International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies 期刊官网-刊鹿论文编译

Lesson study: exploring implementation challenges in England

Abstract:

Japanese lesson study (LS) is a professional development approach in which teachers collaboratively plan a lesson, observe it being taught and then discuss what they have learnt. LS’s global spread is increasing but studies have identified several challenges to its implementation: the lack of structures and systems to accommodate LS (especially time); the focus on demonstrating short-term impact; a lack of teacher research skills; a dearth of access to quality learning and research material; the absence of available koshis; and accountability pressures. The purpose of this paper is to examine the “translation” of Japanese LS through a case study of one English secondary school.,This study is a case study of a single school which has been using LS as an approach to professional development for five years. A documentary analysis of the school’s LS Handbook sought to understand the school’s approach to LS as articulated by senior leadership. Six observations of the schools LS processes were then carried out including planning, research lessons and post-lesson discussions. Finally, one senior leader who had led LS implementation and five teachers who had been working in the school during the implementation stage were interviewed. The findings are analysed against Seleznyov’s (2018) seven critical components of Japanese LS.,Several key deviations from Japanese LS are identified including: a lack of whole school theme studied over time; little kyozai kenkyu and no written lesson planning; teachers deviating from the role of observers in research lessons; no facilitator and little use of discussion protocols; no koshi; and struggles to ensure mobilisation of knowledge between LS groups. Several of these represent gaps between the school’s LS policy and practices. The findings show that LS practices have become diluted over time and that giving teachers choices seems to have led to teachers not adhering to important aspects of the LS policy.,One of the limitations of the research is its focus on the perceptions of a small group of teachers who were likely to be more passionate about LS than others, and perhaps a deeper understanding of the challenges to implementation might be enabled by interviewing a wider range of engaged teachers, especially those who are perceived as “resisting” full engagement. Further research might also explore whether the implementation challenges faced by this school are replicated in other English schools and in other countries using LS as an approach to professional development.,Several implications for English school leaders seeking to implement LS are discussed, including the need to articulate the rationale for the protocols that shape LS, especially for staff new to the school and to check that important protocols are adhered to over time.,Whilst several studies of LS in the UK have explored its impact on teachers and pupils, and the challenges and successes of introducing LS into a UK context, this study provides a different perspective. It explores the challenges of using LS over time as a consistent approach to professional development in a school and seeks to understand how both resistance and dilution can affect its impact on practice.

Author Listing： Sarah Seleznyov

Volume： 9

Pages： 179-192

DOI： 10.1108/ijlls-08-2019-0059

Language： English

Journal： International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies

International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies

INT J LESSON LEARN S

影响因子：1.0

是否综述期刊：否

是否OA：否

是否预警：不在预警名单内

发行时间：-

ISSN：2046-8253

发刊频率：-

收录数据库：Scopus收录

出版国家/地区：-

出版社：Emerald

期刊介绍

年发文量	13
国人发稿量	1
国人发文占比	7.69%
自引率	10.0%
平均录取率	-
平均审稿周期	-
版面费	US$3370
偏重研究方向	EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
期刊官网	-
投稿链接	-

质量指标占比

研究类文章占比	OA被引用占比	撤稿占比	出版后修正文章占比
100.00%	15.07%	0.00%	0.00%

预警情况查看说明

时间	预警情况
2024年02月发布的2024版	不在预警名单中
2023年01月发布的2023版	不在预警名单中
2021年12月发布的2021版	不在预警名单中
2020年12月发布的2020版	不在预警名单中

JCR分区 WOS分区等级：Q3区

版本	按学科	分区
WOS期刊SCI分区 WOS期刊SCI分区是指SCI官方（Web of Science）为每个学科内的期刊按照IF数值排序，将期刊按照四等分的方法划分的Q1-Q4等级，Q1代表质量最高，即常说的1区期刊。（2021-2022年最新版）
	EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH	Q3

关于2019年中科院分区升级版（试行）

分区表升级版（试行）旨在解决期刊学科体系划分与学科发展以及融合趋势的不相容问题。由于学科交叉在当代科研活动的趋势愈发显著，学科体系构建容易引发争议。为了打破学科体系给期刊评价带来的桎梏，“升级版方案”首先构建了论文层级的主题体系，然后分别计算每篇论文在所属主题的影响力，最后汇总各期刊每篇论文分值，得到“期刊超越指数”，作为分区依据。

分区表升级版（试行）的优势：一是论文层级的主题体系既能体现学科交叉特点，又可以精准揭示期刊载文的多学科性；二是采用“期刊超越指数”替代影响因子指标，解决了影响因子数学性质缺陷对评价结果的干扰。整体而言，分区表升级版（试行）突破了期刊评价中学科体系构建、评价指标选择等瓶颈问题，能够更为全面地揭示学术期刊的影响力，为科研评价“去四唯”提供解决思路。相关研究成果经过国际同行的认可，已经发表在科学计量学领域国际重要期刊。

《2019年中国科学院文献情报中心期刊分区表升级版（试行）》首次将社会科学引文数据库（SSCI）期刊纳入到分区评估中。升级版分区表（试行）设置了包括自然科学和社会科学在内的18个大类学科。基础版和升级版（试行）将过渡共存三年时间，推测在此期间各大高校和科研院所仍可能会以基础版为考核参考标准。提示：中科院分区官方微信公众号“fenqubiao”仅提供基础版数据查询，暂无升级版数据，请注意区分。

中科院分区查看说明

版本	大类学科	小类学科	Top期刊	综述期刊
	教育学 4区	EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 教育学和教育研究 4区	否	否
2021年12月升级版	教育学 4区	EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 教育学和教育研究 4区	否	否
2022年12月最新升级版	教育学 4区	EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 教育学和教育研究 4区	否	否