1. Davida Fischman
  2. Professor
  3. ACES: Algebraic Concepts for Elementary Students
  4. ACES.csusb.edu
  5. CSU San Bernardino
  1. Jeremy Aikin
  2. Assistant Professor of Mathematics
  3. ACES: Algebraic Concepts for Elementary Students
  4. ACES.csusb.edu
  5. CSU San Bernardino
  1. Kelli Wasserman
  2. Faculty
  3. ACES: Algebraic Concepts for Elementary Students
  4. ACES.csusb.edu
  5. CSU San Bernardino
Public Discussion
  • Icon for: Kelli Wasserman

    Kelli Wasserman

    Co-Presenter
    May 14, 2018 | 01:48 a.m.

    Thank you for taking the time to watch our video Lesson Study:  A Vehicle for Change!

    Lesson Study is not a new idea, it is common practice in some countries, like Japan.  The idea is to help teachers grow in their instruction by providing time and a space to help them really unpack instruction.  Through collaboration, teachers explore content in perhaps a deeper way than they had previously, by consulting with content experts, or reading current research.  Teachers explore student struggles by identifying common misconceptions, analyzing data and talking to students. They plan and implement a lesson, taking this opportunity to experiment with different content and instructional strategies. And then analyzing the data to see if they made an impact.  

    Our experience with Lesson Study has been positive.  Participating teachers typically feel more confident in the content they teach and in the instructional strategies they try. They also feel more supported as they develop a true professional learning community!

    We would love to hear about your experiences with Lesson Study, if you have participated.  And, we would love to talk to you about Lesson Study if you are considering it!

  • Icon for: Stan Yoshinobu

    Stan Yoshinobu

    Higher Ed Faculty
    May 14, 2018 | 12:49 p.m.

    Wonderful! Glad to see Lesson Study taking off in the U.S. What do you see as the way we can expand this to include more and more teachers?  

  • Icon for: Jeremy Aikin

    Jeremy Aikin

    Co-Presenter
    May 14, 2018 | 06:43 p.m.

    Great question! Growing the culture of lesson study as a standard approach to teacher professional learning has been a big challenge in the U.S. Such cultural shifts seem to always be most effective in a "grass-roots" approach wherein we start small and interest begins to spread via word-of-mouth, from teacher to teacher, and eventually to administrators and to different schools and districts. We have recently established the Inland Counties Lesson Study Support Hub in our region in an effort cultivate such a grass-roots movement while providing a networked support structure to guide and determine the needs of the various lesson study teams who are active in our region. We hope to be able to incorporate and support new lesson study teams each year. This support hub is a part of a larger network structure called the California Action Network for Mathematics Excellence and Equity (CANMEE), which was established as a collaboration among many different state and national groups (https://cmpso.org/canmee/) to support a system of regional lesson study hubs in California. The idea is that we not only hope to expand lesson study to include more teachers in the U.S., but we also want to ensure that the important (essential) components of lesson study are always included when teachers begin their journey to really improve their practice.   

     
    1
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Stan Yoshinobu
  • Icon for: Stan Yoshinobu

    Stan Yoshinobu

    Higher Ed Faculty
    May 14, 2018 | 07:16 p.m.

    Thank you! That very helpful and makes sense. G

  • Icon for: Nadine Bonda

    Nadine Bonda

    Facilitator
    May 15, 2018 | 09:32 a.m.

    Lesson study is a very important topic.  Helping teachers to reflect on what they teach and then to take the time to improve it is important.  I am wondering how you integrate helping teachers to gain a deep understanding of the mathematical concept itself (an important first step) with then designing a lesson plan that will convey the learning to the students.  How will you measure your results?

  • Icon for: Davida Fischman

    Davida Fischman

    Lead Presenter
    May 17, 2018 | 01:24 a.m.

    Lesson study being situated in the context of teaching makes the integration very natural. Teachers often select their topic of study based on their classroom experiences, and even while studying the topic in its own right they naturally think about ways to make it more understandable and conceptual not only to themselves but also to their students. They incorporate study of common (mis)conceptions, and frequently interview students to gain a deeper understanding of their own student's conceptions of the topic. This all feeds into the lesson design, as teachers think not only of activities to highlight important concepts, but also of formative assessment in the classroom, and ways they might respond to students' questions and confusions.

    Regarding measuring results, are you asking about assessing student learning in the research lesson? Designing that assessment is an integral part of the lesson planning process, often involving designing an "exit card" to provide evidence of student learning at the end of the lesson (in addition to observing, and sometimes collecting, student work during the lesson). The teachers then engage in post-lesson analysis, in which the exit cards (and possibly other student work) are examined and discussed to learn more about student thinking. This might also lead to additional interviews of students, to understand better the thinking behind their written work.

  • Icon for: Brian Drayton

    Brian Drayton

    Researcher
    May 16, 2018 | 11:44 a.m.

     Nadine's question is mine, as well.  

    It would be interesting to have a dialogue between this team and Mike Steele's 

    (see http://stemforall2018.videohall.com/presentatio...

    in thinking about ways for teachers to support each others' growth. 

  • Icon for: Davida Fischman

    Davida Fischman

    Lead Presenter
    May 17, 2018 | 01:45 a.m.

    Yes, it would! 

    I should note that in addition to the teacher learning communities supported and facilitated by project personnel, in the MSP project we built in to the design monthly self-facilitated teachers study/collaboration time. Thus the teachers met in small groups to focus on study and research of their own choosing. This either followed on the lesson study topics, or led to new lesson study topics, or involved topics in other areas. The goal was not only to support teacher learning during the project, but also to support development of independent teacher learning communities that would be sustained after the funding ended. 

  • Icon for: Karen Economopoulos

    Karen Economopoulos

    Facilitator
    May 16, 2018 | 04:15 p.m.

    I'm curious about how often teachers have the opportunity to participate in a Lesson Study during the school year and whether or not you are tracking when the Lesson study experience begins to have a measurable, ongoing impact on teachers' practice? 

  • Icon for: Davida Fischman

    Davida Fischman

    Lead Presenter
    May 17, 2018 | 01:56 a.m.

    In both projects we built in 10 full days of lesson study annually. Most of the teams went through two lesson study cycles each year in this time. 

    As for impact on practice, it's difficult to single out the effect of the lesson study. In the MSP, for example, we provided a 2-week summer institute, monthly seminars, and self-facilitated collaboration time in addition to the lesson study. However, the Inland Counties Lesson Study Support Hub (mentioned by Jeremy Aikin in a previous response) has the potential to provide this kind of information, as it focusses primarily on lesson study.

  • Icon for: Kelli Wasserman

    Kelli Wasserman

    Co-Presenter
    May 17, 2018 | 10:16 a.m.

    I would agree with Davida that it would be difficult to discern the impact of just lesson study, as there were so many other professional development components of one of the grants showcased here. However, in terms of tracking measurable growth, in this grant the teachers were videotaped at least once every year that they participated in the the 5 year grant.  Those videos are now being coded, using the Mathematical Quality of Instruction (MQI) rubric where the data will be compared across the years to determine growth.

     

    For the other grant however, lesson study was the main focus of the professional development.  These teachers were not videotaped annually (this grant had a very different funding structure).  However, we did periodic observations of these teachers (outside of lesson study), and are comparing notes from year to year.  I can say that what I noticed as a facilitator of lesson study in this grant, is that these teachers embraced the benefits of figuring out the underlying concept that students were struggling with (for instance, one group claimed that students struggled with solving equations because they did not understand inverse operations, but later came to the realization that it was really because students did not understand equivalence).  These types ah-has have led this group of teachers to think more about the big ideas in their planning, to be more purposeful in their questioning, and to approach instruction from a more conceptual perspective. 

  • Icon for: Nancy McGowan

    Nancy McGowan

    Facilitator
    May 16, 2018 | 09:23 p.m.

    Lesson Study is a very valuable form of professional development! :)  In the video, it mentioned a team of teachers gathering to observe a lesson, provide feedback, etc.  I was curious about the teams that have been tried and which ones seem to be most effective.  Ex.Teachers of one grade level with expertise focused on the standards for that grade  OR a team of teachers from multiple grades in order to consider the various abilities within one class.  

  • Icon for: Davida Fischman

    Davida Fischman

    Lead Presenter
    May 17, 2018 | 02:32 a.m.

    Most of our teams include teachers of two or more grades, and we have found that to be extremely effective. Teachers are able to get a good sense of the progression of content through the grades, which helps them in understanding student needs, and then in lesson planning. They also develop a deeper sense of shared responsibility for students, with long-term learning in mind. 

    We have also had facilitators with a variety of backgrounds and experiences, and that has enriched our facilitator community. And important aspect of our work has been to stay faithful to core aspects of lesson study (for example, the study component and the live observation of the research lesson) while allowing teams to develop their own characters and styles. Some of this is described in our paper "Teacher Learning in Lesson Study" (https://scholarworks.umt.edu/tme/vol10/iss3/5/).

  • Icon for: Kathryn Lewis

    Kathryn Lewis

    K-12 Administrator
    May 19, 2018 | 12:46 a.m.

    Very interesting project! Thanks for sharing.  Can you elaborate on some of the structures you used during the initial professional development with teachers?

  • Icon for: Kelli Wasserman

    Kelli Wasserman

    Co-Presenter
    May 21, 2018 | 01:17 a.m.

    Hi Kathryn!  Thanks for your question.  There were actually two different projects here, both of them incorporated lesson study.  The project mentioned above was a 5 year grant, which was a partnership between one school district and CSU San Bernardino.  The initial professional development that teachers participated in was a two week intensive summer institute.  These were full days (6 hrs.) of sessions, where teachers would participate in problem solving as a whole group (60 teachers); then they would go to grade level sessions that focused specifically on content from their grade level; and breakout sessions where they chose a topic they were interested in.  These included more pedagogical topics including topics like understanding the standards of mathematical practice (including a session just on modeling with mathematics), utilizing formative assessment strategies, facilitating classroom discussions, etc.  That was the initial PD, but there were a total of 5 summer institutes that occurred over the course of the grant.

    Then, they attended 3 hour monthly seminars to continue the learning, and this was 10 months a year for 5 years.  Additionally, teachers were put in teams for lesson study, which I think Davida mentioned was 10 full release days per year; and then the independent collaboration time.

  • Icon for: Davida Fischman

    Davida Fischman

    Lead Presenter
    May 21, 2018 | 04:59 p.m.

    One additional structural aspect: in planning the program, and considering the difficulty in making substantive changes in instruction, we asked that teachers apply as teams to participate in the project, and that they obtain administrator approval for their participation (there were additional reasons for the need for administrator approval). Those teams formed also the basis for determining lesson study teams, and the teams tended to prefer to work together in the summer institutes and academic year sessions (though sometimes we mixed them up during those sessions for various reasons). 

    We found that the team approach worked well, and teachers formed strong communities of practice that provided both support for change and support for learning.

  • Further posting is closed as the showcase has ended.