CTE Fase Intensiva 2026-2027 paso a paso para DOCENTES | Presentación y cuaderno de trabajo

Main ideas, concepts, and lessons

• The video is a step-by-step guide for teachers to participate in the CTE / Fase Intensiva 2026–2027, adapted for multi-grade schools (the approach is “technically the same,” with only 1–2 additional elements).
• The presenter emphasizes that the materials are free and/or editable for channel members, and they are organized as:
  • a presentation,
  • a workbook (PDF),
  • and a guide aligned with what is requested by the technical council.
• The sessions revolve around the working structure of Technical Councils, including:
  • building learning communities,
  • participating in consultations/surveys,
  • and co-designing the Analytical Program through a defined funnel-like process:
    • reading of reality → contextualization → formulation of the analytical program
  • followed by continuous improvement planning.

---

Methodology / instructions (detailed bullet points)

1) Access and use the prepared materials

• Use the free presentation (alexdub.com), or download/edit it if you are a member.
• Download additional documents:
  • Workbook in PDF
  • Guide aligned with what is requested by the technical council
• Find the presentation and supporting files via the links provided in the video (including for managers and by levels).

---

2) Early session: conduct consultations and surveys

• Expect the technical council presentation to:
  • welcome participants and praise commitment,
  • explain the curriculum and articulating axes, and how they connect to:
    • the forgiveness plan (mentioned in the subtitles),
    • and formative fields,
  • emphasize the importance of building community in the technical council.
• Perform/complete required or invited consultations, such as:
  • Commitment 27 / OSCAM disappearance consultation (survey link)
  • Impact of digital devices on children and young people consultation
• The presenter advises:
  • watch specific videos at designated minutes (listed in an appendix),
  • check messages and answer surveys in time.
• The cell phone policy may vary by state:
  • some allow phones only for emergencies or pedagogical/educational purposes (no social networks),
  • others may differ; an appendix contains reference information for consultations.

---

3) Core technical council content: Learning Communities

• Treat learning communities as a workspace to:
  • share experiences,
  • build professional networks,
  • improve teaching practice,
  • strengthen student training processes.
• Key operating principles:
  • Democratic participation: all members can give opinions and take part.
  • Professional autonomy:
    • you should not be forced into a rigid document format,
    • but you must include required minimal elements (not “nothing”).
• Decision-making is emphasized as collective and educational, meaning:
  • rules that already exist are not necessarily collective decisions,
  • but educational decisions (planning, improvement, how to teach) should be collectively reasoned and decided.

---

4) Co-design of the Analytical Program (the “funnel” process)

• The video stresses that co-design is needed because:
  • the Ministry proposes a synthetic program, but it cannot be followed literally;
  • it must be adapted through co-design to each school’s context.

Co-design process (levels/phases)

1. Reading of reality

   • Identify not only “problems,” but also:
     • daily-life situations,
     • relevant events,
     • environmental/territorial characteristics,
     • school/community needs, interests, and expectations.
   • Must be question-based:
     • ask “why” things happen as they do (and not as assumed to be normal),
     • avoid focusing only on surface indicators (absences, averages, parental work, scholarships).
   • Include listening and dialogue with:
     • students,
     • families,
     • and school-community members.
   • Use instruments and organize team work to gather inputs.
   • The presenter suggests a structured way to classify patterns from reading reality (a numbered approach appears in subtitles: “1 2 3 4 5”).
   • This process is linked to developing both:
     • the analytical program, and
     • the continuous improvement process.
   • A “story about the starfish” is referenced as a recommended example (no spoilers).

2. Contextualization of synthetic programs

   • After identifying realities, contextualize the synthetic program so:
     • content and development processes connect to the real situations,
     • the analytical program becomes grounded and not “loose.”
   • The presenter frames this as building progress toward the analytical program through team inputs.

3. Formulation of the analytical program

   • Define purposes and references (references are consultable documents).
   • Identify content and how it intersects with:
     • situations/events/problems found in reality,
     • and the relevant articulating axes.
   • Scheduling advice mentioned:
     • you may bring the synthetic program by phase so the team can match content/tasks to identified realities.
     • the analytical program can be developed monthly, quarterly, or annually (teacher staff decides).
   • Format guidance:
     • no single “fixed format” is required, but analytical programs must include minimal elements, specifically:
       • temporality (ordering of content),
       • the situation/problem/event and its link to the relevant community/territory,
       • the PDA associated with the content,
       • didactic suggestions for approaching the content,
       • formative evaluation suggestions.

---

5) Continuous Improvement Program (separate from analytical content)

• The continuous improvement process uses the previously read reality and includes steps such as:
  • identifying problem situations coming from reading reality,
  • writing objectives, goals, and actions (explicitly required),
  • listing problems and determining which is most important.
• Priority rule:
  • prioritize issues that directly impact student learning.
• Distinction from the Analytical Program:
  • Some actions belong to continuous improvement, not analytical programming, for example:
    • repairs/improvements to infrastructure (e.g., bathrooms),
    • professional learning activities (e.g., courses to improve teaching fractions).
  • Conversely, the analytical program can include co-designed content additions/adjustments (content/PDA modifications).

---

6) Suggested pacing for workshop days and school organization

• A suggested flow (day-by-day guidance appears in subtitles, though not strictly mandated):
  • Day 1: respond to surveys about “what we are like as a community” (and/or initial needs).
  • Early days: proceed with reading reality and planning diagnostic work.
  • Day ~3: advance formulation of the analytical program (can be monthly/quarterly/annual).
  • Day ~4: work on continuous improvement.
  • Day ~5: organize the school cycle.
• The Ministry process includes:
  • diagnosing student learning using a standardized system (computer/system mentioned),
  • organizing initial meetings with parents,
  • applying the Ministry’s evaluation process (the exact name is unclear in the subtitles).

---

7) Administrative and compliance items mentioned

• Awareness topic scheduling:
  • “awareness about the seriousness of sexual abuse and child maltreatment,” connected to organization for September 7.
• Additional items and participation references:
  • Appendix information (appendix #2 mentioned as containing details).
  • Participation in systematization of learning communities.
  • A “news board” reminder for:
    • device impact consultation,
    • and the ICAM questionnaire (start at the first workshop day; also mentions 26th).
  • National Survey on administrative burden (mentioned for August 31st).
• Also mentioned:
  • pedagogical resources,
  • integrative learning exercises,
  • diagnostic assessment,
  • pedagogical narratives,
  • and national workshops.
• The presenter points viewers to their networks (links in the video description).

---

Speakers / sources featured (as mentioned in subtitles)

• Presenter / channel owner: the speaker in the video (name appears only as “Alex” and later as “M.” in subtitles).
• Mario Delgado: appears as a thumbnail/source reference while waiting for the technical council message.
• Technical Council / Council messages: institutional source mentioned throughout.
• Ministry of Public Education (SEP / Ministry): institutional source referenced for curriculum, standardized systems, questionnaires, and requirements.