Jennifer Shearman, Canterbury Christ Church University Jennifer.shearman@canterbury.ac.uk

1. Can a “Lesson Study” adaptation have a positive impact on the development of trainee Teach First Mathematics teachers? Jennifer Shearman, Canterbury Christ Church University Jennifer.shearman@canterbury.ac.uk

2. Abstract • Japanese Lesson Study is a collaborative approach to planning and teaching that has been attributed as a major factor in achievement of Japanese High School students in mathematics • Research literature evaluating Lesson Study groups suggested that an adaptation of Lesson Study undertaken with Teach First trainees may be a successful sustainable approach to accelerating development of the participants’ pedagogy and reflective skills • A mixed-method, interpretive case study pilot was undertaken, with 3 participants taking part in an adaptation of Lesson Study • Results suggest that a single iteration of collaborative planning has a measurable impact on pedagogy development and reflective skills

3. Why Lesson Study? • “Lesson study is a simple idea. If you want to improve instruction, what could be more obvious than collaborating with fellow teachers to plan, observe, and reflect on lessons?” (Lewis, 2002) • Teach First participants – high achieving • Focus on subject-specific pedagogy and reflection • Challenging schools • Mission to “close the gap” – role in whole school improvement • Focus on increasingly school-led ITE • Existing Lesson Study Groups involving Teach First teachers

4. Why Lesson Study? • Perceived superior achievement of Japanese High School Students “the highest scoring classroom in the US (and UK) sample did not perform as well as the lowest-scoring classroom in the Japanese example” (Stigler and Herbert, 1999) • “Bottom-up” CPD, driven by teachers – Japanese culture • Correlation between incidence of Lesson Study and constructivist teaching methods (Lewis & Tsuchida,1998) – personalvalues • “Kounaikenshuu”; no teacher ever becomes totally ‘competent’ but all teachers can and must improve over weeks, months and years – contrast to ‘standards’ and ‘criteria’.

5. USA, since 1990s • Rapid growth in popularity • Lesson Study effective in a USA school setting if the teachers learn skills of applying critical lenses to planning, observing and evaluating the lesson (Fernandez, et al., 2003) • Increased positive feedback from teachers (Perry and Lewis, 2008) • Japan (Lewis & Tsuchida, 1998) • Student attainment • Distribution of new content and approaches • Connecting practice in the classroom with the broader goals of education • Forum for exploring conflicting ideas about pedagogy • Improved the standing of teachers Evidence of Effectiveness • UK, since 2001 • Positive effect upon pupil learning, achievement and engagement • No evidence of negative effects (Dudley, 2011). • Correlation between school improvement and incidence of Lesson Study (McKinsey and company, 2007) • Limited evidence of ‘bottom-up’ CPD (Burghes & Robinson, 2009) ITE, since 2008 “Microteaching” Lesson Study Development in the teachers’ plans Reduced ‘teacher led instruction’ Increased ‘class discussion’ and ‘student exploration’ (Fernandez, 2010). Is learning ‘tutor-student’, ‘mentor-student’ or ‘student-student’? (Carroll, 2013)

6. Research Questions • Does Lesson Study have an impact on pedagogy? • Does Lesson Study have an impact on reflective skills? • Will Lesson Study be sustainable? • “Will an adaptation of Lesson Study have a measurable short-term and long-term impact on Teach First participants’ pedagogy and skills of reflection?

7. Methodology • Most previous research interpretivist (Fernandez, 2002), (Perry & Lewis, 2008), (Ricks, 2011), (Carroll, 2013) • Some positivist research (Stigler & Hiebert, 1999), (Lewis & Tsuchida, 1998), (Dudley, December 2008) and (McKinsey and company, 2007) • Mixed-method, interpretive case study pilot • N=3  • Develop pedagogy (including mathematical pedagogy) • Develop an awareness of what ‘good’ teaching is and pedagogical strategies. • Encourage creativity, a willingness to take risks, try out new ideas • Improve subject knowledge for teaching within the topic taught during the lesson • Develop the participants’ skills of evaluation and reflection • Develop reflective, critical analysis of teaching. • Develop participants’ ability to evaluate. • Develop sustainable partnership • To share creative ideas generated by the process with colleagues. • Create a test bed and forum for trialling and evaluating new ideas • Involve participants and colleagues in their own professional development for the benefit of the whole school.

9. Self-assessment scale of 0-10 used on at least 3 occasions; after the first draft (created by participant), after the second draft (following mentor, tutor and peer comments), after a third draft (if necessary) and after evaluating the lesson • Lesson Plan, not the lesson or the teacher that is assessed • Adaptation of the Ofsted criteria for ‘features of good mathematics teaching’ (Ofsted, 2008). Development of pedagogy

10. Development of evaluation and reflection, assessment of sustainability BLACK: AllGREEN: Initial plan onlyRED: Additions after 1st and second iterationsBLUE: Additions after post-lesson feedback and evaluation • Qualitative assessment of changes in lesson plan • Semi-structured interview ‘neriage’ • Qualitative assessment of evaluation • Power relationships and bias, focus on written/verbal evidence not tutor perception

11. Analysis – Development of pedagogy • All participants perceived that their lesson plans increased in effectiveness • no aspects of pedagogy were perceived to have worsened • Average scores increased by 1.5 points through collaboration • All the participants spoke positively about the effects of collaboration • Diminishing returns in taking part in more than one iteration of collaborative planning. • Average increase of 0.2 of a point after the second collaboration • Challenges in managing differences of opinion • Time constraints of taking part in such a task. • On average, participants perceived their plans more favourably after teaching them. • Post lesson feedback and evaluation scores increased by 0.2 • Participants were encouraged to take more of a ‘risk’ following collaboration • Specific categories that reported large score increases (an overall increase >2.5 points) relate to pupil activity and assessment for learning • Specific categories that reported small score increases (an overall increase <1 point) relate to level of challenge and use of subject knowledge • Both participants’ lesson plans changed considerably in format – more focused on objectives and questioning, less on ‘logistics’ and timing

12. Analysis – Reflection, and sustainability • Development of evaluation and reflection • Process of collaboration developed evaluation skills in the participants • Pinpoint specific points in the lesson where effective learning occurred, and how collaboration influenced these points • Justify a particular approach, was taken sometimes acknowledging that the new approach post-collaboration had greater impact than would have happened originally • Concentration on LEARNING (neriage enhanced this effect). • Process of periodic self-assessment of lesson plans in itself developed evaluation skills • ‘unpick and unpack’ plan in order to reach a score • Participants found it challenging to remain focused on the lesson plan during the feedback • Development of sustainable collaboration • Participants all felt that the collaboration process improved their practice.. • Two participants felt process was too time-consuming to be repeated in the same way. • Participants demonstrated that the process of lesson-planning was very specific to the school, department, and makeup of the class and timing of lessons.

13. Implications and future research • Was it Lesson Study? • What would increase participation? • Microteaching at Summer Institute – partnership between school and University • Mentor training • The effect of self-assessing lesson plans using a ‘good practice’ framework on trainee teacher development • The relationship between the perception of Lesson Study by teachers and the culture of the school they are working in • The effectiveness of a ‘pure’ Lesson Study project in a Teaching School with a Lesson Study group that has a mixture of trainees, NQTs and experienced teachers (including Specialist Leaders in Education) • The impact of an adapted Lesson Study at the Teach First Summer Institute

14. References • Burghes, D. & Robinson, D., 2009. Lesson Study: Enhancing Mathematics Teaching and Learning, Reading: CFBT Education Trust. • Carroll, C., 2013. Lesson Study: Helping Pre-service Teachers to Bridge the Theory-Practice gap. Cork, University of Cork. • Dudley, P., 2011. Lesson Study Development in England: From School Networks to National Policy. International Journal of Lesson and Learning Studies, 1(1), pp. 85-101. • Fernandez, C., 2002. Learning from Japanese Approaches to Professional Development: The Case of Lesson Study. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(5), pp. 393-405. • Fernandez, M., 2010. Investigating how and what prospective teachers learn through microteaching Lesson Study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(1), p. 351–362. • Lewis, C., 2002. Does lesson study have a future in the United States?. Nagoya Journal of Education and Human Development, Volume 1, pp. 1-23. • Lewis, C. & Tsuchida, I., 1998. A lesson is like a swiftly flowing river: Research lessons and the improvement of Japanese education. American Educator, Volume Winter, pp. 14-17 and 50-52. • McKinsey and company, 2007. How the world's best performing school systems come out on top, London: McKinsey and company. • Ofsted, 2008. Mathematics: Understanding the Score - Improving practice in mathematics teaching at a secondary level, London: Crown. • Perry, R. & Lewis, C., 2008. What is successful adaptation of lesson study in the US?. Journal of Educational Change, 10(4), pp. 365-391. • Stigler, J. & Hiebert, J., 1999. The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education in the classroom. Kindle ed. New York: Free Press.