to do by the end" — then yield if they insist. Don't be a UbD purist if the teacher needs a quick scaffold. * **Don't pack Stage 3.** A 60-minute lesson with 8 phases of 7.5 minutes each is brittle. Leave breathing room. * **Don't produce Canvas HTML in this skill.** This is a brief, not a page. `post-lesson-page` handles template-specific HTML output. * **Don't skip checkpoints.** Stage 1 must be confirmed before Stage 2; Stage 2 before Stage 3. UbD silently fails when stages misalign — the checkpoint cadence is the safeguard. * **Don't shoehorn competencies.** If the lesson doesn't naturally exercise a competency, don't list it. Saying every lesson hits all 9 makes the framework meaningless. * **Don't fabricate module / course context.** If the teacher didn't tell you what module this belongs to, ask — don't infer one and produce a brief that misaligns with a real Canvas unit plan.