A comment on the article "Using lesson study to assess pupils’ learning difficulties" Brahm Norwich, Pete Dudley and Annamari Ylonen (IJLLS, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 192-207)

International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies

ISSN: 2046-8253

Publication date: 30 September 2014

Abstract

Citation

Tiberghien, A. (2014), "A comment on the article "Using lesson study to assess pupils’ learning difficulties" Brahm Norwich, Pete Dudley and Annamari Ylonen (IJLLS, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 192-207)", International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, Vol. 3 No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLLS-08-2014-0029

Download as .RIS

Publisher

:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited


A comment on the article “Using lesson study to assess pupils’ learning difficulties” Brahm Norwich, Pete Dudley and Annamari Ylonen (IJLLS, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 192-207)

Article Type: Discussion From: International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, Volume 3, Issue 3.

 

Norwich, B., Dudley, P. and Ylonen, A. (2014), “Using lesson study to assess pupils’ learning difficulties”, IJLLS, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 192-207.

This paper deals with “the specific use of Lesson Study for assessment”. It emphasises the dynamic characteristics of assessment, the teacher's feedback in adapting teaching and the feedback of the student(s). The flow chart of the process for an assessment approach in Lesson Study shows a type of trial and error process, in the sense that if a pupil is not engaged and/or progressing, or if the teaching methods or goal are not appropriate, it is necessary to implement a change. This approach resonates with the French Theory of Joint Action in Didactics. The characteristics introduced in the flow chart are: pupil's engagement and progression, teaching methods, conditions and goal. In the French theory, these characteristics could be: goal-related to knowledge (similar) closely related to the teaching elements of the situations that incorporate the elements of knowledge. What are the elements of the teaching situation taken into account by the pupils? Are they the same as those they should be taking into account, according to the goal? If not, what is the pupils’ understanding of these elements? What elements does the teacher modify in response to the pupils’ actions?

In this theory, the analysis of what we call “milieu” (elements of the situation taken or to be taken into account by the pupils and/or by the teacher) and its relationship with the teacher and pupils’ actions is essential. It could be interesting and fruitful to open the debate between several theoretical approaches with a concrete focus on specific classroom situations.

Andrée Tiberghien