Search results

Japanese lesson study (LS) is a professional development approach in which teachers collaboratively plan a lesson, observe it being taught and then discuss what they have learnt. LS’s global spread is increasing but studies have identified several challenges to its implementation: the lack of structures and systems to accommodate LS (especially time); the focus on demonstrating short-term impact; a lack of teacher research skills; a dearth of access to quality learning and research material; the absence of available koshis; and accountability pressures. The purpose of this paper is to examine the “translation” of Japanese LS through a case study of one English secondary school.

This study is a case study of a single school which has been using LS as an approach to professional development for five years. A documentary analysis of the school’s LS Handbook sought to understand the school’s approach to LS as articulated by senior leadership. Six observations of the schools LS processes were then carried out including planning, research lessons and post-lesson discussions. Finally, one senior leader who had led LS implementation and five teachers who had been working in the school during the implementation stage were interviewed. The findings are analysed against Seleznyov’s (2018) seven critical components of Japanese LS.

Several key deviations from Japanese LS are identified including: a lack of whole school theme studied over time; little kyozai kenkyu and no written lesson planning; teachers deviating from the role of observers in research lessons; no facilitator and little use of discussion protocols; no koshi; and struggles to ensure mobilisation of knowledge between LS groups. Several of these represent gaps between the school’s LS policy and practices. The findings show that LS practices have become diluted over time and that giving teachers choices seems to have led to teachers not adhering to important aspects of the LS policy.

One of the limitations of the research is its focus on the perceptions of a small group of teachers who were likely to be more passionate about LS than others, and perhaps a deeper understanding of the challenges to implementation might be enabled by interviewing a wider range of engaged teachers, especially those who are perceived as “resisting” full engagement. Further research might also explore whether the implementation challenges faced by this school are replicated in other English schools and in other countries using LS as an approach to professional development.

Several implications for English school leaders seeking to implement LS are discussed, including the need to articulate the rationale for the protocols that shape LS, especially for staff new to the school and to check that important protocols are adhered to over time.

Whilst several studies of LS in the UK have explored its impact on teachers and pupils, and the challenges and successes of introducing LS into a UK context, this study provides a different perspective. It explores the challenges of using LS over time as a consistent approach to professional development in a school and seeks to understand how both resistance and dilution can affect its impact on practice.

Japanese lesson study (LS) is a professional development (PD) approach in which teachers collaboratively plan a lesson, observe it being taught and then discuss what they have learned. LS's popularity as an approach to teacher PD in the UK is growing, and it is used in both special and mainstream settings. This study explores whether LS is perceived and operationalized in the same way across special and mainstream settings.

This study arose as a result of collaboration between UCL Institute of Education academics (principle investigators) and three special school leaders using LS in their own schools (practitioner co-investigators), who together formed the research team. The team first explored the literature base for LS in special education. They then investigated special and mainstream schools using LS for teacher PD. Research tools included semi-structured interviews and an online survey. Participants were obtained through opportunistic sampling via the networks of schools available to the researchers.

There were several key differences between LS in special and mainstream settings. Special teachers felt LS had a more positive impact on subject knowledge than mainstream teachers, and this impact extended to support staff. Special teachers were more likely to carry out multiple research cycles than mainstream colleagues and to quickly build LS into the existing timetable. Mainstream teachers focused on individual pupils in LS to seek learning about pedagogy more generally, whereas general learning about pedagogy was seen as a secondary benefit to special teachers.

One of the limitations of the research is that participants are more positively inclined toward LS than the general population of their school, since those not interested in LS would be unlikely to take the time to engage with the research. It will be important to conduct more research into the use of LS in mainstream schools, as this study is one of very few exploring LS in this special context.

The ease with which special schools can align LS to current practice due to greater flexibility of timetables and larger staff teams seems to result in a greater appreciation and “valuing” of the process in mainstream schools, where teachers seemed to feel their senior leadership teams had gone to extra lengths to enable LS to happen. LS seems to offer a framework within which senior leaders can prioritize such learning experiences for teachers, leading to positive benefits for pupils, teachers and the school, and is therefore a process worth considering both for special and mainstream school leaders.

The literature review found a limited number of studies of LS in a special educational needs and disability (SEND) context, all of which took place in the UK and focused on the impact of teacher participation in LS on teacher practice and pupil learning. All three studies show a positive impact and suggest that LS might have wider applications for both special schools and mainstream schools supporting SEND pupils. There has been no exploration of the different ways in which mainstream and special school teachers and pupils might experience or construct LS in their own contexts.

The purpose of this paper is to present the findings from a systematic literature review of recent studies of the implementation of Japanese lesson study beyond Japan, reviewing evidence of impact and robustness of the studies. Two studies of the implementation of lesson study from outside the timeframe for the literature review are also reviewed in detail, in order to explore the problematic nature of impact evaluation of lesson study.

A systematic literature review of 154 English language studies of the implementation of lesson study with in-service teachers beyond Japan published between 2006 and 2016 identifies 56 as a measuring impact. A lesson study-specific adaptation of Guskey’s (2000) five levels for the evaluation of professional development enables an analysis of the types of impact measured. An analysis using the Maryland Scientific Method Scale (MSMS) enables a review of robustness. Two recent robust studies from beyond this timeframe are then analysed in detail in terms of their framing of lesson study as an intervention and selection of related impact measures.

The literature review and subsequent analysis shows that studies are largely small-scale US case studies ranking as 1, or “least robust” on MSMS. Studies demonstrate the impact of lesson study on teacher learning and positive reactions, but little evidence of it making a difference to teaching, nor of the impact on schools’ professional learning cultures and structures, is present. The detailed analysis of the two recent studies shows that there are many potential pitfalls for researchers to avoid when measuring the impact of lesson study, specifically in relation to distinguishing lesson study as a professional development intervention, and measuring its impact accordingly.

The systematic review is limited to articles available in the English language, and there is a clear bias towards the USA. The study suggests that future research on lesson study in the UK and beyond should evaluate the implementation of lesson study over a larger scale, gather evidence of the difference lesson study makes to daily teaching and learning, and to its effect on school culture and structures.

The study suggests that researchers should pay careful attention to the fact that lesson study is not an end in itself, merely a means to achieve an identified change to teaching and learning, and design impact measures accordingly.

Unlike other systematic reviews of lesson study, this study analyses the impact evidence for lesson study that might be seen as most relevant to its introduction in cultural and structural contexts beyond Japan. It also explores in detail the potential pitfalls of lesson study impact evaluations, offering guidance to both practitioners and researchers.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the popularity of Japanese lesson study (JLS) beyond Japan and the challenges this translation might pose. It notes that there is not a universally accepted definition of lesson study (LS) and seeks to identify the “critical components” of JLS through a review of the literature. It then uses a systematic literature review of recent studies of the implementation of LS with in-service teachers beyond Japan to analyse the models of LS used against these seven critical components in order to explore the degree of fidelity to the Japanese model.

A broad review of the literature on JLS available in the English language identifies seven “critical components”. A systematic literature review of 200 recent English language studies of the implementation of LS with in-service teachers beyond Japan is then carried out. Articles published between 2005 and 2015 are explored, including peer reviewed articles, scientific journals, book chapters and PhD dissertations. This systematic review enables an analysis of the models of LS used in studies from beyond Japan against the “seven critical components” of JLS.

The analysis shows that there is not an internationally shared understanding of Japanese lesson study (JLS) and that many of the missing components are those which distinguish LS as a research process, not simply a collaborative professional development approach. It also reveals that UK LS models seem particularly far from the Japanese model in those critical components which connect teachers’ knowledge and understanding within groups, to knowledge and understanding that exists beyond it. The study discusses whether these differences could be attributed to structural or cultural differences between Japan and other nations.

The search for descriptions of the JLS is limited to articles available in the English language, which, therefore, represent a quite limited body of authority on the “critical components” of LS. The systematic review is similarly limited to English language articles, and there is a clear bias towards the USA, with the Far East and the UK making up the majority of the remaining studies. The study suggests that future research on LS beyond Japan should consider teachers’ attitudes towards the research elements of the process as well as their skills and confidence in carrying out research into practice.

The study strikes a note of caution for schools wishing to implement JLS as an approach to teacher professional development in the UK and beyond. Japan’s systemic approach has embedded LS experience and expertise into the education system, meaning a uniform approach to LS is much more likely. In addition, other systemic challenges may arise, for example, UK professional development time and resources is not designed with JLS in mind and may therefore require a significant reworking.

Whilst several systematic reviews of LS have explored its growth, geographical spread, impact and key features, this study provides a different perspective. It analyses whether and to what degree the “lesson study” models these studies describe align with the literature on JLS, and the implications of this for researchers and practitioners.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an introduction of the papers in the current issue.

By revealing contrasting features of alternative theories of learning, this paper offers a contribution to the on-going discussion about the role of learning theory in Japanese lesson study and its global adaptations.

Attempts to theorize lesson study in contrast to the theory-based learning study reveal a fundamental difference in the learning theories used to underpin this task related to the different world views on which they are founded.

This paper review provides an overview of the insights into lesson and learning studies provided by the authors in this issue of the journal.

The purpose of this article is to discern and discuss dimensions of variation opened by the articles in the issue 9(2) of the International Journal of Lesson and Learning Studies (IJLLS).

The approach draws on the path of teachers learning through lesson and learning studies presented as a pattern of variation forming a temporal sequence.

Attention is drawn to the importance of being explicit about the theory of learning informing lesson and learning studies and how its implementation leads to teacher learning.

The depiction of the path of learning through lesson and learning studies is original.