# data[].attributes.body
There is evidence of our feedback from the initial work. We see language present that we recommended. Many concepts were put in clearer language, and it is now easier to follow. We appreciate the live links to references that would help the teacher create the lesson....UDL, etc.

# data[].attributes.body
We wonder where were are explicitly calling out equity, inclusion and access.

# data[].attributes.body
Love the idea of a teaching being able to map out the process as they go. Shared by Jennifer in whole group.

# data[].attributes.body
We need to streamline the process for teachers so that we don't discourage them from submitting lessons.

# data[].attributes.headline
Appreciate the clearer focus in the revise on lesson planning (its not about materials, its about lesson design)

# data[].attributes.subject
Appreciate the clearer focus in the revise on lesson planning (its not about materials, its about lesson design)

# data[].attributes.body
No lesson will be exclusively direct instruction.

# data[].attributes.headline
An elementary level version would be helpful - the language and focus of the criteria are very much secondary.

# data[].attributes.subject
An elementary level version would be helpful - the language and focus of the criteria are very much secondary.

# data[].attributes.body
The "look-fors" - a vision for what is happening in the classroom

# data[].attributes.headline
What's missing in the criteria is the basic notion (key to California) is that language and literacy are integrated throughout the curriculum - this is not just a matter of ELD... it is the basic ELA/ELD framework and the Common Core understanding of language.  We need criteria that really speak to the quality of focus on language, the ways in which literacy in engaged in content, etc.

# data[].attributes.subject
What's missing in the criteria is the basic notion (key to California) is that language and literacy are integrated throughout the curriculum - this is not just a matter of ELD... it is the basic ELA/ELD framework and the Common Core understanding of language.  We need criteria that really speak to the quality of focus on language, the ways in which literacy in engaged in content, etc.

# data[].attributes.body
Learner variability is starting to be called out.

# data[].attributes.headline
Better, clearer focus on ELs and ELD standards -integrated, etc.

# data[].attributes.subject
Better, clearer focus on ELs and ELD standards -integrated, etc.

# data[].attributes.body
I wonder how student discourse can be included explicitly in the criteria and then reflected in the "look-for"

# data[].attributes.headline
Wonder where the focus on equity, equalizing participation and status in the classroom, access is

# data[].attributes.subject
Wonder where the focus on equity, equalizing participation and status in the classroom, access is

# data[].attributes.body
We want to make sure we're thinking about the different needs of teachers. We should keep the guide for those who need to go deeply within it. We then need a second level of a template that is aligned to the guide. Then we need a checklist for the teacher to just be sure that all the things are there.

# data[].attributes.body
I wonder if academic language should be included and/or a little more specific on academic language by grade level.

# data[].attributes.body
Wondering: About the linguistic experince of the student so the use of academic language does not replacement this experience.

# data[].attributes.body
Can we have links on the lesson templates that take teachers to that section of the bigger document? Not all teachers need all the things, but having links that they can access as needed can help meet teachers where they are.

# data[].attributes.body
Student-responsive teaching - who the students are will shape the lesson.
Question: Will there be a discussion or place to document - Who my students are and why I designed it this way?

# data[].attributes.headline
Lessons should be prefaced with discussion of who the students were in the class for which the lesson was designed... student responsiveness requires response to who the students are.  So the "readers" and "users" of the lesson need to know.  And one criteria should be "lesson designed in response to student needs"

# data[].attributes.subject
Lessons should be prefaced with discussion of who the students were in the class for which the lesson was designed... student responsiveness requires response to who the students are.  So the "readers" and "users" of the lesson need to know.  And one criteria should be "lesson designed in response to student needs"

# data[].attributes.body
I wonder if there could be different lesson plan rubrics based on grade span.

# data[].attributes.body
I wonder if there is a place to document accommodating / modifications for learner variability. How will they teach to the margins . . .