Investigating Learning Processes in Teachers' Professional Discussions in Lesson Study

OBJECTIVE, TOPIC AND RESEARCH QUESTION

Despite recognizing that human learning is a mystery that may never be solved (Säljö, 2000/2001, p.12), the objective of this study is to contribute to the literature on teachers’ professional learning.

For this purpose, teacher discussions in Lesson Study (LS) are analysed. LS is a collaborative approach to teacher learning that originated in Japan more than hundred years ago and is now widespread across the world. Through the phases of a  LS cycle, “plan, do and see” (Isoda, 2010, 2015), teachers work together to gain knowledge of how to promote student learning. In LS groups, teachers plan, conduct and reflect on one or more research lessons, understood as lessons designed for the purpose of investigating the connection between teaching and student learning.

Teachers’ discussions in LS offer opportunities for researchers to scrutinize teachers’ professional learning, by  “opening a window” into teachers’ reflections concerning teaching and learning. For this study, we have developed the following research question: How to describe teachers’ professional learning as it appears in teacher discussions in LS?

CONCEPTUAL/THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The current study leans on a social understanding of teachers’ learning, viewing learning as an active collaborative process ‘in which teachers engage in activities that lead to change in knowledge and beliefs (cognition) and/or teaching practices (behaviour)’ (Bakkenes, Vermunt & Wubbels, 2010, p. 536). The concept of  ‘community of practice’ (Wenger, 2008) informs this study by describing learning as ‘negotiating of meaning’ (Wenger, 2008, p. 226) and by emphasizing the importance of a group’s ‘shared repertoire’ (p. 73). This study also draws on the theory of ‘collectively thinking’ and ‘interthinking’ (Littleton & Mercer, 2013; Mercer, 2000, 2002) to describe teachers’ collaborative learning, being visible through spoken interactions in discussions in LS.

METHODOLOGY

To gain knowledge concerning teachers’ professional learning, teacher interactions in discussions in LS are investigated. This study has a qualitative design that includes an inductive approach to teachers’ professional learning that is closely related to empirical data, represented by transcripts of audio taped teacher discussions. Data for the analysis is retrievd from discussions by two different teacher groups. The teachers in the first group (LS group 1) aimed to promote group discussions of social science by tenth-grade students (15–16 years old). The second group (LS group 2) investigated how to promote the reading skills of eighth-grade students (13–14 years old) via reading strategies. Five teacher discussions in LS were selected for close analysis, two from LS group 1 and three from LS group 2. The discussions were all part of the ‘see’ phase of the LS cycle, representing teacher discussions that occurred after research lessons. The analytic approach is described in the attached Methods chapter.

RESULT

Teacher interactions developed in different ways during the post-research lesson discussions. Analysis of teacher interactions during discussions revealed different intertwined learning processes. These processes included sharing and reflecting on observations from research lessons, teachers’ meaning making processes connected to these observations and, shorter or longer processes of decision making related to changes in practice. Based on close analysis of these processes, teachers’ professional learning is presented in this study as dimensions of learning processes, represented by five scenarios: sharing, meaning making, noticing, turn and developing practice.

The result shows that professional learning as it appears in the teacher discussions of this study can be understood as a number of different learning processes that influence and  interfere with each other.

The attached Methods chapter includes further description and theorizing of the five scenarios.

METHODS SECTION Using an inductive approach, the researcher worked close to the data material, an approach that included an ongoing process whereby transcriptions of teacher discussions were read and re-read several times. To prepare for further analysis, transcripts were divided into episodes, representing small meaningful units that included teachers’ reports, interpretations or discussions related to student learning in the research lessons. Further, the episodes were investigated to gain insight into what type(s) of learning processes that seemed to appear in each episode.To further investigate the nature of teachers’ professional learning in these discussions, the episodes were investigated by bringing in theoretical perspectives on learning. The scenario of sharing can be understood as building a ‘shared repertoire’ (Wenger, 2008) or a group’s ‘dynamic common knowledge’ (Littleton & Mercer, 2013, p. 60). The scenario of meaning making can be understood as the LS groups’ joint negotiation of meaning (Littleton & Mercer, 2013; Wenger, 2008). Noticing is a term that can be described as teachers’ professional awareness and sensitivity directed toward classroom episodes and connected to pedagogical solutions or changes in practice (Jacobs et al., 2010; Mason, 2002, 2011; van Es, 2011). Turn can be linked to ‘learning points’ (Dudley, 2016, p. 19) in the discussion, which are understood as changes in the assumptions or opinions visible in the discussions, which are here anchored to student observations or student responses. Such turns may be related to what one of the teachers in a study by Owen (2015, p.64) described as ‘aha moments’. The fifth and last scenario, developing practice, describes the consequences of teachers’ decisions regarding changes in teaching. Returning to the definition of teacher learning as a social process (Bakkenes, Vermunt & Wubbels, 2010), these five scenarios represent an active collaborative process ‘in which teachers engage in activities that lead to change in knowledge and beliefs (cognition) and/or teaching practices (behaviour)’ (p. 536). The term scenario has been chosen to represent different dimensions of the learning processes that appeared in the teacher discussions considered in this study. Scenario originates from the Latin word scaena or scena and can be understood to mean a ‘description of a scene’. This approach to the description of learning processes is inspired by Messiou and Ainscow (2015, p. 251), who use the term cameo to describe teachers’ different approaches to student responses and how this influenced different types of changes in teachers’ thinking or practice.

CONCLUSIONS The importance of teachers’ professional learning to the quality of education has been emphasized internationally, both in education policy (OECD, 2005, 2021) and by researchers (Borko et al., 2010; Cordingley, 2015; Dahl et al., 2016; Darling-Hammond et al., 2017; Fullan & Hargreaves, 2016). Such attention points to the importance of gaining more knowledge concerning how teachers learn, a topic that has been little researched (Owen, 2015; Vrikki, 2017; Webster-Wright, 2009). LEARNING PROCESSES APPEARING IN TEACHER DISCUSSIONS Learning cannot be ‘seen’ directly but must be studied indirectly through what people say or do (Säljö, 2015/2016, p. 33). Säljö emphasises the importance of communication, because it is through communication that people’s knowledge and experiences become visible (2015/2016, p. 113). Teachers' professional conversations show what teachers prioritize talking about and play an important role in their learning (Readman & Rowe, 2016). Hence, exploring teachers’ spoken interactions can contribute to knowledge about their learning processes. In this study, learning processes in teacher conversations are presented as dimensions of professional learning, represented as sharing, meaning making, noticing, turn and development practice. These processes were identified from the empirical data and have been illuminated by theoretical perspectives (see the attached Methods section). These scenarios can be seen as intertwined learning processes that influence and interfere with each other. IMPLICATIONS Although all attempts to analyse learning processes must be seen as incomplete (Wood & Cajkler, 2016, p. 10), this study has contributed to the understanding of teachers’ learning processes as they appear in teacher discussions in LS. Teachers' conversations are arenas for creating meaning, and it is through exploring meaning-making processes that one can understand learning (Säljö, 2015/2016). Further studies can potentially be based on the dimensions presented here and serve to develop these ideas further.

LITERATURE Bakkenes, I., Vermunt, J. D., & Wubbels, T. (2010). Teacher learning in the context of educational innovation: Learning activities and learning outcomes of experienced teachers. Learning and Instruction, 20(6), 533–548. Borko, H., Jacobs, J., & Koellner, K. (2010). Contemporary approaches to teacher professional development. International encyclopedia of education, 7(2), 548-556. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.00654-0 Isoda, M. (2010). Lesson Study: Problem Solving Approaches in Mathematics Education as a Japanese Experience. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8, 17–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.003 Isoda, M. (2015). The Science of Lesson Study in the Problem Solving Approach. I I. Maitree, I. Masami & Y. Banhar (Red.), Lesson Study: Challenges in Mathematics Education (s. 81–108). World Scientific. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835420_0006 Jacobs, V. R., Lamb, L. L. & Philipp, R. A. (2010). Professional Noticing of Children’s Mathematical Thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(2), 169–202. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.41.2.0169 Littleton, K. & Mercer, N. (2013). Interthinking: Putting talk to work. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203809433 Mason, J. (2002). Researching Your Own Practice: The Discipline of Noticing. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203471876 Mason, J. (2011). Noticing: Roots and branches. I M. G. Sherin, V. R. Jacobs & R. A. Philipp (Red.), Mathematics teacher noticing (s. 35-50). Routledge. Mercer, N. (2000). Words and Minds: How We Use Language to Think Together. Routledge. Mercer, N. (2002). Developing Dialogues. I G. Wells & G. Claxton (Red.), Learning for Life in the 21st Century: Sociocultural Perspectives on the Future of Education (s. 141–153). Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470753545.ch11 Messiou, K. & Ainscow, M. (2015). Responding to learner diversity: Student views as a catalyst for powerful teacher development? Teaching and Teacher Education, 51, 246–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.07.002 Readman, K. & Rowe, J. (2016). Developing emerging leaders using professional learning conversations. Higher Education Research & Development, 35(5), 1011–1024. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1139554 Säljö, R. (2001). Læring i praksis. Et sosiokulturelt perspektiv (S. Moen, Transl.). Cappelen Damm Akademisk. (Originally published 2000). Säljö, R. (2016). Læring – en introduksjon til perspektiver og metaforer (I.C. Goveia, Transl.). Cappelen Damm Akademisk. (Originally published 2015). van Es, E. A. (2011). A Framework for Learning to Notice Student Thinking. I M. G. Sherin, V. R. Jacobs, & R. A. Philipp (Red.), Mathematics Teacher Noticing. Seeing Through Teachers' Eyes (s. 134–151). Routledge. Wenger, E. (2008). Communities of Practice. Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803932 Wood, P. & Cajkler, W. (2016). A participatory approach to Lesson Study in higher education. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 5(1), 4–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLLS-08-2015-0027