Starting Lesson Study in Elementary School Science

In mid-May 2013, a seminar-workshop on “Development of Inquiry-Based Science Activities” was conducted by the NISMED Elementary School Science Group for 15 Grade III science teachers from three schools in the Division of Taguig-Pateros (5 teachers per school).

PALS Inaugurated

The Philippine Association of Lesson and Learning Studies (PALS) Inc. was inaugurated on 10 December 2016 at the Pearl of the Orient Tower in Manila.

World Association of Lesson Studies (WALS) International Conference 2017

NISMED staff as well as teachers from partner schools presented papers at the World Association of Lesson Studies (WALS) International Conference 2017 held at Nagoya University, Japan on 24-17 November 2017.

Starting Lesson Study in Elementary School Science

In mid-May 2013, a seminar-workshop on “Development of Inquiry-Based Science Activities” was conducted by the NISMED Elementary School Science Group for 15 Grade III science teachers from three schools in the Division of Taguig-Pateros (5 teachers per school).

PALS Inaugurated

The Philippine Association of Lesson and Learning Studies (PALS) Inc. was inaugurated on 10 December 2016 at the Pearl of the Orient Tower in Manila.

Thursday, March 15, 2018

Using models as part of the instructional process: What teachers need to know

 Rolando M. Tan

Using three-dimensional models in teaching has become part of the instructional practices of science teachers. Using models in teaching has shown marked improvements in students’ understanding especially of complex subject matters in science (Mclaurin, Halverson and Boyce, 2014). Models, which serve as a representation of the abstract concepts, help students construct ideas (Krontiris-Litowitz, 2003; Orgill and Thomas, 2006). Glynn (1991) states that using models that facilitate analogical reasoning is an effective way to foster understanding by relating their existing knowledge with text knowledge. This is an important consideration because effective analogies do not only motivate students but also help them clarify their thinking and avoid misconceptions (Orgill and Thomas, 2006). Moreover, analogies also “enhance student learning through a constructivist pathway” (Harrison and Treagust, 1993, p. 1292). If the research lesson would use such physical manipulatives or any other instructional models as part of the instructional process, lesson study practitioners and the so-called knowledgeable other must bear in mind the theoretical foundations of using teaching materials that foster analogical reasoning.
So what makes a model an effective teaching material to foster analogical reasoning? Gentner (1998) enumerates the processes in analogical reasoning: (1)retrieval – an individual tries to recover a previous analogous example from long term memory (2) mapping – examining the commonalities from two working memories and making inferences from one working memory to another (3) evaluation - where the inferences and their analogies are assessed and (4) abstraction – examining the common structure between two analogies. Gentner, focuses more on mapping as he proposes the Structure mapping theory for analogy. In structure-mapping theory, analogy is “a  mapping of knowledge from one domain (base) to another (target) which conveys that a system of relations known to hold in the base also holds in the target.”(Falkenhainer, Forbus, Gentner, 1989, p. 2).

Gentner (1983) stressed that mapping commonalities between the target domain (the object to be compared) and the base domain (the object which the target is compared to) would involve two aspects: object attributes and relational predicates. For example when the atom is compared to a solar system, the atom is the target domain while the solar system is the base domain.

Object attributes are the physical features that can be visibly seen on the base and on the target while relational predicates pertain to the interaction of the objects in a domain.  Structure-mapping theory  states that when several overlaps are found in the object attributes and in relational predicates between the target and the base, literal similarity is attained and if overlaps are strongly seen on relational predicates, analogy therefore has been achieved (Gentner, 1983). One example of an analogy is the lung chest model which was constructed using simple household materials such as  plastic bottle, plastic sheet, small plastic bags and flexed straws. Looking closely, overlaps between the object attributes of the model and the human respiratory system are very weak but in terms of relational predicates a strong overlap can be observed. When the plastic sheet goes down the small plastic bags inside the plastic bottle inflate. This  indicates that air rushes inside these plastic bags. In the human respiratory system the diaphragm situated below the lungs also demonstrates a downward movement when it contracts causing the lungs to inflate.  If this model would have object attributes almost similar to the anatomical structure of the human respiratory system, literal similarity would have been attained.

The use of analogical models in the teaching learning process has become a pertinent issue when teachers collaboratively develop research lessons involving three dimensional models as a teaching tool. A lesson study group composed of Grade 5 teachers intended to use a three dimensional model to teach a science concept by analogy. The lesson study group intended to use a hard-boiled egg as their model to represent the interior of the Sun. In light of Gentner’s structure-mapping theory - the hard-boiled egg which serves as an analogical model of the interior of the Sun has been found to be problematic. Object attributes between the target and the base domain do not have several overlaps. If the yolk would correspond to the central core, what will be the counterpart of the Sun’s radiative zone and the convective zone? The egg shell itself may not have a counterpart with the Sun as the Sun’s surface does not have a covering that can correspond to the egg shell. The softness of the yolk and egg white does not have any similarity with the Sun’s interior as the Sun is made up of hot gases. Another consideration is the shape of the egg as the Sun is nearly spherical in shape.   With regards to relational predicates, there is totally no relational overlap observable between the Sun and the hard-boiled egg. The hard-boiled egg’s interior cannot be made to give heat and light as how the core and radiative zones  produce heat and light. When few or no relational overlaps are observed between the target and the base, what can be attained is an anomaly instead (Gentner, 1983).

A snapshot of the research lesson to be implemented is shown below:

Prepared Questions on the Research Lesson 

From the part titled Analysis and Discussion, the teacher tried to narrow down on the fact that the cross–section of a hard-boiled egg has similarities with the Sun which is more prescriptive rather than constructivist in approach. What the implementing teacher failed to see is that the hard-boiled egg cannot be used as an analogical model to make them infer the interior parts of the Sun.

After the first lesson implementation data from the post lesson discussion revealed interesting results from two NISMED staff. NISMED staff 1 gave a firsthand account on some critical areas seen during the lesson implementation while NISMED staff 2 focused more on the shared ideas and comments of the implementing teacher, his co-teachers as well as the general impressions about the implementation.

From NISMED staff 1:

A preliminary activity aimed at unlocking the terms “inner” and “outer” was done.
The Teacher started with eliciting prior knowledge by asking them to draw the inner parts of the sun but he actually just said draw the sun instead of saying draw the inner parts of the Sun.

He conducted another activity by asking the students to draw the cross section of a hardboiled egg and then made them compare the egg and the Sun. The egg model elicited responses that are not related to the parts of the Sun. One student even mentioned the presence of Salmonella in eggs.

When he asked if there is any difference between the sun and the egg most of the students were silent as they do not seem to know how to answer the question. The hard-boiled egg failed to represent fully the interior parts of the Sun as the Sun’s radiative and convective zone have no counterparts that can be found in the hard-boiled egg.

Students were asked to put together the puzzle pieces to show the parts of the Sun. Afterwards, a reading activity about the parts of the Sun was given to the students. They were asked to label the parts of the Sun. The teacher, however, did not give time for the students to label properly the parts of the Sun as the teacher already named one of the parts. 

During the group activity, only a few students were actually engaged in the task assigned to them. 

From NISMED staff 2:
·         After Mr.  ________shared his observations about the activity and his implementation:
o     He found that the activity was time consuming despite giving a time limit for the task;
o     He liked the activity because it gave the students opportunity to relate their previous lessons (from the earlier grades) to the current lesson, and allowed them to observe something concrete (egg model) to anchor the development of their ideas on the current lesson; and
o     He expressed that the objectives he set for the lesson were met to a certain extent since they were not able to finish the lesson.
·         The impressions and observations of the rest of the team (co-teachers and NISMED staff 1) were similar to his observations with regard to the length of time spent in doing all the activities. Several suggestions were cited by different members of the group to address this (see the decisions in the next section). The discussion on time management has implications on the number of tasks for the students and the choice of which tasks to retain in the revised lesson plan.
·         Other aspects of the lesson and lesson plan that were brought to light were:
o   Use of the egg as a model of the Sun – Since the responses of the students showed that they could not easily connect the egg model to the parts of the Sun (only one group made an effort/attempt to make the connection) and was limited to inner and outer parts only;
o   Extent of participation of the members in the group -Only two to three  members were really engaged in the activity due to the big size of the group (10 members ); and
o   Assessment/Quiz – The group was advised by the NISMED staff to review the items based on the revisions that will be made on the lesson plan.

Instead of inferring the parts of the Sun from the egg model, students started to describe the egg as one pupil even mentioned the presence of Salmonella that can also be found in eggs.  The teacher had not realized his role as a facilitator of learning when he immediately named one of the parts of the Sun’s interior. By the teacher’s behavior and the students’ responses, the egg model was not really instrumental in making the students infer the parts of the Sun from the cross section of the egg since the reading activity was the only source that could make the students understand more about the parts of the Sun’s interior.    

NISMED staff gave the following recommendations:

·         Sir ____ will finish the lesson on the following day with the same section (including the quiz), but will no longer be observed by the NISMED staff.

·         Retain the preliminary activity using the pictures of the inner and outer parts of the house for the unlocking of the terms, but only for the low-ability sections. For the high-ability sections, this can be omitted or asked directly to the pupils (What do you think is the meaning of inner/outer?).

·         For the main focus question, stress the interior parts but rephrase it “What do you think is inside the Sun?/What do you think are the inner parts of the Sun?”. The teacher is encouraged to ask this in Filipino especially in the lower-ability sections.

·         To save time, the egg model and the puzzle will be removed. The activities that will be retained are the drawing of the Sun to answer the question, “What do you think is inside the Sun/What do you think are the inner parts of the Sun?” and to elicit prior knowledge. This task will be done individually and drawn in their notebook. Second, the article will be retained, but instead of a group activity, it will be done in pairs (think-pair-share). Moreover, the next task involving the article is for the students to draw and label the parts of the Sun based on what they understood or learned from reading the article.
·         For the presentation of output/drawings, the teacher will tell the students to post their drawings on the board. The teacher will also give them time to view the other pairs’ work and then call volunteers to group similar drawings together. He will then ask for volunteers who will describe their drawings further using their own words.
·         After the selected pairs have presented, this is the time that the teacher shows the image of the Sun (showing the interior parts) with proper labels (labels should be bigger). This time, the teacher will tell the class (pairs) to compare their drawings with the illustration of the Sun that the teacher posted. The students can evaluate for themselves (no need to score) on how close their drawings are to the illustration.
·         Review the assessment items if the tasks and skills required are aligned with the tasks and skills of the revised lesson plan. Include a diagram of the Sun and its parts in the assessment task since the revised lesson will have more visuals.
·         The second implementation will be done by Ms. ______.

For the lesson study practitioner and knowledgeable others who serve as consultants to the lesson study group, it is important to bear in mind the conceptual framework for using models as tools for analogical reasoning. Every time a manipulative model or any three-dimensional model is being used to teach a science concept, the knowledgeable others must be able to analyze the object attributes and relational predicates that overlap between the target and base domain. This is important because “uncritical use of analogies may generate misconceptions and this is especially so when unshared attributes are treated as valid.” (Harrison and Treagust, 1993 p. 1292).       


Falkenhainer B., Forbus K. D. & Gentner D. (1989). The Structure-mapping engine:
Algorithm and Examples. Artificial Intelligence, 41, 1-63. Retrieved from

Gentner,  D. (1983). Structure mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive
                Science, 7(2), 155-170. doi: 10.1016/S0364-0213(83)80009-3.

Glynn S.H. (1991). Explaining Science Concepts: A Teaching-with-analogies model. In
S.M. Glynn, R.H. Yeany & B.K. Britton (Eds.) The psychology of learning science. Lawrence  ErlbaumAssociates, Inc.: New Jersey.

Harrison, A.G. & Treagust D.F. ( 1993). Teaching with Analogies: A case study in grade
10 optics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 30, 1291-1307. Retrieved from
Krontiris-Litowitz, J. (2003), “Using manipulatives to improve learning in the
Undergraduate neurophysiology curriculum”, Advances in PhysiologyEducation, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 109-119. doi: 101152/advan.00042.2002.

McLaurin, D.C., Halverson, K.L. and Boyce, C.J. (2014), “Using manipulative models to
develop tree thinking”, Biology International, Vol. 54, pp. 108-121, available at:
11Halverson-Vol-54.pdf (accessed September 12, 2014).

Orgill, M. & Thomas, M. (30 December 2005). Analogies and the 5E model. National
 Science Teachers Association. Available at


Wednesday, December 6, 2017

World Association of Lesson Studies (WALS) International Conference 2017

NISMED staff as well as teachers from partner schools presented papers at the World Association of Lesson Studies (WALS) International Conference 2017 held at Nagoya University, Japan on 24-17 November 2017. The conference, with the theme Building Research and Practice through Lesson Study, aimed to bring together practitioners and researchers around the world to share knowledge, experience, and insights of Lesson Study as a form of practice-based research. The abstracts of the papers presented at the said conference can be read in the attachments below.

Adapting Mathematical Discourse in Instruction Framework for Planning and Analyzing Research Lessons 

Ronald C. Lucasia, Rizal High School 
Priscilla M Tuazon, Rizal High School 
Erlina R. Ronda, UP NISMED

Adapting Lesson Study and Teaching Mathematics through ProblemSolving: Tensions, Dilemmas, Opportunities 

Mineria A. Se, Sta. Lucia High School 
Julie Reyes, Sta. Lucia High School 
Erlina Ronda, UP NISMED

Examining the Activity of 'Knowledgeable Other' in Lesson Study as a Hermeneutic Effort
May Chavez, UP NISMED
Erlina Ronda, UP NISMED

Lesson Adaptation in Five Countries

Ivy Mejia, UP NISMED

Lesson Study: A Framework for Developing Lessons That IntegrateScience and Mathematics 

Eligio C. ObilleJr, UP NISMED 
Soledad A. Ulep, UP NISMED

Teaching mathematics through problem solving vis-a-vis primary teachers perception ofgood mathematics teaching 

Dana M Ong , Edna G Callanta , Erlina R Ronda, UP NISMED
Yumiko Ono, Naruto University of Education 

University education experts and in-service elementary school science teacherscollaboration for professional development through lesson study 

Sally Baricaua Gutierez,, Seoul National University and UP NISMED
Arlene P. delaCruzUP NISMED


Wednesday, August 30, 2017

Students Answering Their Own Questions: Voices from High School Chemistry Classroom through Lesson Study

by Amelia E. Punzalan and Arlene P. de la Cruz

Mas napapa-isip ako sa pagsagot sa tanong ko. Celyn, 15 years old (I think more of answering my own questions.)

nasasagot ‘yung hindi namin maintindihan. Ann, 14 years old (… the things we do not understand are being answered.)

The two statements above are part of several explanations given by third-year high school chemistry students during an interview on why they would rather ask questions (and answer them) than answer questions from the teacher. This paper presents the results of the second and third cycles of one of the two high school chemistry lesson study groups under UP NISMED’s three-year lesson study project in public schools in Metro Manila. The focus of the discussion is on the interview responses of the students after the second cycle of the study. It includes comments on teaching and learning science, the students’ questions and answers, and lesson study as a professional development activity and research opportunity in teaching science. 

The lesson study group, which was formed in May 2010, was composed of three chemistry teachers (designated as T1, T2, and T3) and two researchers from the UP NISMED Chemistry Group. These three teachers were all seasoned ones with more than two decades of high school chemistry teaching experience. Both T2 and T3 retired from the service at the end of school year 2012-2013, having reached the optional retirement age of 63 years. T1 and T2 were usually assigned to handle the relatively low-ability sections of about 40 students. As reported earlier (Punzalan, de la Cruz, Nudo, Baltazar, Mindo, & Fernandez, 2013), some of the students in these sections were repeaters. On the other hand, T3, acting as observer, knowledgeable other, and documenter, had been teaching in the top three third-year pilot science classes of the school. 

The lesson study group members decided to adopt the same goal and sub-goal of the 1st lesson study cycle, which are stated thus: The goal is to develop and nurture self-directed learners who have enduring understanding of science concepts that can be applied to real-life situations; The sub-goal is to participate actively in communicating the students’ ideas by asking questions and finding answers to their questions. They also decided Gas Laws as their research lesson. 

At the end of the four-day lesson on Boyle’s and Charles’ Laws, an intact group of six students were randomly selected by T1 and T2 from each of their classes, and interviewed by the two NISMED staff. These two groups of 12 students were composed of 10 girls and 2 boys aged 14 years (50%), 15 years (41.7%), and 17 years (8.3%) years. The purpose of the interviews was to get students’ feedback up close regarding their experience of raising and answering their own questions. The group interviews were conducted right after their respective classes. The students were instructed to be brief and direct to the point in writing down their responses which could be in English or Filipino. The interviewers saw to it that all the students had finished writing before proceeding to read the next question in Filipino. The interview questions were the following: 

1. What was your reaction when you were told to make your own question regarding the activities in your science class? 
2. What was your reaction when you were told to answer your own questions? 
3. Was it difficult for you to ask questions and answer your own questions? Explain. 
4. Which do you prefer the teacher asking questions or yourself asking questions? Explain. 
5. Did you learn science when you were given an opportunity to ask and answer your questions? Explain. 

Based on the students’ responses, as well as their reaction when told by their teacher that their task was to ask questions and answer them, the students expressed that they were excited and surprised, and that they happily welcomed and liked the idea. Therefore, they set themselves to immediately think. On the other hand, they also felt nervous and anxious, thinking they might give wrong answers. However, the students appreciated the teaching style of the teacher; because of which, their questions opened up discussions among them and they were able to freely express their thoughts about their observations and answers to their questions. It was just like imitating their teacher where she elicited from them answers to her questions. 

In this study it was also shown that students did not find the task of answering their own questions difficult. Half (six students) of those interviewed said it was not difficult, while the other half mentioned that it was just a bit difficult. They prefer being the ones asking questions, so much so that they learned their science well. 

Further, it is worth mentioning that the observers noted from the classroom observations that the students were fully engaged in the activity as well as in posting papers on the board, reading their reports, and listening to other group reporters. Students participated actively in communicating their ideas among themselves in both the small groups and the whole class, and to the teacher. 

The students’ explanations about why it was not difficult to ask and answer their own questions at all were further discussed. They reasoned that they made actual observations during the lesson and that they could confidently express themselves because they were using the mother tongue. Tagalog is the base of the national language, Filipino, which is the lingua franca in the area. Additionally, four out of the 12 students interviewed specifically mentioned the advantage of using the mother tongue in communicating and expressing their questions and answers, as well as in understanding their lessons. Their explanations affirmed previous findings regarding the use of the mother tongue (Saong & Punzalan, 2013; Punzalan et al., 2013). The students expressed their reasons for their difficulty: not knowing the correct answers to their own questions and needing to do some more thinking. 

Meanwhile, given a choice based on interview question 4, students overwhelmingly preferred that they be the one asking questions rather than the teacher. Students were learning the things they would like to know, be clarified with, and understand. They would like to ask things they were curious about. The enumerated reasons about the benefits to learning affirmed other studies mentioned in this study (Chin & Osborne, 2008, Eshach et al., 2013, Weinstein, et al., 2010, Carpenter, et al., 2006, Karpicke & Roediger, 2007, McDaniel et al., 2007 cited in Weistein et al., 2010). Students had an idea where the lesson is going to proceed. Interesting questions were asked by other students, which they understood and for which knew the answers very well. Answers were accepted and the wrong answers were corrected. However there were students who got nervous when the teacher asked questions. They said that they learned nothing when the teacher does the questioning. Perhaps, questioning, both a teacher behavior and an important instructional strategy (Kim & Kellough, 1987) does not need to be dominated by the teacher any longer. 

In consonance with the research lesson sub goal ”communicating the students’ ideas…” being able to verbalize what they know, or think of what they know is an important aspect of learning (Developing Communication Skills, n.d.). When students listen to each other, they have the opportunity to hear the same things they already know as well as other questions and ideas different from their own. Along with explanations or answers, they come to realize, first hand, that it is “alright” to have many questions and ideas about an event (Jelly, 1985). Only when ideas are made to surface will there be active learning as opposed to passive or memory learning (Chin, 2001 p. 99). 

The full version of this article is published in the UP NISMED’s Lesson Study Book 2: Learning more together, growing in practice together.

Tuesday, August 29, 2017

Three Teachers, One Lesson on Teaching Trigonometry through Problem Solving in a Lesson Study

by Allan M. Canonigo

This article discusses the different ways students solved a given problem involving trigonometry and how the teacher made use of the students’ solutions in introducing and developing conceptual understanding of sine, cosine, and tangent. In this study, the teacher introduced a problem to the class and then allowed the students to solve the problem in groups using their prior knowledge and understanding of some mathematics concepts. There were five teachers who were involved in the lesson study, three of whom implemented the same lesson in their respected classes. Results show that in all three classes, students used graphical representation to understand the problem and to present the solution. The diagrams or graphical representations were essential tools for students’ mathematical thinking. This is consistent with the study of Greeno and Hall (1997), particularly regarding the algebraic, numerical, and graphical representations. In particular, most of them used the unit circle to arrive at their solutions. 

In all these classes, the students were not able to provide much reasons to justify or explain their solutions. However, the problem has already provided opportunity for students to make connections, justify their solutions, and make sense of sine, cosine, and tangent. Two of the teachers emphasized the unit circle method in introducing sine, cosine, and tangent. Two other teachers utilized the students’ solutions in introducing the concept of sine, cosine, and tangent. Although these teachers vary in their approaches to utilizing students’ answers and solutions, two of them attempted to ask probing questions to elicit students’ justifications to their solutions. This helped the students to make a clear connection of previous mathematical concepts which were needed to solve the problem. 

In planning a lesson, the teachers involved in the lesson study team realized that in order to be effective in teaching, students’ current knowledge and interests must be placed at the center of their instructional decision making. Although they wrote all their intentions in the plan prior to the implementation of the lesson, they learned to adjust their instruction to meet the students’ learning needs. They also realized that instead of trying to fix weaknesses and fill gaps, they can make use of students’ existing proficiencies – by making use of the students’ solution to the problem in order to help them understand the concept of trigonometric functions. 

As shown in this study, the students could solve a problem in different ways when they were given the opportunity to do so. The students were able to work in groups effectively and came up with a solution and the reasoning behind that solution. On the other hand, it is very important that the teachers are able to process these solutions to develop conceptual understanding of sine, cosine, and tangent. For the teachers involved in this study, it was a challenging task for them to introduce the lesson and develop students’ conceptual understanding through problem solving by utilizing students’ solutions and answers. 

The teachers found the lesson study a rich learning experience. Through planning the lessons collaboratively, they were able to deepen their subject matter knowledge as well as their understanding of how to teach sine, cosine, and tangent. It provided them with the opportunity to actually see and be sensitive to how students processed their thinking, how students’ misconceptions and difficulties could arise, and how it was an eye-opener to observe how the students struggled with the problem, and how teachers used students’ solutions to develop conceptual understanding in different ways. They were able to see that a good lesson is one that meets the learning needs of the students. Such teachers are responsive both to their students and to the discipline of mathematics. It is therefore recommended that, whenever mathematics teachers use “real-world” contexts for teaching mathematics, they maintain a focus on mathematical ideas. 

The full version of this article is published in UP NISMED’s Lesson Study Book 2: Learning more together, growing in practice together.

Thursday, August 24, 2017

Learning the Nature of Inquiry-based Teaching through Lesson Study

by Ivy Mejia

A number of reform-based initiatives in science education are focusing on inquiry as an approach to science teaching. A case in point is the K to 12 Science Curriculum of the Department of Education (DepEd, 2016). The general standard for this curriculum is for students to acquire an “understanding of basic science concepts and application of science inquiry-skills” (DepEd, 2016, p. 4). However, there are varied conceptions of inquiry both in preservice and in-service education (Akerson, Abd-El-Khalick, & Lederman, 2000). To regulate accurate understanding of inquiry in science instruction, teachers needed support in this area. To reconcile the need for the development of inquiry and support, the University of the Philippines National Institute for Science and Mathematics Education Development (UP NISMED) initiated a collaboration with five science teachers at a typical public school in the National Capital Region. It was a three-year project whose main goal was to enhance the capacity of science teachers to strengthen the inquiry skills of the students. This article will not describe the entire project but only the results of the first year of implementation of a professional development model, which is referred to as lesson study. 

The study employed a case study design where the case is a group of five teachers and two UP NISMED staff. The data collected were drawn from the several stages of lesson study: planning, implementation, and post-lesson discussion. The research lesson is on “evidence of chemical change.” Two classes of first-year students were selected to gather data on teaching and learning with a focus on inquiry skills. The transcript of the group discussions and lesson implementations were subjected to content analysis. These were coded and categorized to draw patterns on science inquiry skills gained both by the teachers and students. 

Figure 1. Students synthesizing their observations drawn from the activity on evidences of chemical change (Photo credit:  High School Earth Science Workgroup).
The entire process of lesson study brought realizations to teachers that unpolished process skills of students served as barriers to the development of inquiry skills. During the first lesson implementation, students had an alternative conception on initial and final observations. For example, they had to describe a piece of bread before and after it was burned. Their initial observation was that the bread looks brown while their final observation was that the bread became toasted. Another instance was ignoring the changes on the surface of a sliced eggplant once it was exposed to air. For them, they have been used to this appearance and did not consider it as a change. The group had to revise the lesson by revisiting observation as basic process skill. Students were taught what is meant by initial and final observations. On the second implementation, students were able to describe the physical and chemical changes. They provided explanations based on evidence brought by employing careful observations on changes as drawn from the activity. 

On the first year of lesson study, the members concluded that enhancement of inquiry skills of students was dependent on prior process skills of students. The group focused on the inclusion of inquiry but it overlooked the prior readiness of students to engage in inquiry. The planning, implementation, and lesson study discussion, as part of lesson study cycle, served as a way for the group to understand the factors affecting the acquisition of inquiry skills both to teachers and students. Although students were observed to have been discussing their explanations based on evidence, this does not guarantee that they have understood this feature of inquiry. The students should not only undergo the process of inquiry but also demonstrate an understanding of the process of inquiry. This is achieved when teachers are both competent in knowledge and skills about inquiry. 

The full version of this article is published in UP NISMED’s Lesson Study Book 2: Learning more together, growing in practice together.

Thursday, August 10, 2017

World Association of Lesson Studies (WALS) International Conference 2016

On September 3-5, 2016, four NISMED staff presented their papers* in the 10th World Association of Lesson Studies International Conference at the University of Exeter, the United Kingdom. The theme of the conference was on the role of lesson study in transforming teaching and teacher learning in professional learning communities.  The entire conference highlighted the benefits of collaboration which is built on lesson study.  When teachers collaborate with their colleagues they start to build self-efficacy, gain new idea on how students learn which results in deep learning, receive moral support, and predict future success as an effect of working together.  During the conference, there was also a presentation on countries that managed to sustain lesson study, such as Cambodia and Indonesia.  It was also suggested that lesson study has to be the culture of school even if the principal leaves the school.  The relationship between the principal and the faculty is far more important than the top-down approach to sustain lesson study. Investing in social relationship such as principal-to-teacher and teacher-to-teacher is what Andy Hargreaves, the keynote speaker, referred to as Social Capital.  
*Title of papers presented in WALS 2016
Sustaining the culture of collaboration in lesson study through fostering a collegial atmosphere:  A practice-based case study
Ms. Jacquieline Rose Gutierrez

Students’ answering their own question:  Voices from high school chemistry classroom Ms. Arlene dela Cruz
Influence of culture in adapting lesson study
Ms. Ivy Mejia and Mr. Eligio Obille


Thursday, July 20, 2017

How Fair Testing was Brought to Light from Pupils’ Responses in a Science Lesson through Lesson Study

by Rolando M. Tan

Experimental investigations such as those used in science classroom activities entail the need to control certain variables to validate changes observed from a single variable being investigated. This practice follows the fair test principle. Conducting fair test in experimental investigations eliminates the chance of making inconsistent conclusions; instead, it provides opportunity to draw out conclusions based on verifiable and reproducible evidence (Mclleland, 2006). This principle is an important issue in the field of elementary science education as most elementary school teachers have inadequate training and exposure to inquiry-based instruction as a pedagogical model for teaching science (Newman, 2004). This issue was brought out in a Lesson Study on a seed germination activity for fourth grade pupils as a means to foster evidence-based learning through the inquiry approach. The research lesson, prepared by Grade 4 science teachers, was implemented twice with post-lesson discussions that follow after each implementation. 

The first implementation of the research lesson was designed to make pupils infer which variable was able to initiate seed germination of mung beans. The experiment consisted of three setups: Setup A used dry soil, Setup B used wet soil, and Setup C used wet cotton. The pupils were asked to make these setups and to record their observations for four days. On the fifth day, the pupils posted their data on the blackboard and explained their findings including their answers to the questions in the activity. The implementing teacher was not able to see that the setups had two variables that were changed (type of medium and presence of moisture). As a result, the experiment had not been helpful to the pupils as they were only able to answer that water initiated the process of germination from a previous experience. One of them explained that the unexpected germination of the beans in the dry soil setup was caused by the rain that made the setup wet. Some pupils, however, answered that air and sunlight are the factors that initiated seed germination. From the post lesson discussion, the implementing teacher had not realized that the experimental setups in the seed germination activity was flawed and had overlooked how the pupils arrived at their conclusions. The flaw in the experimental setup was discussed during the first post lesson discussion. The lesson study team decided to include an additional setup containing seeds embedded in dry cotton, which will serve as the control for the other setup (seeds embedded in wet cotton). The revised research lesson used a pair of setups which had a wet soil setup and a dry soil setup as the control and another pair of setups which had a wet cotton setup and a dry cotton setup as the control. The lesson study team decided that half of the class will use the dry soil and wet soil setups while the other half will use the wet cotton and dry cotton setups. 

The second lesson implementation of the revised research lesson was implemented by another member of the lesson study team. A four-day observation period was carried out. On the fifth day, the class reported their observations. A discussion on the activity was conducted by the teacher. The teacher asked in vernacular (Tagalog): What is common and what is not in the pair of setups? The pupils responded better as the teacher emphasized the presence or absence of the independent variable by asking questions to make the pupils infer that water initiates seed germination regardless of the kind of medium (cotton or soil) used for germinating mung beans. During the post-lesson discussion, the team saw the need to put Tagalog translations on the research lesson especially on questions where discussion and concept development are constructed by the pupils. 

In summary, the pupils’ responses provided teachers helpful insights on their lesson development. First, the use of the vernacular language facilitated better student engagement in the discussion of the results of the experiment. Second, the experience from the two lesson implementations stressed the importance of how pupils arrive at an answer instead of just focusing only on the answer given by the pupils. This is aligned with the inquiry-based approach of making pupils construct evidence-based statements (BSCS, 2006; NRC, 2000).

The full version of this article is published in UP NISMED’s Lesson Study Book 2: Learning more together, growing in practice together.

Tuesday, December 13, 2016

PALS Inaugurated

The Philippine Association of Lesson and Learning Studies (PALS) Inc. was inaugurated on 10 December 2016 at the Pearl of the Orient Tower in Manila. Educators and teachers from Metro Manila, Cavite, and Bicol Region attended the event. During the inauguration, The members of the Board of Trustees and Incorporators were introduced. Fr. Onofre Inocencio Jr, PALS President, presented the vision, mission, and strategic directions of the association. PALS elected officers also include Dr. Erlina Ronda of UP NISMED (Vice President), Iris Therese Velasco of Keys School Manila (Secretary), and Dr. Aida Yap of UP NISMED (Treasurer).

During the launch, three keynote speakers talked about lesson study. The first was Dr. Masami Isoda, Director of the Center for Research on International Educational Development (CRICED) who talked about lesson study in Japan. The second speaker was Dr. Soledad A. Ulep, Director of UP NISMED, who talked about the Institute’s effort in spreading lesson study. The third speaker was Maylani Galicia, Supervisor in Mathematics of Division of Albay talked about how lesson study spread throughout the division.


Wednesday, July 29, 2015

Lesson study: A tool for building teachers’ culture of reflective practice

by Sally B. Gutierez
Researchers claim that personal reflection on one’s practice is one of the methods of capability building among teachers (Darling-Hammond & Richardson, 2009); Glickman, Gordon, & Ross-Gordon, 2009; Reeves, 2010). Moreover, by blending reflective practice into continuing professional development, teachers develop self-knowledge and self-challenge on their professional learning journey (Leitch & Day, 2000; Klein, 2008; Ng & Tan, 2009). Based on these claims, effective professional development for teachers goes beyond enhancing their knowledge and skills to providing them with opportunities of self-reflection within a support group that establishes sustainability and collaboration. In education, a growing interest to move away from one-shot workshops has attracted education specialists to instigate a life-long learning community among in-service teachers. Teacher inquiry groups (Crockett, 2002), peer coaching, collaborative teacher consultation, teacher mentoring (Brownwell, Adams, Sindelar, Waldron & Vanhover, 2006), lesson study (Lieberman, 2009), and collaborative professional learning (Gutierez, 2015) are just few of the promising teacher professional development models at the present. According to Shriki and Movshovitz-Hadar (2011), through these professional development activities, teachers are able to acquire new knowledge and skills by participating in a learning community that focuses on teaching practices as learning objects. 
Reflective practice in education is said to scaffold critical thinking (Conway, 2001) and promote self-regulation (Singh, 2008; Boud, 2007) as the teaching process is believed to be a process that is open to examination and deliberation (Van Manen, 1995; Schön, 1983; Elliot, 2001) for significant improvement in the teachers’ instructional practices (Kemmis  & McTaggart 1988). Engaging in a reflective practice provides rigor in the shared repertoire of knowledge development through constructive sharing of opinions and feedbacks. Constant interaction draws collegial and critical examination of their actual teaching practices (Daniel, Auhl, & Hastings, 2013). In this method, feedback forms the basis of critical analysis which provides sustainable evaluation of existing practices (Han, 1995; Hatton & Smith, 1995). On-going feedback thus becomes a crucial component in a community of reflective practitioners in response to the changing paradigms of professional engagement. Through feedback, Loughran (2002) stressed the importance of establishing meaning to actual experiences so that these may be valued ‘in ways that minimize the possibility establishing a routine on a faulty teaching practice’ (pp. 34). In light of the foregoing literature, reflective practice brings implicit knowledge based on actual practice so that it can be recognized, questioned, and perfected (Parra, Gutierrez, & Aldana, 2015). Classroom practices serve as the objects of learning and not from the theoretical knowledge from formal education settings (Schön, 1983).
Lesson study captures the idea of enhanced learning and intellectual functioning when a group collaboratively work together which eventually leads to the development of personal expertise as a product of the constant interaction and deep reflection (Hadar & Brody, 2010). This means that constant interaction is vital to the optimum development of instructional practices. Moreover, the sustainable collaborative reflection to evaluate teaching routines not only examines the alignment of teaching practices to new and existing paradigms but builds a community of practice where teachers become more critical and constructive with each other (Achinstein, 2002; Grossman, Wineburg, & Woolworth, 2001; Little, 1990, 1999; Witziers, Sleegers, & Imants, 1999).
In a qualitative study which documented and categorized the reflective practices of three (3) groups of public elementary school science teachers from their year-long professional development through lesson study, findings reveal that there exist three types of reflection exemplified by the teachers across the stages of the lesson study process but these were hardly noticed during normal conversations. In-depth analyses of the transcripts show that the team mostly used descriptive reflection and this occurred mostly during the planning and goal setting stage (47.37%) and in the post-lesson reflection and discussion ([PRD], 41.78%]) between the teachers and the “knowledgeable others.” The presence of the knowledgeable others prompted the teachers to engage in a critical dialogue and make attempts to evaluate their lessons. In this study, critical reflection is considered as the highest form of reflective practice thus, as beginning reflective practitioners, teachers showed less skill on this method of reflection. However, the 26.24% attempts to use this reflection is indicative of teachers’ potential to become reflective practitioners among themselves which increases in the presence of the knowledgeable others in the planning and goal setting and PRD stages given a sustainable and enough opportunities.

Analyses show that the participatory, collegial, and collaborative nature of lesson study were the enabling factors in the open sharing of information and establishment of consensual and mutual understanding (Cooper, 2014) between and among the teachers and the knowledgeable others. This supports the claims of Healy (2009) who said that collective and reflective approaches to evaluate professional practice supports the development of understanding leading to a shared professional identity. This adapts the claim of Marcos, Sanchez, and Tillema (2011) that reflective practice among teachers helps them to deliberate and solve instructional problems critically. Findings also indicate that a professional development activity tailored to the direct experiences of teachers result to significant outcomes.