Teaching Versus Teachers as a Lever for Change: Comparing a Japanese and a U.S. Perspective on Improving Instruction

2017 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 169-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Hiebert ◽  
James W. Stigler

We examine the distinction between teaching and teachers as it relates to instructional improvement. Drawing from work outside of education on improvement systems and from analyzing the Japanese system of lesson study, we contend that a focus on teach ing can shape a coordinated system for improvement whereas a focus on teach ers, common in the United States, leads to elements that are uncoordinated and often work against the continuous, steady improvement of classroom teaching. We propose that the concept of systems for improvement and its instantiation in Japanese K–8 education offer opportunities to reexamine U.S. efforts to improve teaching and shift these efforts toward a more promising direction.

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin Duez

“Lesson study” has been used for over a century in Japan (Makinae, 2010). However, only recently, in 1999 with the release of The Teaching Gap by Stigler and Hiebert, did the practice begin to spread globally (Fujii, 2013; Ebaeguin & Stephens, 2013). The Teaching Gap is a summary of the Third International Math and Science (TIMSS) video study and included an entire chapter titled “Beyond Reform: Japan’s approach to the improvement of classroom teaching.” This chapter stated that the way the United States was reforming education was not systematic and offered lesson study in eight steps as a way to improve teaching and learning (Stigler & Hiebert, 1999). From 2000-2006 the lesson study process spread across the globe to nations including Indonesia, United States, England, Philippines, Australia, Sweden, and several African Nations (Groves & Doig, 2014). This paper will describe Japan’s lesson study process and the successes and failures of global application.


This chapter first explains the essential features of Japanese Lesson Study and then examines the advantages of using JLS as a model of professional learning. It asks the readers to consider if their own model is sustainable and connected to classroom practice. This chapter also explains the challenges of using JLS in the culture of the United States.


2009 ◽  
Vol 103 (2) ◽  
pp. 103

In The Teaching Gap (1999), James W. Stigler and James Hiebert describe differences between mathematics instruction in Japan and the United States. They attribute some of these differences to a commonly used method of professional development in Japan called lesson study: “The lesson-study process has an unrelenting focus on student learning. All efforts to improve lessons are evaluated with respect to clearly specified learning goals, and revisions are always justified with respect to student thinking and learning” (p. 121). Over the past decade, many groups of educators in North America have implemented various forms of lesson study.


2009 ◽  
Vol 102 (9) ◽  
pp. 705

In The Teaching Gap (1999), James W. Stigler and James Hiebert describe differences between mathematics instruction in Japan and the United States. They attribute some of these differences to a commonly used method of professional development in Japan called lesson study: “The lesson-study process has an unrelenting focus on student learning. All efforts to improve lessons are evaluated with respect to clearly specified learning goals, and revisions are always justified with respect to student thinking and learning” (p. 121). Over the past decade, many groups of educators in North America have implemented various forms of lesson study.


2010 ◽  
Vol 103 (6) ◽  
pp. 429

In The Teaching Gap (1999), James W. Stigler and James Hiebert describe differences between mathematics instruction in Japan and the United States. They attribute some of these differences to a commonly used method of professional development in Japan called lesson study: “The lesson-study process has an unrelenting focus on student learning. All efforts to improve lessons are evaluated with respect to clearly specified learning goals, and revisions are always justified with respect to student thinking and learning” (p. 121). Over the past decade, many groups of educators in North America have implemented various forms of lesson study.


2021 ◽  
pp. 143-154
Author(s):  
Lauren McArthur Harris ◽  
Anne-Lise Halvorsen ◽  
Linda Doornbos ◽  
Matthew T. Missias

2011 ◽  
Vol 104 (6) ◽  
pp. 446-451
Author(s):  
Randall E. Groth

The lesson study model of professional development that originated in Japan is becoming increasingly popular in the United States (Lesson Study Research Group 2009; Stigler and Hiebert 1999). At its core, lesson study is a means of bringing teachers together to carry out the process of planning a lesson, implementing and observing it, and then examining it during a debriefing session (Yoshida 2008). The debriefing component is one of the most distinctive characteristics of this type of professional development. It provides a means–discussion–for reflecting on the strengths and weaknesses of the collaboratively planned lesson. As such, the debriefing component merits special attention from those currently engaged in lesson study as well as those considering using it.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document