How Should Research Contribute to Instructional Improvement? The Case of Lesson Study

TLDR

Lesson study, a Japanese professional development model focused on collaborative analysis of live classroom lessons, has rapidly spread in the United States since 1999. The authors argue that to prevent lesson study from being discarded like many reforms, three types of research are required and six structural changes in educational research—rethinking research‑to‑improvement pathways, adopting a local proof route, developing better methods, and fostering cross‑cultural learning—must be implemented. They propose a research agenda that builds a descriptive knowledge base, explicates lesson study’s mechanisms, and cycles iterative improvement research while incorporating the six structural changes to better support innovation practitioners.

Abstract

Lesson study, a Japanese form of professional development that centers on collaborative study of live classroom lessons, has spread rapidly in the United States since 1999. Drawing on examples of Japanese and U.S. lesson study, we propose that three types of research are needed if lesson study is to avoid the fate of so many other once-promising reforms that were discarded before being fully understood or well implemented. The proposed research includes development of a descriptive knowledge base; explication of the innovation’s mechanism; and iterative cycles of improvement research. We identify six changes in the structure and norms of educational research that would enhance the field’s capacity to study emerging innovations such as lesson study. These changes include rethinking the routes from educational research to educational improvement and recognizing a “local proof route”; building research methods and norms that will better enable us to learn from innovation practitioners; and increasing our capacity to learn across cultural boundaries.