Differentiation

A lesson that lets English learners do the thinking while they build language.

Get an ESL / ELL lesson with scaffolds. Enter content topic and language level.

01

How it works.

Provide content topic, language level, time and get a complete ESL / ELL lesson with scaffolds in minutes — including language objectives. Free AI workflow, no signup required to preview.

Start now

Plan my esl lesson

02
ESL lesson: content + language objectives, vocab, scaffolds by phase, structured talk/write tasks, CFU, extension.
Format & standard
03

What good looks like.

01

What it must include

Criteria
  • 01WIDA/ELPS proficiency level (Entering to Bridging) named with language objectives separate from content objectives — the plan does not pretend all ELLs are the same.
  • 02Scaffolds (sentence frames, word banks, visuals, realia, native-language support) tiered to the proficiency levels actually present — one-size scaffolds are avoided.
  • 03The four domains (listening, speaking, reading, writing) addressed with intentional balance — the lesson does not collapse to 'read and answer questions'.
  • 04SIOP features and comprehensible input / total physical response strategies built in — the design uses research-based sheltering rather than just 'speak slowly'.
  • 05Differentiated output expectations by level — the same objective is reached through different linguistic demands so all students can show what they know.
  • 06Vocabulary front-loading with multiple exposures planned — key terms are taught before they are needed in context, not defined on the fly.
02

Signals of expertise

Quality
  • Pairs a content objective with a language objective using WIDA Can-Do descriptors — the writer understands that language development is not automatic just because content is 'simplified'.
  • Uses tiered scaffolds by proficiency level and SIOP features named — the plan is specific enough that a co-teacher or sub can deliver the supports correctly.
  • Plans differentiated output (not just 'write less') while holding the content objective — shows the author refuses to lower cognitive demand for language learners.
03

Common mistakes

Pitfalls
  • ×One-size scaffolds ignoring the actual proficiency spread in the room — beginners drown and advanced students are bored by the same supports.
  • ×No language objective, only content — language growth is left to chance and the lesson becomes a content lecture with pictures.
  • ×Simplifying content instead of supporting access — students are denied grade-level ideas because the teacher lowered the bar rather than the language load.
  • ×Treating all 'ELL' students as a single group without level data — the supports miss the mark for both ends of the spectrum.