1. Lessons learned from using "Lesson Study" with pre-service teachers Christopher S Hlas UW-Eau Claire, Mathematics education hlascs@uwec.edu Christopher S Hlas UW-Eau Claire, Mathematics education hlascs@uwec.edu

2. Overview 1.Lesson study background 2.LS experiment #1 3.LS experiment #2 4.General conclusions, plans for #3 1.Lesson study background 2.LS experiment #1 3.LS experiment #2 4.General conclusions, plans for #3 Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

3. Background: Teaching Gap Circa 2005 Teaching Gap (1999), by Stigler &Hiebert – Comparisons of USA, Japan, Germany – Teaching is a cultural activity – Lesson study model of PD in Japan Circa 2005 Teaching Gap (1999), by Stigler &Hiebert – Comparisons of USA, Japan, Germany – Teaching is a cultural activity – Lesson study model of PD in Japan Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

4. Lesson study model 1.Research 2.Plan 3.Teach (w/ observers) 4.Reflect 5.Goto #1 Could this model work with preservice teachers? 1.Research 2.Plan 3.Teach (w/ observers) 4.Reflect 5.Goto #1 Could this model work with preservice teachers? Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

5. LS experiment #1 Preservice math methods at research university (n=23, practicum and/or methods) Colleague’s class, focused on reform methods Adapted LS model for logistic constraints: – Read Teaching Gap for motivation – Three lessons in one semester (mini-cycles) – Peer teaching – 4-column lesson planning Preservice math methods at research university (n=23, practicum and/or methods) Colleague’s class, focused on reform methods Adapted LS model for logistic constraints: – Read Teaching Gap for motivation – Three lessons in one semester (mini-cycles) – Peer teaching – 4-column lesson planning Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

6. 4-column lesson template Steps of lesson: Learning activities& Key questions Student activities and expected responses Teacher’s response to students& Key aspects Goal & Methods evaluation Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010) Adapted Lewis 2002 Key lesson features or other distinctive information Title of lesson, Grade/content area Course number & title; Standards Student names Objectives:Materials:References used:Time needed: Prior knowledge expected:

7. First lesson (5 wks) 1.Develop GSP lesson (in pairs) – Learn GSP – Draft reviewed by peers and instructor – Taught to peers – Peer/instructor feedback – Revise lesson for summative feedback 1.Develop GSP lesson (in pairs) – Learn GSP – Draft reviewed by peers and instructor – Taught to peers – Peer/instructor feedback – Revise lesson for summative feedback Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

8. Second lesson (2 wks) 2.Problem-solving focus based on reform textbooks – 4-5 “teachers” in a group – Researched lesson, curriculum, assessment tools, historical information regarding curriculum – 30 minutes peer instruction, 15 mins debrief – Revised plans submitted for summative feedback 2.Problem-solving focus based on reform textbooks – 4-5 “teachers” in a group – Researched lesson, curriculum, assessment tools, historical information regarding curriculum – 30 minutes peer instruction, 15 mins debrief – Revised plans submitted for summative feedback Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

9. Third lesson (methods, 2wks) 3.Problem-solving 2 related non-trivial problem – Random pairs – One person taught to small group, other recorded observation – “Students” gave feedback – Week later, students switch roles to new small group – Student feedback – Revision then submitted for summative feedback (practicum worked with cooperating teachers to teach one lesson in schools) 3.Problem-solving 2 related non-trivial problem – Random pairs – One person taught to small group, other recorded observation – “Students” gave feedback – Week later, students switch roles to new small group – Student feedback – Revision then submitted for summative feedback (practicum worked with cooperating teachers to teach one lesson in schools) Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

10. Survey sample questions (n=13) 1.Describe your strongest experience with the four-column lesson plan. 2.Which columns were most helpful, and in what way? 3.Which columns were most difficult to construct? Why? 4.What might be differences for your students between using the four-column plan or a traditional single column plan? 5.Did you collaborate with a peer or cooperating teacher on the plan? What were the comments of that person on the four-column plan? 6.If you could repeat the lesson preparation and teaching you did, what hindsights would you find useful in writing a more complete four-column plan? 1.Describe your strongest experience with the four-column lesson plan. 2.Which columns were most helpful, and in what way? 3.Which columns were most difficult to construct? Why? 4.What might be differences for your students between using the four-column plan or a traditional single column plan? 5.Did you collaborate with a peer or cooperating teacher on the plan? What were the comments of that person on the four-column plan? 6.If you could repeat the lesson preparation and teaching you did, what hindsights would you find useful in writing a more complete four-column plan? Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

11. Example responses “The teacher will be more concerned w/ the student's understanding of the lesson w/ the 4 column plan, than finishing everything in the objective” “it really helps in the development of a lesson to get feedback and different viewpoints of how things might unfold in the classroom” “I find the 4-column plan clumsy and bothersome. I would only use it if I had to” “The teacher will be more concerned w/ the student's understanding of the lesson w/ the 4 column plan, than finishing everything in the objective” “it really helps in the development of a lesson to get feedback and different viewpoints of how things might unfold in the classroom” “I find the 4-column plan clumsy and bothersome. I would only use it if I had to” Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

12. Takeaways Students focused on student thinking Students found benefits in collaboration and feedback Students thought 4-col LP was recommended for daily planning 3 mini-cycles? Students focused on student thinking Students found benefits in collaboration and feedback Students thought 4-col LP was recommended for daily planning 3 mini-cycles? Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

13. LS experiment #2 Circa 2008 Preservice methods at teaching university My class, 2 nd time teaching methods 4 groups of students, 3-4 in group 10 weeks, meet twice a week Circa 2008 Preservice methods at teaching university My class, 2 nd time teaching methods 4 groups of students, 3-4 in group 10 weeks, meet twice a week Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

14. Planning Concept map big math ideas, choose concept Research concepts – What are big ideas? – Find research articles on student thinking – Compare sample lessons (reform/trad) 3 weeks for completion, mostly outside class Concept map big math ideas, choose concept Research concepts – What are big ideas? – Find research articles on student thinking – Compare sample lessons (reform/trad) 3 weeks for completion, mostly outside class Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

15. Lesson one Create lesson – Topic w/ brief background research – Objectives – Using 4-column lesson plan 4 weeks to plan Game lesson to another group while observed (S/T ratio issues) Reflections due next class with debrief Create lesson – Topic w/ brief background research – Objectives – Using 4-column lesson plan 4 weeks to plan Game lesson to another group while observed (S/T ratio issues) Reflections due next class with debrief Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

16. Lesson two Give revised lesson one week after last lesson Reflection due next class along Comparison of L1 and L2 also due Give revised lesson one week after last lesson Reflection due next class along Comparison of L1 and L2 also due Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

17. Anecdotal observations Students didn’t understand 4-column LP Teaching to peers was limiting Research component good, but difficulty narrowing topic Logistic constraints Students didn’t understand 4-column LP Teaching to peers was limiting Research component good, but difficulty narrowing topic Logistic constraints Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

18. Future plans More scaffolding earlier (motivate LS using TG) More scaffolding with 4-column lesson planning (develop with students instead of give to students) Teach to actual students (first/second, logistics) More time for revision? More scaffolding earlier (motivate LS using TG) More scaffolding with 4-column lesson planning (develop with students instead of give to students) Teach to actual students (first/second, logistics) More time for revision? Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

19. Conclusions? "single lesson contains many (if not all) of the critical components that teachers must consider to improve instruction" (Sims, 2009, p. 725) Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)

20. Q/A & Resources Matthews, M., Hlas, C.S., &Finken, T. (2009 March). Using four-column lesson planning and Lesson Study with pre-service teachers. Mathematics Teacher, 102, 504-508. Lewis, C. (2002). Lesson Study: A Handbook of Teacher-Led Instructional Improvement. Philadelphia: Research for Better Schools. Sims, L. & Walsh, D. (2009). Lesson study with preservice teachers: Lessons from lessons. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 724-733. Stiger, J.W. &Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: Free Press Matthews, M., Hlas, C.S., &Finken, T. (2009 March). Using four-column lesson planning and Lesson Study with pre-service teachers. Mathematics Teacher, 102, 504-508. Lewis, C. (2002). Lesson Study: A Handbook of Teacher-Led Instructional Improvement. Philadelphia: Research for Better Schools. Sims, L. & Walsh, D. (2009). Lesson study with preservice teachers: Lessons from lessons. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 724-733. Stiger, J.W. &Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: Free Press Preservice lesson study (WMC, 2010)