topic they are about to teach. Then the team collaboratively plans a lesson based on an upcoming topic. Everyone teaches the les- son to their own students, but one member volunteers to teach the public “research les- son,” during which the other team members observe and collect data on student under- standing as the lesson progresses. After collecting the student work, the


team reflects on the understanding demon- strated in the papers, as well as the student behaviors during the lesson that revealed their thinking. Then they revamp the lesson using the observation data and analysis of student papers, as well as insights from indi- vidual team members’ experiences teaching the lesson. Another teacher volunteers to teach the


improved version of the lesson, while the others again observe and collect data. After- ward, the team analyzes the new lesson data along with the student work, and compares the results to those of the first lesson to see if student understanding improved. Finally, they discuss the broader implications for their mathematics instruction in general. Most cycles include two such “live” stu-


dent lessons and team reflections, but some teams have completed a third lesson cycle to maximize the potential of improving the lesson for students. One teacher said, “We must design les-


sons very well so children want to learn, and want to pursue the questions themselves.”


Impact on classroom practice Catherine Lewis, co-author of “Lesson


Study Step by Step,” speaking to the Proj- ect DELTA teachers at the 2011 summer institute, discussed the improved quality of instruction over time resulting from the lesson study method of collaboration. Lewis is fluent in Japanese, and has observed this quality improvement trajectory firsthand in classrooms in Japan and the United States through her involvement with the model for more than two decades with a wide variety of students, schools and subject areas. Riverside County Associate Superinten-


dent of Schools Diana Walsh-Reuss agrees with Lewis about the impact on classroom practice. “Our most challenging group is the community school population,” she says.


These students are expelled from their home districts, and attend the county program for varying terms, ranging up to a year. “But the [Project DELTA] teachers have new ways to deliver instruction so that the kids are more interested and can better understand the concepts,” she says. “It’s more hands-on and


[mathematical] practice standards from the Common Core, like sense-making and perseverance. I believe our initial success in improved CAHSEE test scores is just the tip of the iceberg. Now they’re learning to really look to see if an answer makes sense.” For teacher practitioners, an added value of les-


Algebra students at the Arlington Regional Learning Center (Riverside COE) participate in “physical math” lessons, in which they work in competitive teams to solve problems using manipulatives.


engaging. The students obviously like it. And we’ve already seen the results in improved student scores on the CAHSEE.” RCOE Alternative Education Coordina-


tor-Principal Robert Brough adds, “For the kids, DELTA is perfect because our kids like to do things their way. They don’t like being put in boxes. The approach is not just about getting a right answer. It is a varied approach, where they are asked to find, maybe, three or four ways to solve a problem, but they have to be able to explain it. Our kids like choices, and they really buy into this.” Project DELTA teacher Karen Earle asked


Brough to create a class for her comprising students who scored just below the cut-point on the assessment to be placed in Algebra I. She believed that using DELTA methodol- ogy, these students could succeed. She says, “They are being successful be-


cause of this method, which is more con- ceptual than rules and shortcuts. Rules make no sense unless the students know why they work. And they are not only learn- ing the math content standards, but also the


son study as part of a collaborative model in- cludes the opportunity to observe the impact that a teacher’s wording and presentation, as well as the content of a problem or activity, can have on a student’s learning.


Observing students while they do the work The opportunity to closely observe stu-


dent behaviors during the peer-taught les- sons provides new insights, including such subtleties as notations of “tsubuyaki” (un- der-breath exclamations) students make during the lesson, which the instructing teacher may easily miss. The debrief allows the entire team to benefit from individual members’ observations, and enables every- one to refine their ability to anticipate stu- dent responses within a given lesson. Another teacher remarked, “We had been


looking at student work, but didn’t realize how important it was to look at students while they were doing the work.” In addition to the introduction of the


Japanese lesson study model, with six days annually for teams to complete full inquiry


January/February 2012 19


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40