Enriching Preservice Science and Mathematics Teachers’ Practice Teaching Experience through Lesson Study

Lesson study has started to permeate Philippines at the basic education level. However, most Philippine teacher education institutions (TEIs) have not yet utilized lesson study in preservice teacher education. This study examined the use of lesson study in preservice science and mathematics teachers’ practice teaching and determined how it could enrich their practice teaching experience.

Using mixed-methods research design, the study made use of lesson study with modified microteaching as the intervention prior to preservice science and mathematics teachers’ deployment in the field for their practice teaching. It was conducted as part of the practice teaching program of a teacher education institution (TEI) in southern Philippines. Preservice science and mathematics teachers were deployed in a public secondary school in the same locality. The cooperating teachers from the public secondary school and the science and mathematics education faculty members of the implementing TEI served as knowledgeable others of the lesson study teams formed during the workshops. Separate lesson study workshops were conducted for each group to introduce preservice science and mathematics teachers to the intervention.

Findings of the study included preservice science and mathematics teachers’ appreciation of the use of lesson study in their practice teaching as it helped them enhance their ability to collaboratively develop lesson plans. Furthermore, preservice science and mathematics teachers reported that lesson study enabled them to iron out issues and problems that may arise during lesson implementation. Thus, helping them become more confident and more prepared to conduct the lesson in actual classrooms. Examination of the different versions of the research lessons showed that the most common improvement made on the research lessons was related to assessment of student learning. Finally, this study has shown how lesson study in combination with the use of microteaching served as a support mechanism for preservice science and mathematics teachers during practice teaching.

This research was funded by the University of the Philippines Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research and Development (UP OVCRD) through its Outright Research Grant (Project No. 171710 PSSH). Dr. Monalisa T. Sasing headed the research. Full text of the study for preservice mathematics teachers will be included in UP NISMED’s Lesson Study Book 3 which will be published in print form by UP NISMED soon.

Read More

Features of collaborative lesson planning (CLP) as a positive “dissonance’ to the teachers’ individual planning practices

 Sally B. Gutierez

Several researchers have proven the increase in teacher effectiveness when teachers collaborate with others of the same interests (Garmston & Wellman, 1999; Graziano & Navarrete 2012; Hawley & Valli 1999; Hiebert & Stigler 2000). One area for teacher collaboration can be planning their lessons together (Hiebert & Stigler, 2000), engaging in peer coaching, and observing new strategies being modeled (Garmston & Wellman, 1999; Hawley & Valli, 1999). 

Traditionally, most teachers are trained to practice individual lesson planning. Thus, collaborative lesson planning (CLP) has been widely researched to be a professional development for teachers (Rahman, 2019). During CLP, teachers can share their pedagogical experiences and conduct reflections-on-action on their teaching methodologies and assessment tools (Gutierez, 2015, 2019a, 2019b; Xu, 2015). Several authors recommend that CLP can be effective when experienced teachers who possess extensive knowledge and experiences on content and pedagogy share these to novice ones (Borko, Livingston, & Shavelson, 1990; Leinhardt & Greeno, 1986; Livingston & Borko, 1989). They can be joined by other academic experts such as those university-based researchers who can facilitate their PD activities. In CLP, it is important that collegial atmosphere is focused on linking teachers’ practices to students’ learning outcomes (Lovett & Cameron, 2011). Each of the members of the learning community, especially the teachers, should be provided with equal opportunities to share their insights and reflections. 

However, findings of a previous study conducted by Jones, Jones, and Vermette (2011) presented several gaps in lesson planning practices, namely: (a) unclear learning objectives; (b) unmatched assessment methods and learning objectives; (c) unspecific evidence for developing ideas; (d) failure to assess students’ level of understanding; (e) failure to specify students’ depth of involvement in knowledge construction; and (f) insufficient methods for deeper learning. Thus, in the study of Gutierez (2021), CLP was introduced and became a positive ‘dissonance’ to the teachers’ individual lesson planning practices. 

Based on the results of the study, CLP became a positive dissonance because it served as an opportunity for the teachers to establish mutual trust in a community of practice. In the study of Holmqvist (2019), in-service teachers have difficulty discerning the different approaches of teaching and learning because they have no opportunities to discuss theoretical assumptions with supervising teachers. This was addressed in CLP study through the observation, post-lesson reflection, and discussion activities in the ‘dissonance’ stage. As the teachers developed trust in each other, their anxiety of feedbacks were minimized as they developed a sense of collaborative accountability and joint ownership of their lesson plans. During observations, the teachers were also trained to become keen and critical of the specific parts of the lessons which are effective and those which require further revisions. These observation data served as their pieces of information to evaluate their lesson plans in the process of collaborative reflections. 

Through collaborative reflective practice, Gutierez (2021) identified the stages as follows: 

The ‘dissonance’ stage 

The ‘dissonance’ stage is comprised of a series of activities, namely: goal setting and planning, lesson implementation and observation, and collaborative discussion and reflection (Figure 1). 

1) Goal setting. Two goals were set during collaborative lesson planning: (1) as a science team with a goal of designing an inquiry-based lesson; and (2) goals of the lesson plan based on the students’ learning competencies. For example, the Grade 5 team’s lesson objective was to let students identify some common constellations. Students were also asked to infer how these constellations were named. These goals and objectives served as their guide to formulate the teaching procedure, the materials to be used, and the assessment methods to measure students’ understanding. 

2) Lesson implementation and observation. Here, one teacher taught the lesson while the other teachers of the team observed. The first lesson implementation was conducted after the training workshop. One teacher taught the lesson while the other teachers acted as students. The other two lesson implementations and observations were taught to actual students. The other grade-level teams were invited to observe. As observers, they focused their observations on the students’ responses. Moreover, they observed whether the objectives of the lesson were met based on the sequence of students’ activities. They particularly noted whether the allotted time for the students’ engagement in the activities was sufficient, and whether the students were able to appropriately accomplish the given tasks. 

3) Collaborative reflection and discussion. This was done after the lesson implementation. A total of three reflections and discussions for each team were conducted; one after the lesson was taught to the teachers during the training workshop and two after the lesson implementations to actual students. These usually happened right after the lesson implementations so that the events in the classroom were still fresh in the teachers’ memories to be discussed. 

Refinement stage 

In the framework, the refinement stage was primarily done during the regular gathering for discussion of the teachers. This stage is composed of four activities, namely: (1) organization and reflection on prior knowledge; (2) reflection, organization, and development of new knowledge; (3) refinement and enactment of the new knowledge; and (4) planning for task accomplishment (Figure 1). This stage is crucial as the series of activities lead them to collaboratively plan, revise, or modify their lessons. 

1) Organization and reflection on prior knowledge. This is the first activity during the refinement stage. During the training workshop, they were guided by the science training team and asked to focus on recalling the features of inquiry-based science teaching. Since they were asked to bring their existing lesson plans, they identified the inquiry features of their plans. Moreover, they were prompted to reflect on whether the activities in their existing lesson plans were able to meet the objectives of the lesson and the required competencies of the students based on their curriculum. They shared their reflections with their grade-level teams, and together, they pooled all their ideas and came up with a common decision on how to improve their lesson plans collaboratively. 

2) Reflection, organization, and development of new knowledge. The new knowledge that they developed came from their decisions on how to improve the lesson plans in the previous activity. With five different ways (one from each teacher) to teach the lesson from their existing individual plans, they discussed, reflected, and agreed on how they will develop the plan. They identified which among their individual plans have most of the inquiry features. Then they decided to revise the existing activities to align the objectives and the curriculum-based students’ competencies. 

3) Refinement and enactment of the new knowledge. Through collaborative reflections, they tried to identify the significant parts of their lesson plans such as the objectives, materials to be used, the teaching and learning sequence, and the assessment methods. In this activity, the teachers reflected on the sequence of the learning activities included in the lesson plan. Moreover, they also discussed the materials to be used and the distribution techniques during the actual teaching. This was important because they had to allocate the time for all the activities they planned to do. 

4) Task accomplishment is where they finally wrote their lesson plans. At the end of their preparation, each teacher in the team verified the finished lesson plan to see if it was written as collaboratively planned.

Figure 1. The cycle of activities which make up the series of activities in the collaborative lesson planning (CLP). 

For details of this study, the article can be accessed using the link: https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2020.1856177.

References: 

Borko, H., Livingston, C., & Shavelson, R. J. (1990). Teachers’ thinking about instruction. Remedial Special Education 11 (6), 40–49. doi:10.1177/074193259001100609. 

Garmston, R. J., & Wellman B. M. (1999). The adaptive school: A sourcebook for developing collaborative groups. Norwood, NJ: Christopher-Gordon Publishers. 

Graziano, K. J., & Navarrete L. A. (2012). Co-teaching in a teacher education classroom: Collaboration, compromise, and creativity. Issues in Teacher Education, 21 (1), 109–126. 

Gutierez, S. B. (2015). Teachers’ reflective practice in lesson study: A tool for improving instructional practice.” Alberta Journal of Educational Research 61 (3), 314–328. 

Gutierez, S. B. (2019a). Teacher-practitioner research inquiry and sense making of their reflections on scaffolded collaborative lesson planning experience. Asia-Pacific Science Education 5 (1), 8. doi:10.1186/s41029-019-0043-x. 

Gutierez, S. B. (2019b). Learning from teaching: Teacher sense-making on their research and school-based professional development. Issues in Educational Research 29 (4),1181–1200. 

Gutierez, S. B. (2020). Collaborative lesson planning as a positive ‘dissonance’ to the teachers’ individual planning practices: characterizing the features through reflections-on-action, Teacher Development, DOI: 10.1080/13664530.2020.1856177 

Hawley, W. D., & Valli, L. (1999). The essentials of effective professional development: A new consensus. In Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice, edited by L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes, 127–150. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 

Hiebert, J., & Stigler J. W. (2000). A proposal for improving classroom teaching: Lessons from the TIMSS video study. The Elementary School Journal, 101 (1),4–21. doi:10.1086/499656. 

Holmqvist, M. (2019). Lack of qualified teachers: A global challenge for future knowledge development. In Teacher Education in the 21st Century, edited by R. B. Monyai, chapter 5 (online). London: IntechOpen. doi:10.5772/intechopen.83417. 

Jones, K. A., Jones, J., Vermette, P. J. (2011). Planning learning experiences in the inclusive classroom: Implementing the three core UDL principles to motivate, challenge and engage all learners. Electronic Journal of Inclusive Education 2, 7. 

Leinhardt, G., Greeno, J. G. (1986). The cognitive skill of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology 78, 75–95. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.78.2.75. Livingston, C., Borko, H. (1989). Expert-novice differences in teaching: A cognitive analysis and implications for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education 40 (4), 36–42. doi:10.1177/002248718904000407 

Lovett, S., Cameron, M. (2011). Schools as professional learning communities for early-career teachers: How do early-career teachers rate them? Teacher Development 15 (1), 87–104. doi:10.1080/13664530.2011.555226. 

Rahman, M. S. (2019). Teachers’ peer support: Difference between perception and practice. Teacher Development 23 (1), 121–138. doi:10.1080/13664530.2018.1488765. 

Xu, H. (2015). The development of teacher autonomy in collaborative lesson preparation: A multiple-case study of EFL teachers in China. System 52, 139–148. doi:10.1016/j.system.2015.05.007.

Read More

Lesson study groups as a teacher research learning community

Lesson study groups as a teacher research learning community

Sally B. Gutierrez

Introduction 

    When it comes to school reform, teacher development is one of the areas which should be given attention. In recent years, the emergence of teacher professional learning communities was continuously inspired by the community of practice (CoP) perspective (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Contrary to the ideas of the traditional one-shot and expert-driven professional development models, teachers in a CoP actively construct and re-construct their teaching practices through regular interactions. Lesson study, the popularly adapted form of teacher professional development in Japan (Saito & Atencio, 2013), resembles the most important feature of CoP which pays attention to how teachers use their lesson plans as objects of learning as they reconstruct their pedagogical practices. One feature that is unique to lesson study is the engagement of teachers as researchers. In fact, their collaboratively planned lessons are oftentimes referred to as “research lessons” (Saito & Atencio, 2013, p. 88). In this article, I present some empirical studies which regard a lesson study group as a teacher research learning community. The article is divided into sections which articulate various aspects in a teacher research learning community such as possible areas of study in a teacher learning community and a lesson study group as a research learning community. 

Some areas of investigation in a teacher research learning community 

    Studies show that teachers’ effectiveness increases when teachers come together and work with others of the same interests (Garmston & Wellman, 1999; Graziano & Navarrete, 2012; Hawley & Valli, 1999; Hiebert & Stigler, 2000). As they come together, they establish a community and focus their activities on finding solutions to their existing problems which may be in various areas in their teaching career such as content and pedagogical strategies. They may even focus on answering their questions on how to improve their professional competence. They may therefore employ research procedures that would unravel the knitted complexities of the teaching and learning process (Loucks-Horsley et al., 1987). 

    In education, teacher learning community can be situated in one school where teachers collaboratively use their lessons as their learning instruments. With trusting and collegial relationships, they can utilize lesson planning as an object of learning and as they continuously meet over time, they deepen their professional friendship, establish open communication, and become more reflective. Collaboratively, they can use their theoretical knowledge, experiences, and personal capacities to plan for lessons that would impact their students’ learning. Their extended engagement is sustained without pressures through collective efforts (Harris & Jones, 2010). 

        In the previous study, Gutierez (2019) articulated the processes of collaborative lesson planning of the teachers. In this study, the teachers were involved in identifying the impacts of their activities in their research learning community. Results of the study revealed that during the teachers’ reflections which is one of the processes of collaborative lesson planning, they identified the advantages collective and social process of research learning community, experience-based inquiry, and the value to collective leadership to name a few (Gutierez, 2019). Reflecting on these aspects, the teachers realized that their roles can also extend to becoming practitioner-researchers by gaining insights from each other in the teacher learning community. 

        Another teacher learning research opportunity is utilizing the teachers’ classrooms (Gutierez & Kim, 2017). By observing each other on how they implement their collaboratively planned lessons, they may focus on understanding the uniqueness of each classroom dynamics based on the students’ characteristics. In the study of Gutierez and Kim (2017), the teachers realized that even though the implementation strategies of a single lesson is already planned ahead, the teacher-implementer’s responsiveness to the unique and diverse students’ needs in specific classrooms may alter the plans that were set. However, there still needs scaffolding from each other to set contingencies for these unplanned scenarios that may arise. Teachers specifically mentioned that these realizations would not arise if they were not intentional in their inquiry in their classrooms. 

Figure 1. Teachers trying out their research lesson as one of their collaborative activities in a teacher research learning community

        Based on the above empirical studies, teacher research learning community should be established in such a way that teachers can regularly collaborate and exchange ideas and insights. By giving value to regular social interactions, they may gain understanding of their professional practices through collective scrutiny and judgement of their instructional methods. Moreover, they may situate their teacher learning communities at their own local schools considering their familiarity on the social and cultural norms that are existing. Thus, a teacher learning community can be a sustainable school-based PD wherein teachers increase their agency and effectiveness by utilizing various aspects of their teaching profession as objects of research. 

Lesson study groups as research learning communities 

            What qualifies a lesson study group as a teacher research community is the use of lesson plans as objects of learning. Using lesson plans as research materials in lesson study, teachers continuously try to understand and improve the quality of their lessons during their constructive critiquing in their learning communities. With the shared goal of improving their practices, they try to focus on their lessons and improve them according to the students’ responses. Moreover, as they establish a common interest of improving their practices, they focus their inquiry on their lessons and not on each other’s weaknesses in either content or pedagogy (Gutierez & Kim, 2017). 

        Using their lesson plans, each member in the lesson study team gather data during lesson observation and implementation that could be used as evidence and areas for discussion when they come together to conduct their regular interactions in the learning community. Through time and as teachers embrace the essence of practitioner-researchers, their discussions may deepen to include inquiry on how to reconcile practical and theoretical problems using their lesson plans as research materials (Gutierez, 2019). Moreover, since the direct implications are observed from the students’ responses, knowledge construction directly comes from the classroom through negotiated dialogues. 

            Traditionally, teachers are reluctant to engage in research activities. Dimmock (2016) identified barriers to their reluctance such as lack of time, motivation, and priority. However, looking into lesson study as a professional development which focuses on collaborative research lessons, teachers may develop the agency to become researchers in a community of like-minded professionals. Since lesson study is conducted in collaboration, lesson study teams can serve as the teacher learning community who regularly come together and conduct research. 

References 

Garmston, R. J., & Wellman, B. M. (1999). The adaptive school: A sourcebook for developing collaborative groups. Christopher-Gordon Publishers, Norwood, MA. 

Graziano, K. J., & Navarrete, L. A. (2012). Co-teaching in a teacher education classroom: Collaboration, compromise, and creativity. Issues in Teacher Education, 21(1), 109-126. 

Gutierez, S. B. (2019). Teacher-practitioner research inquiry and sense making of their reflections on scaffolded collaborative lesson planning experience. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 5. 

Gutierez, S. B., & Kim, H-B. (2017). Becoming teacher-researchers: Teachers’ reflections on collaborative professional development. Educational Research, 59 (4), 444-459. DOI: 10.1080/00131881.2017.1347051 

Harris, A., & Jones, M. (2010). Professional learning communities and system improvement. Improving Schools, 13(2), 172–181. DOI: 10.1177/1365480210376487 

Hawley, W. D., & Valli, L. (1999). The essentials of effective professional development: A new consensus. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the Learning Profession: Handbook of Policy and Practice (pp. 127-150). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc. 

Hiebert, J, & Stigler, J. W. (2000). A proposal for improving classroom teaching: Lessons from the TIMSS video study. The Elementary School Journal, 101(1), 4-21. DOI: 10.1086/499656 

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991a). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Loucks-Horsley, S., Harding, C. K., Arbuckle, M. A., Murray, L. B., Dubea, C., & Williams, M. K. (1987). Continuing to learn: A guidebook for teacher development. Andover: The Regional Laboratory for Educational Improvement of the Northeast and Islands. 

Saito, & Atencio. (2013). A conceptual discussion of lesson study from a micro-political perspective: Implications for teacher development and pupil learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 31, 87-95. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2013.01.001

Read More

Desirable Mindsets in Lesson Study

 By Rolando M. Tan

Lesson study provides a collaborative atmosphere where teachers reflect on their practices in the pursuit of instituting pedagogical reforms in their lessons (Gutierez, 2015). While improvements of research lessons through implementation and post-lesson reflection and discussion are important outcomes in lesson study, it is also vital that teachers develop desirable mindsets in every aspect of the lesson study cycle. 

Desirable mindsets of teachers were evident in a school-based lesson study program conducted in an exclusive private school for boys, where three research lessons were implemented in the teachers’ respective classes. One of the three lesson study teams developed a research lesson on weathering, a Grade 5 Earth Science topic. The research lesson aimed to make students identify the agents of weathering in the environment: wind, water, plants’ roots and changing temperature from situations taking place in the natural environment. The research lesson made use of learning stations. At each station, students were asked to identify a particular agent of weathering in a given situation. The post-lesson reflection and discussion became an important venue where pertinent issues were raised and deliberated upon. Arising from these discussions were desirable mindsets that were instrumental in identifying gaps or oversights in the research lesson. 

1. Identifying problematic areas based on students’ responses 

One of the learning stations aimed to make students identify that wind is an agent of weathering. A video animation showed the wind “rubbing” against the surface of a rock as the rock decreases in size while particles of it are carried by the wind. One of the Knowledgeable Others (KO) in the lesson study team heard students say that the rock looked like a potato, causing confusion among the students. 

Another problem in the animated video was that it did not show that the particles carried by the wind collided with the surface of the rock causing the rock’s surface to get scratched and weathered. The use of the animated video failed to make the students understand the natural process of how wind can weather rocks. Selection of the appropriate learning material in science is crucial to the teaching-learning process. Thus, teachers must always position themselves from a critical standpoint when selecting video materials especially when an animated video simulates a natural phenomenon like weathering. 

The use of animated video to simulate another phenomenon called frost wedging became a major talking point during the post-lesson reflection and discussion. The teacher-implementer realized that there was a problem in processing the answers in the video simulation of frost wedging as the video failed to demonstrate how frost wedging could weather rocks. He realized that the video watched by the students made them answer that water softens the rocks, which may be a possible source of misconception. This is an important realization because it will help the lesson study team decide whether they will continue to use the same video or find a better material that will not lead to a misconception. Cheng and Yee (2012) stated that listening to what students say gives teachers a better understanding of how students learn. 

2. Foreseeing possible problems in future lesson implementations 

One of the learning stations focused on the role of plants’ roots in the weathering of rocks. A sequence of pictures showed how a seed dropped by a bird on the ground grew and became a tree while the roots continued to grow downward thereby breaking the rocks underneath. While the processing of this activity made the students conclude that the roots of the plants is an agent of weathering, one of the teachers opined that the pictorial story might make the students conclude that the bird is the agent of weathering. This kind of observation is commendable as it prevents possible errors in future implementations not encountered in the initial implementation. Such proactive inputs must be taken into consideration in the revision of instructional materials to prevent the occurrence of misconceptions. 

3. Raising unrelated but important comments 

In the processing of answers concerning plant roots as agent of weathering, one member of the lesson study team corrected the teacher-implementer regarding the function of plant roots. He heard the teacher-implementer mentioned that the roots grow into cracks to acquire nutrients. Actually, not only do roots acquire nutrients from the ground but water as well. Thus, plants send their roots into cracks in search of water. Although this issue is not related to the objectives of the research lesson, citing oversights, not related to the main objectives must be taken into account as these corrections are valuable for other lessons and therefore must not be ignored. 

4. Planning the research lesson considering the allotted time 

 Realizing that the time was not enough to cover the four agents of weathering, one of the lesson study members suggested that each group focus on one station and for them to share their observations during the processing of the answers. One of the KO suggested that they focus on two agents in one meeting and the other two in the next so that all students would get the chance to get engaged in the learning stations. Time management is just as important as the content of the lesson itself as time constraints can affect the execution of lesson as well as the processing of students’ responses. 

5. Appreciating the importance of post-lesson deliberation 

One of the members of the lesson study team gave a positive impression about the conduct of the whole process of lesson study. For him, it provided opportunities to see the strengths and weaknesses of the research lesson, especially when the lesson was implemented with observers present. Such appreciation is vital to the sustainability of the program. Lewis (2002) mentioned that one of the supporting conditions for lesson study to succeed is the belief that improvement can be achieved through a collective effort. When teachers stop believing that nothing will be achieved from the inputs gathered in post-lesson reflection and discussion, the sustainability of the lesson study process will definitely be undermined. 

References: 

Cheng, L.P. & Yee, L.P. (2012). A Singapore case of lesson study. The Mathematics Educator, 21(2), 34-57. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ961515.pdf 

Gutierez, S.B. (2015). Teachers’ reflective practice in lesson study: A tool for improving instructional practice. Alberta Journal of Education Research, 61 (3), 314-328. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301633235_ Teachers%27_reflective_practice_in_lesson_study_A_tool_for_improving_ Instructional practice 

Lewis, C. (2002). Does lesson study have a future in the United States? Nagoya Journal of Education and Human Development, 1, 1-23. doi: 10.4119/UNIBI/jsse-v3-i1-967

Read More

E-Lesson Study: Using Online Platforms for a Collegial Collaboration on Lesson Research and Development

by Rolando Tan

The global pandemic has upended many academic activities the world over. Professional development programs for teachers are not even spared. Alternative methods of learning have become more of a necessity than merely an add-on in many academic activities, considering that physical distancing as a public health measure against the spread of the novel coronavirus is in place. In this article, I would like to share my thoughts on how professional development programs like Lesson Study can still be implemented using different online platforms for a collegial collaboration on developing research lessons.         

Learning Management Systems and Video Conferencing for Online Collaboration and Post-lesson Reflection and Discussion

The use of Learning Management Systems (LMS) is one platform where members of the lesson study team can collaborate in planning research lessons online without having to resort to face-to-face meetings. Learning management systems is a digital platform that facilitates the implementation of courses in conventional face-to-face, blended, and online learning environments (Wright, Lopez, Montgomerie, Reju and Schmoller, 2014). Impact studies on collaborative learning environments using LMS showed that students expressed interest in using the web-based tools to learn programming (Cavus, Uzunboylu, Ibrahim, 2006). Another study showed that university faculty members and college students demonstrated positive attitudes toward the use of LMS in the teaching-learning process (Alshorman and Bawaneh, 2018). It can therefore be used as an avenue for the Knowledgeable other (KO) to critique their work and offer insights regarding gaps or problematic areas in the lesson plan, the worksheets, and other teaching materials that are utilized in the lesson.

Some of the popular LMS like EDMODO have features that allow posting of materials, where the discussion threads are provided for sharing inputs of those who are reading the posts. Hence, learning management systems can facilitate interactions and feedback that are important in collaboration and critiquing. Since teachers also have Facebook accounts, setting up a Facebook page can also be used as LMS since any new inputs or developments taking place in the development of research lessons can show up as notifications in their smartphones and therefore facilitate engagement.

Educators have started to capitalize on popular social media platforms to facilitate the teaching-learning process (Williams and Whiting, 2016; Suwannatthachote and Tantrarungroi, 2012). Some studies show that there is a strong positive relationship between the use of Twitter, a popular social media platform, as an LMS) and student engagement while the use of a traditional LMS did not significantly enhanced their level of engagement (Williams and Whiting, 2016).  

Online collaboration using LMS may have some advantages. Inputs, opinions, comments and suggestions are clearly documented and can be revisited again. Since comments and suggestions can be written on threads for each post, members of the lesson study team can readily react to the statements.

In blended learning formats the online interaction provides a flexible learning environment for the teachers to interact as they need not react right away unlike in a face-to-face meeting where the LS team need to come up with solutions or suggestions to improve the lesson. Another advantage of online collaboration is the degree or extent of collaboration that can be documented and therefore motivate the timid or non-participative teachers to contribute to the development of the research lesson. The KO can provide a more adequate content as the platform can allow the KO to upload content in the post, which could be a video, a PowerPoint presentation or a photo, instead of just verbally explaining to them the suggestions or comments addressing certain areas of their research lesson. Since the lesson preparation is flexible, members of the team, as well as the KO, can have adequate time to analyze parts of the research lesson and make carefully thought out suggestions which cannot easily come out in a face-to-face meeting.

During post lesson discussions, group chats in the LMS can also serve as a venue to exchange ideas through group chats. Suwannathachote and Tantraringroj (2012) noted a significant but low correlation  between Facebook activities and group engagement among 205 pre-service teachers who were enrolled in an educational technology course. This implies that implementing lessons using Facebook as an LMS can be associated to an increased level of collaboration among students. 

There are certain advantages in using group chats.  Previous discussions can be recalled so there is no need for a tape recorder during post lesson discussions. The KO or the facilitator will be able to assess the extent of contribution of each member of the lesson and evaluate the degree of collaboration taking place in the development of the research lesson. In this way, the facilitator can call the attention of lesson study members and motivate them to share their ideas with their colleagues. Furthermore, since attachments are allowed in Facebook group chats, discussions and explanations can be best presented with pictures, videos, PDF files and other such attachments.     

                  Video conferencing is another way to have a virtual face to face where members of the lesson study team, together with their KO can discuss real time the issues and gaps that they need to address in the research lesson they are developing. Rosetti and Surnyt (1984) claimed that video conferencing can be more effective than the traditional face-to-face interaction of teachers and students. At present, various platforms can now be used to implement video conferencing. One of the latest platforms is ZOOM where real time discussions can be conducted to promote the exchange of ideas in the spirit of collegiality.

 Online lesson implementation of the research lesson

The online implementation of the research lesson is the challenging part in the process of lesson study. While so many instructional strategies have been developed by instructional designers and blended learning advocates to promote instruction using web-based tools, the difficulty lies in how members of the lesson study team can observe the teaching-learning process. Pupils’ responses are very vital in assessing the effectiveness of the research lesson. The on-the-spot observation of pupils’ responses in a lesson implementation might not be effectively done in an online environment as it depends on the compliance of the students participating in the lesson. Thus, members of the lesson study team may look for other pieces of evidence of students’ outputs during the implementation. This is when the pupils submit their work by sending their worksheets as attachments in the group chat or by email.

The lesson implementer might schedule the lesson implementation with his students and set deadlines for submission of their outputs, which serve as a formative assessment component of the research lesson. Group chats during lesson implementation can also be used to help students who cannot catch up and receive immediate feedback for certain discussions in order to approximate real time discussions that also take place during a face-to-face interaction. These group chats for the lesson implementation can also be used during the post lesson reflection and discussion.

The Future Prospects of Online Lesson Study

With unexpected turn of events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the academic community must be able to carry out contingency measures that can address the hindrances brought about by the pandemic. The academic community must develop the infrastructure to implement online professional development programs to continuously upgrade teachers’ professional practice without compromising on the need for physical distancing as a public health measure to contain the spread of the disease. Using an online lesson study process can be best initiated among pre-service teachers to prepare them in future disruptive events such as this pandemic.  

Challenges must not be ignored even during these times that the teaching-learning process has been affected significantly by the global pandemic.  It seems likely that teachers and students may have reservations on using online learning as a teaching strategy and as a means for professional development.  In a survey of 9,500 faculty members and 40,000 college students, 73% of faculty members and 70% of students prefer face-to-face over online learning, but half of them are amenable to a blended learning environment (Koenig, 2019). Thus, instructional designers must be able to make online learning environments more user-friendly and accessible to both faculty members and students in order to address restrictions brought about by the pandemic.      

REFERENCES: 

Alshorman, B. A., & Bawaneh, A.K., (2018). Attitudes of faculty members and students towards the

use of learning management system in teaching and learning. The Turkish Online Journal of

Educational Technology. 17(3), 1-15.   

Cavus, N., Uzunboylu, H., Ibrahim, D. (2006). Combining collaborative learning with learning

management systems in teaching programming language. Paper presented at the 2^nd

International Open and Distance Learning (IODL) Symposium (2006) Eskişehir, Turkey.

Koenig, R. (2019, December 11). Most students and faculty prefer face-to-face instruction,

EDUCAUSE survey finds EDSURGE

Suwannatthachote, P. & Tantrarungroj, P. (2012). How facebook connects students’ group work

Collaboration: A relationship between personal facebook usage and group engagement.

Creative Education, 3, 15-19. doi: 10.4236/ce.2012.38b004

Williams, D., & Whiting, A. (2016). Exploring the relationship between student engagement, Twitter,

And a learning management system: A study of undergraduate marketing students.

International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 28(3), 302-313.

Wright, C.R., Lopes, V., Montgomerie, C., Reju S., & Schmoller, S. (2014, April 21). Selecting a learning

management system: Advice from an academic perspective. EduCauseReview. Retrieved

from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2014/4/selecting-a-learning-management-system

-advice-from-an-academic-perspective

Read More

Collaborative Practitioner Inquiry: Perspectives on Lesson Study in the Philippines

by Sally B. Gutierez

This paper presents my perspectives on collaboration on the practitioner inquiry nature of lesson study that was conducted by a group of elementary school science teachers in the Philippines. Grounded on the conception that an effective professional development requires teachers’ opportunities and self-initiatives to work together, teachers’ collaboration with science education researchers shaped the teachers’ openness and shared leadership. Thus, as a team of science education researchers, we instituted a regular collaborative discussion on how to improve their inquiry-based lessons. In this activity, I personally focused my observation on how collaboration developed their sense of interdependency. Together with us, the various stages of their lesson planning included conceptualization, data gathering and analysis, interpretation of results—a series of processes which embraces the concept of learning by doing. Through interdependency, they enhanced their interactions and professional worth as their opinions were acknowledged in the collaborative inquiry.

During the conduct of lesson study, I can say that the strength of the teacher learning community can be attributed to the collective endeavor in the development of collective knowledge.This can be grounded on the shared environment where intellectual growth is highly regarded while maintaining mutual trust and respect for multiple perspectives. Teachers’ inquiry was supported by mentors who acted as co-learners or co-creators of knowledge for teaching (Beck & Kosnik, 2002). Inquiry-driven learning was established in a community that centered on personal practice which “involves a knowledge of teaching about teaching and a knowledge of learning about teaching and how the two influence one another” (Loughran, 2008, p. 1180).

Collaboration in lesson study, therefore, acknowledges the fact that teachers are also learners with diverse set of knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs; that they too needed advisers in order to optimize their learning process. Thus, creating a learning community consisting of a group of teachers with shared goals, can lead to a wider range of practitioner inquiry (van Es, 2012).  This can be extended to a collaborative reflection about theory and practice; the theory may come from experts, as well as their existing knowledge from pre-service teacher education and the practice may come from their daily routines and other issues about their day-to-day teaching experiences (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999; Darling-Hammond & Sykes, 1999).

Teachers try-out collaboratively their inquiry-based lesson.

As a personal insight, as we and the teachers established equal roles, our shared reflections probed the collaborative understanding of their experiences for authentic learning from their own classrooms. Thus, providing a space to acknowledge their capabilities instead of creating a dichotomy of roles (as teachers and academic experts) can be a way to enrich their agency and effectiveness. In a decade of curriculum change in the Philippine education curriculum, much research is needed in empowering teachers to explore their own classrooms. Through collaborative lesson study, knowledge and practice can be aligned as educators gradually establish collegial interaction in a practitioner inquiry. Centered on lesson planning as the primary means of teacher collaborative activity and reflective practice, the consultation sessions assured the support and convergence of ideas and collective beliefs as potential routes to uplift the professionalism of teachers.

References

Beck, C., &Kosnik, C. (2002). Components of a good practicum placement: Student teachersperceptions. Teacher Education Quarterly, 29, 81-98.

Loughran, J. (2008). Toward a Better Understanding of Teaching and Learning about Teaching.In Handbook of Research on Teacher Education: Enduring Questions in ChangingContexts. 3rd ed., edited by M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, and J. McIntryre,1177–1182. New York: Routledge.

van Es, E. A. (2012). Examining the development of a teacher learning community: The case ofa video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28,182-192.doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.09.005

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacherlearning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249-305. doi:10.2307/1167272

Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (Eds.). (1999). Teaching as the learning profession:Handbook of policy and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

This paper was presented at the 2018 East-Asian Association of Science Education (EASE) Annual Conference held at National Dong Hwa University in Hualien Taiwan on 29 November to 02 December 2018.

Read More

PALS and UP NISMED Hold First National Convention on Lesson Study

Three hundred thirty teachers, school administrators, educators, and research students from all over the country attended the first national convention on Lesson Study in the Philippines hosted by the Philippine Association of Lesson and Learning Studies, Inc. (PALS) and the University of the Philippines National Institute for Science and Mathematics Education (UP NISMED) on 11-12 April 2019 at the UP NISMED auditorium. 

With the theme Lesson Study: Collaboratively Improving Practice One Lesson at a Time, the convention provided a forum for the participants to share their Lesson Study (LS) experiences and outputs and to learn from those of others. The event also sought to inspire more teachers and schools to do LS, to publish their research lessons and contribute to the country’s teaching and learning resources, and to encourage research on LS that is adaptive and responsive to Philippine school settings.

Dr. Christine Kim-Eng Lee of the National Institute of Education in Singapore and Immediate Past President of WALS gave the keynote address titled Moving Beyond the Surface Features of Lesson Studies: The Experience of Singapore Schools. 

Lesson Study, according to Dr. Christine Lee, is about opening the lesson to fellow teachers and to school administrators and, in so doing, allowing “extra eyes” to see how children experience the curriculum. What Lesson Study does is “keep the students at the heart of a professional development activity.” 

Dr. Lee narrates how the growth of Lesson Study in Singapore followed a global trend in adopting Lesson Study as a form of teacher-led professional development activity. Citing a school-based implementation of Lesson Study in Singapore, she underscores the need to go beyond the surface features of Lesson Study and focus instead on issues of quality. 

An important highlight in Dr. Lee’s keynote is her characterization of potential sources of dilution of Lesson study. One potential source, she says, is teachers’ giving too much emphasis on the planning of the research lesson “forgetting to situate it as part of a series of lessons in a unit of work.” Other sources, she says, include inadequate attention given to studying relevant curriculum materials and literature related to the topic, the struggle to identify a research theme and carry out the research, inadequate use of evidence during observation, and lack of teacher content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge. 

Dr. Lee concludes by challenging the audience to look beyond the surface features of Lesson Study and to give more premium to depth than breadth. In essence, it is a challenge to “embrace the substance and spirit of Lesson Study” seen through the lens of teachers gaining knowledge about how students learn, developing new understanding of content and pedagogy, and reflecting on their work and their learning. 

The convention featured plenary talks, symposia, panel discussions, and poster presentations. Dr. Masami Isoda of the University of Tsukuba, who also serves as adviser to PALS, gave the talk School Curriculum Management for the Establishment of Learning Community on SEAMEO Curriculum and Teacher Standards. Dr. Manabu Sumida of Ehime University spoke about collaborating in LS beyond the classroom and presented a web-based app that he developed which enables collaborative analysis of video lessons. Dr. Wataru Hanai of Fukui University spoke about reflective LS and professional learning communities. Dr. Arif Hidayat of Indonesia University of Education shared LS experiences and classroom teaching research in Indonesia. Dr. Teodora Salubayba and Dr. Marlon Ebaeguin of the University of the Philippines encouraged the conduct of local research during their talks on action research and design-based research approach, respectively. 

Dr. Masami Isoda presented a comparison between teacher standards as defined by the Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization (SEAMEO) and those of the Philippine standards as presented in the symposium led by the group of Dr. Soledad A. Ulep. He described the approach in the Philippine standards as learner-centered and highly proficient, while that of the SEAMEO standards proposes different standards for different subject areas. SEAMEO, he said, describes the play but does not discuss the progress. 

Dr. Isoda observed that while the teaching of content in mathematics is taught through exercises, the process of thinking or the “way of thinking” can only be taught through reflection. 

In the plan, do, and see cycle of LS, Dr. Isoda asked the audience which part is most important to them. He cited the case of Japan where subject-based LS is the most important to them. In subject-based LS, there must be a theme and objective. If a lesson plan does not have a theme and objective, he said, then it is hardly considered a lesson study plan at all but only a lesson plan. He also asked the participants to enlarge a Japanese character for “haru” or spring using a ruler. He explained how the simple activity lets students apply different strategies of learning. He then presented the teacher standards of Okinawa, Japan which defne the multifaceted roles that teachers take: a public servant, a teacher, and an educator. 

Dr. Manabu Sumida, who is currently the Director of the Japan Society of Science Education, introduced the use of web-based collaborative lesson study system which he developed. He also discussed the advantages of doing Lesson Study taking into account different foreign perspectives. He mentioned a double-edged sword in LS which situates different models of lesson study as both benefitting from standardization and, at the same time, struggling with keeping up with the latest research trends. 

Dr. Sumida’s web-based application allows teachers to watch videos of LS implementation and do video analysis during their free time. Using the app, he was able to showcase sample videos featuring activities of students from Ehime University while teaching students of the University of the Philippines Integrated School. According to Dr. Sumida, links to these videos are sent to teachers and observers to study and comment on. In the same manner, these comments can also be downloaded and analyzed for further study. 

Dr. Sumida also shared a key finding from a study which showed Japanese students performing well in the science component of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) despite their lack of interest in science subjects. 

Dr. Wataru Hanai delivered the plenary session titled Reflective Lesson Study and Professional Learning Communities. The presentation focused on how reflective lesson study (LS) is carried out within professional learning communities in Japan as attributed to the Japanese culture. Dr. Hanai reiterated that there is a need to reconstruct the basic learning mode in schools from the ‘traditional content-transmission mode’ to ‘content + inquiry-based competence-formation’ approaches of learning. He also emphasized that the teachers’ collaborative learning in schools, long-term reflective lesson study, and professional learning community are key in creating a new learning culture in this century, leading to educational change and reform. 

In Dr. Hanai’s presentation, he underscored the importance of reflectiveness in 21st century education; as such, it should be situated at the heart of key learning competencies. His talk also focused on the process and organization of a long-term reflective lesson study in Fukui, Japan where teachers write a longitudinal reflective practice report and reflect on the students’ learning from a long-term perspective. Dr. Hanai presented different perspectives on the process of change in schools’ learning culture. He also highlighted the need to re-appreciate the meaning of school-based lesson studies and learning studies. 

During the open forum, Dr. Hanai elaborated on how teachers who are part of a reflective study group write their individual reflective report on the lessons they opened through lesson studies, focusing on their students’ learning progress in these lessons. Then, at the end of the year, these teachers gather to work as a reflective group and share their reports. This practice, according to him, enables changes in teachers’ lessons which also lead to changes in student learning. 

Dr. Arif Hidayat of the Department of Physics Education at the Indonesia University of Education delivered the plenary session titled From Lesson Study to Learning Improvement: A Case of Indonesia. The presentation is based on a team research he conducted with Dr. Hendayana and Dr. Supriatna that focused on the identity of learning in LS. Dr. Hidayat pointed out that teachers should mind student thinking and listen more to student dialogues. This, he said, must be implemented as well in conducting reflective LS, keeping in mind that every single person in the LS group should be a star and that all voices must be heard. 

Dr. Hidayat enumerated new movements that aspire for higher quality LS. He emphasized the significance of collegiality in LS practices. He said that in LS, teachers must be observers instead of models. In his view, a great LS is not about high quality lesson but about accepting the challenge to improve it together. In their research, Dr. Hidayat’s team hoped to promote the landscape shift of understanding in education from teacher-centered to learner-centered. He shared the case of Indonesia, where LS became an activity system in schools. 

Dr. Hidayat concluded by sharing learning improvement topics such as the changing roles of teachers and students as knowledge builders and knowledge creators, respectively. He also challenged the audience to keep up with current initiatives such as his own Indonesia Consortium for Learning Improvement (ICLI) whose aim is to organize an activity system of LS that is more academic and supportive of an active community. 

In her talk, Dr. Teodora M. Salubayba shared insights and recommendations on integrating action research into lesson study. Dr. Salubayba presented an actual action research done in a school. She specifically described the action research process that was carried out in that school and the problems that arose. She mentioned that clashes of ideas between and among persons involved in the action research usually lead to discord. In many cases, she documented members initially doing action research becoming less involved later on and that, sometimes, the completion of the action research is left on the initiative of only one person. 

Dr. Salubayba’s talk delved into the intricacies of action research and its similarities with lesson study. One similarity she said is that, like in action research, one of the goals of doing lesson study is to make teachers more independent in doing research. Another similarity is that, like in lesson study, one of the challenges in doing action research is to make the group work harmoniously and productively. More than the clash of ideas, the problem in doing lesson study may come from a clash of personalities among those involved. She further mentioned that teachers in public schools in general, have a hard time accepting criticisms, and for that among other things, she thinks that doing action research on lesson study could be a good idea. 

Dr. Marlon Ebaeguin presented his study about the way he and teachers from two high schools used Design-Based Research (DBR) as a methodology in implementing Lesson Study with culture as intervention. He holds that in order to attain more teaching success and sustainability, research on contextualizing LS in the Philippines has to be done continually. He cited what he called the ‘big disconnect’ between educational research and what we observe in teachers’ practices, and between the general lack of understanding of Lesson Study as deterrents of teacher growth and the proper implementation of Lesson Study in Philippine schools. 

Dr. Ebaeguin detailed the characteristics of a quality DBR study and its advantages over other research methods in implementing LS. Citing the flexibility of testing intervention, mixing methods, and the possibility of continuous evolution of design principles as key features of DBR, he illustrated ways by which LS can be situated in a Philippine public educational environment. With culture as intervention of LS, the bases for the design of the research program are more carefully considered and structured. He emphasized that with all these features, there should be expected variations in the implementations and results of DBR studies. He concluded by saying that DBR can support LS by pointing to ways in which research on LS needs to be undertaken. 

The three symposia organized by local researchers, educators, and teachers focused on the following topics: 1) Lesson Study as vehicle for teacher leadership development in the public schools; 2) Fostering collaborative professionalism; and 3) From tensions to institutionalization: Lesson Study in higher education institutions. 

The first symposium titled Lesson Study as Vehicle for Teacher Leadership Development in Public Schools was facilitated by the team of Ms. Maylani L. Galicia, the Assistant Division Superintendent of the City Division of Tayabas, Albay. Her co-presenters were Mathematics teachers from three different schools in Albay namely, Ms. Brenly B. Mendoza and Mr. Ryan T. Casulang (from Ligao National High School, LNHS); Ms. Geylen M. Abainza (from Marcial O. Rañola Memorial School, MORMS); and Ms. Ma. Salve B. Rosal (from Libon Agro-Industrial High School, LAIHS). 

The symposium focused on LS as a vehicle for teacher leadership development in LNHS, MORMS, and LAIHS. The team took pride in sharing how the Schools Division Office of Albay competed for the BEST Innovation Fund Grant in 2018 and was awarded PHP 1M for the project LS in Mathematics and Science. Through this grant, videography became a supplementary feature in their LS implementations. The presenters also highlighted how lesson study in Albay has progressed from an offshoot training with UP NISMED staff in 2011 up to the present. 

The first speaker, Ms. Mendoza, shared the LNHS LS goal to make students value mathematics by developing their thinking skills. Based on their LS research, positive impacts on content, pedagogy, and attitudes of the 16 LS implementers/researchers have been observed during the implementation of LS in LNHS. The next speaker was Mr. Casulang whose presentation focused on how LS can serve as a tool to improve oneself as a teacher. According to him, the introduction of LS to LNHS was a big boost to the teaching competence and abilities of his fellow mathematics teachers. The third speaker, Ms. Abainza, described LS in Albay as really growing. For her, a good thing about LS implementation is for educators to be able to reflect on their practice through pictures and videos. She ended her presentation by quoting Robert John Meehan who said: The most valuable resource that all teachers have is each other. Without collaboration, our growth is limited to our own perspectives. 

The last speaker was Ms. Rosal. The focus of her presentation was to show how LS contributed to the development of leadership capacities among teachers in LAIHS. She pointed out some key learnings from their LS implementation. According to her, LAIHS’ success depends on institutional support, attitude, working relationship among teachers, work culture and environment, acceptance of the program, and class scheduling. 

The group headed by Dr. Soledad A. Ulep led the convention’s second symposium which focused on collaborative professionalism. Dr. Monalisa T. Sasing, Ms. Richelle Anne C. Mangulabnan, Ms. Helen G. Tanio, and Ms. Julie R. Reyes comprised the rest of the group. Dr. Ulep’s introduction consisted of a short orientation on the Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers (2017) and its definition and elaboration of teacher quality and expectations. Later on, she emphasized the need to help teachers in their pursuit of continued personal growth and professional development. She explained that the way to help teachers with this pursuit is by giving them sustained support through collaboration, and one of the best ways to collaborate with other teachers is by engaging in lesson study. 

The group’s entire presentation revolved around the ten tenets of collaborative professionalism. These tenets are: (1) collective autonomy, (2) collective efficacy, (3) collaborative inquiry, (4) collective responsibility, (5) collective initiative, (6) mutual dialogue, (7) joint work, (8) common meaning purpose, (9) collaborating with students, and (10) big-picture thinking for all. In each of the presentations made by the other group members, the practice of these tenets was illustrated. 

Dr. Sasing’s study highlights the use of microteaching and lesson study in the implementation of lessons for pre-service teacher education. The intervention in the form of microteaching addressed some of the things pre-service teachers needed before they implemented actual research lessons. Ms. Malabnan and her co-teachers at Pinagkawitan Integrated National High School in Batangas, did a modified lesson study for their students to accomplish a project that involved four subject areas. Her group looked into the students’ ability to work well in groups. Ms. Tanio and the teachers from Diffun National High School, Ifugao Village Integrated School, and Magsaysay National High School did a lesson study on the research lesson Images Formed by Plane Mirrors. This undertaking involved several schools in the province, as well as some staff of UP NISMED. Ms. Reyes and her co-teachers at Sta. Lucia High School in Pasig City did a lesson study on various research lessons in mathematics after they attended a seminar at UP NISMED. The implementation of lesson study in their school ultimately resulted in a presentation of a paper at the World Association of Lesson Study in Nagoya, Japan in 2017. 

The third and last symposium titled From Tensions to Institutionalization: Lesson Study in Higher Education Institutions was led by the group headed by Dr. Levi E. Elipane. He is currently an Associate professor at the College of Graduate Studies and Teacher Education Research of Philippine Normal University. His team is composed of Mr. Von Christopher Chua, from De La Salle University, Dr. Leorence Tandog, Ms. Anna Jean Garcia from the University of Southern Mindanao, Ms. Geraldine Libron, and Engineer Marian Grace Veloso of the Ateneo De Davao University. 

The symposium focused mainly on how to nurture and make lesson study more sustainable in higher education institutions. According to Dr. Elipane, he has been collaborating with fellow educators from various universities to make lesson study a form of research and development initiative. His group look looked into how LS can be institutionalized by incorporating it in graduate study courses. They also do demonstration teaching and share their lesson study stories. Seminars, partnerships, and research endeavors were also offered. By doing this, their teachers and students were able to present papers in international conferences. Some were able to publish their research and received recognitions and awards. 

Mr. Chua, a student of Dr. Elipane, presented his lesson study journey during his graduate studies from 2013 to the present. His engagement in lesson study, he said, was a process of metamorphosis for him. In 2013, he found himself as part of a four-member lesson study team that helped other students. That initial experience led his team to write a paper as a requirement for the course. This paper was accepted to several international conferences and eventually was published in the International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies. Dr. Tandog, for his part, shared his team’s experiences in engaging teachers in lesson study through their graduate program. Seminar-workshops were embedded in their courses. From these undertakings, the students were able to produce various research outputs. In Ms. Garcia’s presentation, she shared one of the research outputs of her graduate students which was accepted in an International Conference in Korea. 

The last to present were Ms. Libron and Engr. Veloso from Ateneo de Davao who showcased their lesson study journey which started when they attended the National Conference in Science and Mathematics Education (NCSME) at UP NISMED in 2013. Their learning process of lesson study was enriched through a series of consultations, seminar-workshops, capacity-building, and lesson implementations. Last year, the team of Engr. Veloso was able to present a paper in an International Conference in Malaysia, which also won them the Best Paper award. 

The eight poster presentations provided participants with a glimpse of LS activities around the country. 

The convention is an initial undertaking of PALS which now has over 500 members all over the country. Plans for the second convention which include activities such as parallel presentations and open class or school visit, are now underway.

Read More