A story about how consulting an AI on my lesson plan helped me realize what I was missing

“The goal of the unit is a bit vague.”

When the AI said that to me, I felt a sting of annoyance.

It was a lesson plan I had spent three hours writing. But five seconds later, I thought, “Maybe it is.”

It was vague. I knew it, but I couldn't fix it. I hadn't been able to put it into words.

The AI had pointed it out so easily.

I’ve never been good at writing lesson plans.

The “goal of this lesson” section always ends up being abstract. “Students will understand X,” “Foster an attitude of proactive engagement”—it sounds professional when written down, but even I find it hard to answer the question, “So, what exactly needs to be achieved for this to be considered a success?”

Since this year, I’ve started writing lesson plans with the help of AI, and that “vagueness” has become easier to see.

The first thing I tried was “having it read the lesson plan I wrote.”

I pasted the goal of the lesson and the flow of the main learning activities, and asked it to “point out any parts where the flow seems strange or missing.”

This is what came back.

“The objectives written in the lesson goal do not correspond to the lesson activities. It is difficult to see which part of the goal is being achieved during the activities.”

I stopped reading.

I had thought about the lesson activities. But I realized that the correspondence between “what is being achieved in this activity” was actually ambiguous. The goals and the activities existed separately.

You might think, “Isn't that obvious if you just look at it?”

But when writing a lesson plan, your state of mind is different when you write the goals versus when you write the activities. When writing the goals, you have an ideal of “what kind of lesson I want to have,” and when writing the activities, you are pulled back to the reality of “how to manage the 50 minutes.”

In between those two, the alignment slips.

It’s hard to notice on your own. Even when I reread what I wrote, I might feel like “something is off,” but I don’t know “where.”

The AI looked at it from a different angle.

Based on its feedback, I changed how I write my goals.

I changed it from "students will understand XX" to "by the end of the lesson, students will be able to express XX in the form of YY."

Writing it as "able to express in the form of YY" allows me to confirm at which point in the activity that happens. It became easier for me to see things like, "Wait, there's no moment here for them to say that," or "So that's what this activity was for."

Writing lesson plans has become a little easier.

The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology's Course of Study Commentary (2021) emphasizes setting unit and lesson objectives from the perspective of "what students will be able to do." It is a way of thinking that clarifies the desired state across three perspectives: "Knowledge and Skills," "Thinking, Judgment, and Expression," and "Motivation for Learning."

I understood that in my head. But when it came to writing it in a lesson plan, I struggled to make it concrete.

When the AI asked me, "Which of the three perspectives are you focusing on in this activity?" I realized, "I intended it to be 'Thinking, Judgment, and Expression,' but the activity content is mostly just skills practice."

It felt like having the gap between my "intentions" and the "actual activity" pointed out from the outside.

Now, I incorporate "dialogue with AI" into the process of writing lesson plans.

Write it → Have the AI read it → Rewrite it based on the points raised → Have it read again

Going through this back-and-forth twice makes a significant difference.

I fix "vague objectives" with the first round of feedback, and "unclear assessment points" with the second. I feel like the review work that used to take an hour has been cut down to 30 minutes.

It is completely different from "having the AI write it for me."

If I "have it write it," the lesson design isn't mine. Even if an AI that doesn't know the reality of these students writes it, I won't be able to facilitate it.

When I "have it read and point things out," I feel like I am refining my own design.

That difference is something I only understood after trying it.

AI utilization flow for refining lesson plans: Full text of specific prompts

I will summarize the full text of the prompts I use for lesson plans. If you use them in order, you can review the whole thing.

① Prompt to check the gap between objectives and activities

以下は中学校英語の授業の学習指導案（本時部分）です。
「本時のねらい」と「主な学習活動」を読んで、以下を確認してください。

1. ねらいに書かれた目標と、授業の活動が対応しているか
2. 活動の中で「ねらいの達成をどう確認するか」が見えるか
3. 45分の流れとして不自然な部分（時間配分・順序）があるか

「正しい指導案に書き直して」は求めていません。
指摘だけをお願いします。書き直すかどうかは自分で判断します。

---
（本時のねらいと、主な学習活動の流れをここに貼る）

② Prompt to organize objectives by "perspective"

以下は本時のねらいです。

学習指導要領の「知識・技能」「思考・判断・表現」「主体的に学習に取り組む態度」の観点から、この目標がどの観点に対応しているかを整理してください。

また、どの観点の目標が曖昧になっているか、または欠けているかがあれば指摘してください。

---
（本時のねらいをここに貼る）

③ Prompt to confirm assessment points

以下は本時の授業の流れです。
この授業の中で、教員が「生徒の達成状況を確認できる場面」はどこにありますか？

また、評価の場面がない・少ないと感じる部分があれば指摘してください。
指摘だけをお願いします。

---
（授業の流れをここに貼る）

4. A prompt to check support for students with special needs

以下は授業の流れです（個人情報は含みません）。

この授業の中で、読み書きや音声認識に困難がある生徒が参加しにくくなる可能性がある場面を教えてください。
また、そういった生徒の参加を支えるために活動を調整できる部分があれば、一般的な観点から提案してください。

医療的な診断に踏み込む内容は含めないでください。

---
（授業の流れをここに貼る）

Before / After: Changes in the lesson plan before and after using AI

| | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Lesson Objective | Abstract expressions like "understand ~" | Concrete states like "can express ~ in the form of ~" |
| Alignment with Activities | Objectives and activities exist separately | Each activity corresponds to "which objective it achieves" |
| Assessment Points | Only at the end of the lesson | Included check points during intermediate activities as well |
| Rewriting Time | Spent an hour lost, thinking "something is off" | Able to fix it in 30 minutes after AI feedback |
| Support for Special Needs | General descriptions in the "students needing support" column | Confirmed ease of participation for each activity |

Pitfalls

If you just "fix it because the AI said so," it stops being your lesson

If you try to accept all of the AI's feedback, there are times when you won't be able to conduct the lesson. Even if it says "there are few assessment points," there are times when you decide that is fine for this specific unit.

After receiving feedback, you make the judgment yourself: "Even so, I will do it this way here." That is your lesson design.

Don't use it just to fix the "format" of the lesson plan

AI is good at tidying things up into a "lesson plan style." But the essence of a lesson plan is not the "writing style" but the "lesson design." It is meaningless if the lesson plan the AI tidied up cannot be executed in class.

Rather than just fixing the form, use it while constantly checking, "Can I visualize the flow of the lesson?"

Conclusion

I started with the story of how I felt a bit annoyed when the AI pointed out, "This is vague."

But that feedback was correct. It allowed me to see from the outside what I already knew but couldn't put into words.

It's not so much that the way I write lesson plans has changed, but that it has become easier to see "what I am not looking at." I believe that is the change for this school year.🐱

References

• MEXT "Course of Study (2021 Notification) Commentary: Foreign Languages" *Regarding the concept of setting goals based on the three perspectives of "Knowledge/Skills," "Thinking/Judgment/Expression," and "Attitude toward proactive learning." Available on the MEXT official website (mext.go.jp).

• MEXT "Reference Materials on Learning Assessment for the Integration of Instruction and Assessment (Junior High School English)" (2020) *Referenced for the concept of aligning lesson objectives with assessment.

• MEXT "Guidelines for the Use of Generative AI in Elementary and Secondary Education (Revised Edition)" (2024) *Referenced as a basic policy for utilizing AI as an aid for school administration and lesson design.

note tags

#LessonCreation, #LessonPlan, #AIUtilization, #TeacherIngenuity, #JuniorHighSchoolEnglish, #before-after, #EducationDX, #SpecialNeedsEducation, #GenerativeAI