Long-term Planning
Annual or programme-level planning that sets the overall trajectory of a course before any individual lesson is written. Working at this scale, a teacher or curriculum team decides what learners will be able to do by the end of the year, which strands of language and skill the syllabus will cover, how external constraints (exam dates, term boundaries, contact hours) shape the calendar, and how the course connects to the level above and below.
Function
Long-term plans answer questions that no single lesson can. Which Lesson Aims are non-negotiable across the year? Which exams or assessments anchor the calendar, and how much pre-exam work do they require? Where will recycling happen, and how will the syllabus surface high-frequency language repeatedly across units rather than only on first introduction? Decisions taken here cascade — a Scheme of Work derives from the long-term plan, and weekly lessons derive from the scheme. Skipping the long view typically produces tightly designed lessons that do not add up to a coherent course.
The artefact takes various shapes. Common forms include a Scope and Sequence table mapping units to weeks, a competency map keyed to a framework such as the Common European Framework of Reference, and a calendar overlay showing public holidays, exam windows, and review weeks. Backward Design is the dominant logic: identify exit outcomes first, place assessments next, then sequence the units that build toward them.
Inputs and revisions
Long-term planning draws on the institution's stated outcomes, the coursebook's organisation if one is mandated, the cohort's likely entry profile, and contractual contact hours. Realistic plans build in slack — review weeks, buffer sessions, contingency for cancelled classes — because the academic year rarely matches the planned grid. Most institutions revisit the long-term plan annually and make incremental adjustments rather than rewriting from scratch, which lets the programme accumulate refinement without losing continuity.
The plan is a living document. Mid-year reviews compare planned coverage against actual coverage, surface which sessions ran long, and feed adjustments back into the next iteration of the Scheme of Work and into Medium-term Planning for the remaining terms.
References
- Graves, K. (2000). Designing Language Courses: A Guide for Teachers. Heinle & Heinle.
- Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press.