Lesson study: an exploration of its translation beyond Japan

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the popularity of Japanese lesson study (JLS) beyond Japan and the challenges this translation might pose. It notes that there is not a universally accepted definition of lesson study (LS) and seeks to identify the “critical components” of JLS through a review of the literature. It then uses a systematic literature review of recent studies of the implementation of LS with in-service teachers beyond Japan to analyse the models of LS used against these seven critical components in order to explore the degree of fidelity to the Japanese model. Design/methodology/approach A broad review of the literature on JLS available in the English language identifies seven “critical components”. A systematic literature review of 200 recent English language studies of the implementation of LS with in-service teachers beyond Japan is then carried out. Articles published between 2005 and 2015 are explored, including peer reviewed articles, scientific journals, book chapters and PhD dissertations. This systematic review enables an analysis of the models of LS used in studies from beyond Japan against the “seven critical components” of JLS. Findings The analysis shows that there is not an internationally shared understanding of Japanese lesson study (JLS) and that many of the missing components are those which distinguish LS as a research process, not simply a collaborative professional development approach. It also reveals that UK LS models seem particularly far from the Japanese model in those critical components which connect teachers’ knowledge and understanding within groups, to knowledge and understanding that exists beyond it. The study discusses whether these differences could be attributed to structural or cultural differences between Japan and other nations. Research limitations/implications The search for descriptions of the JLS is limited to articles available in the English language, which, therefore, represent a quite limited body of authority on the “critical components” of LS. The systematic review is similarly limited to English language articles, and there is a clear bias towards the USA, with the Far East and the UK making up the majority of the remaining studies. The study suggests that future research on LS beyond Japan should consider teachers’ attitudes towards the research elements of the process as well as their skills and confidence in carrying out research into practice. Practical implications The study strikes a note of caution for schools wishing to implement JLS as an approach to teacher professional development in the UK and beyond. Japan’s systemic approach has embedded LS experience and expertise into the education system, meaning a uniform approach to LS is much more likely. In addition, other systemic challenges may arise, for example, UK professional development time and resources is not designed with JLS in mind and may therefore require a significant reworking. Originality/value Whilst several systematic reviews of LS have explored its growth, geographical spread, impact and key features, this study provides a different perspective. It analyses whether and to what degree the “lesson study” models these studies describe align with the literature on JLS, and the implications of this for researchers and practitioners.

Lesson study as a way of improving school-day navigation for pupils with severe intellectual disability and autism

“…This may be because teachers and researchers outside of Japan have difficulty understanding the Japanese perspective of lifelong learning goals, where it can take six months to formulate an LS lesson, even when the teachers involved work on it daily (Fujii, 2014). Accordingly, Seleznyov (2018) emphasized that although LS has been frequently used in Western countries, there are remaining challenges in finding a transnational shared understanding of its original core components and in particular how to apply research in practice. In this context, Norwich et al (2020) suggested the need for research measuring the changes and limitations in LS to increase participation, belonging and achievement at the highest possible level in SEND teaching.…”

Curriculum design through lesson study

“…In its transformation into other countries and schools, it is found that there is much variation in practice. Seleznyov's (2018) In summary, studies of the translation of JLS into contexts beyond Japan show that there is not an internationally shared understanding of JLS. It is interesting to note that several of the often-missing components are those that distinguish JLS as a research process, instead of merely a collaborative approach to professional development.…”

Exploring lesson study in postsecondary education through self-study

“…Initially, the criticism lesson became a part of lesson study as well as the approach of local normal schools for teacher education while, later on, it found its way from preservice teacher education to in-service professional development. Stigler and Hiebert (1999) are credited with the initial publications about lesson study (modeled in the Japanese tradition) as a method to improve teaching in the North American IJLLS 9,4 context (Seleznyov, 2018). Lesson study, in this context, generally involves groups of teachers or instructors interested in collaborating to develop a "research lesson".…”

“…The process of planning, doing, checking and acting (see Figure 1) is completed once again with the new lesson (Cerbin and Kopp, 2006). However, other researchers suggested that reteaching a lesson intended for a specific class at a specific point in time is unethical and not considered a component of Japanese lesson study (Seleznyov, 2018). As a middle ground, Seleznyov (2018) recommended that information learned through past research lessons be incorporated into future research lessons.…”

“…To inform their work, the group read scholarly articles and book chapters and developed a common understanding of lesson study (Alvine et al, 2007;Fernandez, 2002;Fernandez et al, 2003;Fernandez and Yoshida, 2004;Seleznyov, 2018;Stigler and Hiebert, 1999;Watanabe, 2018). After considerable discussion, the decision was made to focus on Alireza's class for the collaborative lesson study.…”