Lesson Study with Pre-service Teachers: Learning to Teach English Language Learners Rosemarie Michaels, Dominican University of California

Lesson Study with Pre-service Teachers: Learning to Teach English Language Learners

Rosemarie Michaels Dominican University of California

Abstract

Pre-service teachers at a private university in California participated in a lesson study program prior to their full-time student teaching experiences in elementary schools. However, pre-service teachers consistently report that they learn very little about teaching English language learners (ELLs), even though lesson study sessions take place in schools serving predominantly ELLs. The lesson study program was redesigned to integrate collaboration among student teachers, mentor teachers, and university instructors to design lessons to teach all students, with a focus on planning for the academic needs of ELLs. Survey-research methodology was used to collect data to answer the research question: What are the effects of a lesson study program on student teachers’ professional growth? Results indicate that lesson study has a powerful impact on student teachers’ pedagogy, specifically, in their confidence and ability to plan instruction for and teach ELLs, especially for pre-service teachers that teach the research lesson.

Keywords: Lesson study, English language learners, teacher preparation, professional development

Introduction

This study describes a university lesson study program and its impact on the professional growth of pre-service teachers. This article provides a review of literature on lesson study with pre-service teachers and their preparation to teach English language learners (ELLs); the protocol for implementation of a university lesson study program specifically redesigned to address preparation for teaching ELLs; and its impact on pre-service teachers’ professional growth.

Context and Background

Pre-service teachers at a small, private university in northern California participated in a lesson study program, which was embedded in coursework throughout the teacher preparation program. The primary goal of the lesson study program was to bridge the gap between theory and practice for pre-service teachers through guided experiences in the real world of elementary classrooms. The program is based on the Japanese professional development model of lesson study, wherein a team of classroom teachers collaboratively plans, observes, reflects, and analyzes research lessons as a way to enhance student learning through improved instruction (Lewis, 2009; Lewis & Hurd, 2011). Research lessons are collaboratively planned to focus on an aspect of teaching or classroom instruction (Chassels & Melville, 2009; Lewis & Hurd, 2011). The university lesson study program is similar, however, classroom teachers individually plan and teach lessons for pre-service teachers, demonstrating effective instructional strategies for the academic content area of focus. Pre-service teachers observe, participate, analyze, and reflect on the lessons in collaboration with classroom teachers and university instructors. Lesson study sessions take place at elementary schools serving diverse student populations, including ELLs, and are facilitated by university instructors. The focus of the sessions is on best instructional practices for specific content areas to facilitate pre-service teachers’ understanding of the knowledge and skills they will need to be successful. Prior research conducted at this university indicates that pre-service teachers’ professional growth is positively impacted through the lesson study program, however, preservice teachers consistently report that they learn very little about teaching ELLs, even though lesson study sessions take place in schools serving predominantly students whose first language is other than English (Michaels, 2015). In addition, classroom teachers plan lessons in isolation; so pre-service teachers miss an important aspect of Japanese lesson study, that is, the collaborative planning of research lessons to address the academic needs of students. Moreover, prior to the student teaching semester, pre-service teachers take a foundation ELLs course, but university instructors and mentor teachers report the knowledge and skills gained in this course do not transfer to their lesson planning or pedagogical practice during student teaching. This is a significant issue, as pre-service teachers need to develop the knowledge and skills necessary to

meet the needs of all students, including ELLs, prior to earning a California teaching credential [California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC), 2016]. Therefore, the lesson study program was redesigned to incorporate the collaborative planning of research lessons, mirroring traditional Japanese lesson study practices. During seminars, student teachers, mentor teachers, and university instructors collaboratively design research lessons to teach and reach all students, with a focus on best pedagogical practices for teaching ELLs. (Student teachers are pre-service teachers in their final semester in the teacher preparation program, working full-time with mentor teachers in their classrooms). The following week, a lead student teacher teaches the research lesson in his or her elementary classroom, while the university instructor, mentor teacher, and student teachers observe and participate. Student teachers take notes on the lesson and gather evidence of student learning. Immediately following the research lesson, student teachers, the mentor teacher, and the university instructor meet to collaboratively debrief and analyze the student learning and reflect on the research lesson. Thus, student teachers are participating members of a learning community that is collaborative and authentic, which may serve to prepare them for the teaching profession and their future classrooms.

Purpose

The purpose of this study is four-fold: 1) connect the literature on lesson study with preservice teachers and their preparation to teach ELLs, 2) describe the protocol of a redesigned university lesson study program for student teachers, 3) discuss the impact of the program on student teachers, and 4) discuss implications for effective practices in teacher preparation. The following question guided this research: What are the effects of a lesson study program on student teachers’ professional growth?

Literature Review

Preparation of Elementary Pre-service Teachers to Teach ELLs

The number of ELLs attending public schools in the United States (US) has steadily increased over the last three decades and will continue to do so [National Center for Education

Statistics (NCES), 2019; Villegas, SaizdeLaMora, Martin & Mills, 2018]. NCES (2019) reports that in 2016, the percentage of K-12 public school students who were ELLs was 9.6 percent, that is, 4.9 million students. California has the greatest population of ELLs; nearly 21% of their public school students are ELLs (NCES, 2019). As the population of ELLs continues to rise, pre-service teachers need to be prepared to meet the academic needs of these students. To maximize their opportunity to learn, ELLs require access to the same challenging grade level academic content and skills as their peers (Fairbain & Jones-Bo, 2010; Villegas et al., 2018). Unfortunately, pre-service teachers are inadequately prepared to effectively teach ELLs (Darling-Hammond, 2006; Durgunoglu & Hughes, 2010; Hallman & Meineke, 2016, Hutchinson, 2013; Liu & Ball, 2019). In response, teacher preparation programs across the US are being called upon to address this need (Hallman & Meineke, 2016; Hutchinson, 2013; Liu & Ball, 2019; Lucas & Villegas, 2011). As ELLs are a considerable portion of California’s student population, in 2016 the CTC mandated that all pre-service teachers be prepared to teach ELLs. California pre-service teachers must understand and “be able to apply pedagogical theories, principles, and instructional practices for the comprehensive instruction” (CTC, 2016, p. 3) of ELLs.

Teacher educators agree that pre-service teachers should have fundamental knowledge of language acquisition that provides a foundation for understanding ELLs and planning instruction for their academic success (e.g., Bollin, 2007; Fairbain & Jones-Bo, 2010; Villegas et al., 2018; Wright, 2015). The most prevalent way teacher preparation programs prepare pre-service teachers to teach ELLs is through a foundation ELLs course. Characteristically, foundation ELLs courses include theories of language acquisition and pedagogical strategies for teaching ELLs academic content and skills at varying levels of English acquisition. Researchers of foundation ELLs courses study the evolution of pre-service teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about ELLs over the course of the semester. This is the most studied aspect in the field of teaching ELL research, as pre-service teachers’ knowledge and beliefs influence the way they will teach and view ELLs in their own classrooms (Pu, 2012; Villegas et al., 2018). As this is a newer field of study, the research base is small and conducted by the university instructors of the foundation ELLs courses.

Jimenez-Silva, Olson, and Hernandez (2012) studied their pre-service teachers’ efficacy and confidence in instructing ELLs while enrolled in such a course. Jimenez-Silva et al. (2012) found that lectures and readings on foundational pedagogical theories and practices for meeting the needs of ELLs did little to increase pre-service teachers’ efficacy. However, using collaborative instructional strategies, thereby engaging pre-service teachers with each other and the course content, significantly raised pre-service teachers’ levels of efficacy and confidence in teaching ELLs. Markos (2012) studied how pre-service teachers’ beliefs about, and understanding of, ELLs evolved while enrolled in her foundations ELLs course. At the beginning of the course, pre-service teachers held a deficit-based, limited understanding of ELLs. Over the course of the semester, Markos (2012) engaged them in the course content using a variety of personal and collaborative reflection activities. At semester’s end, pre-service teachers acknowledged their prior limited thinking and substantially broadened their understanding of ELLs, including appreciation of unique cultures, languages, and experiences. In addition, pre-service teachers understood the necessity for adapting instruction to meet the academic needs of ELLs. Pu (2012) and Bollin (2007) also studied the evolution of pre-service teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about ELL during foundation ELLs courses, however, fieldwork with ELLs was an integral component. Pu (2012) required her pre-service teachers to work with one ELL for 20 hours in an elementary school, while Bollin (2007) required pre-service teachers to tutor elementary ELLs in their homes for 10 weeks. Pre-service teachers in both studies kept weekly journals, wherein they reflected on their experiences with ELLs and also submitted final reflective essays on their overall fieldwork experiences. During classroom observations, preservice teachers in Pu’s (2012) study recorded teachers’ accommodation strategies to make academic content accessible and then practiced using those strategies with small groups of ELLs. Results of both studies indicate that pre-service teachers developed confidence and a deeper understanding of ELLs. Pre-service teachers also learned the factors that effect ELLs’ academic performance and the importance of differentiating instruction to accommodate ELLs (Bollin, 2007; Pu, 2012). This is best illustrated by comments in the reflective essays, “The greatest thing I learned from this experience is that not all of the children in a classroom can be taught in the same way. Every student is different and goes home to a different story” (Bollin,

2007, p.184). “I now see it is my job to pinpoint the specific strengths and weaknesses of all my students, especially English learners, to give them the support they need and deserve” (Pu, 2012, p. 9). In addition, fieldwork with ELLs facilitated conversations between university instructors and pre-service teachers on teaching ELLs, thereby connecting the pedagogical principles and theories of teaching ELLs to actual practice. Daniel (2014) studied how four elementary student teachers learned to teach ELLs during their student teaching experiences in schools serving ELLs. Daniel (2014) used case study methodology to gather data through individual and group interviews and classroom observations. Unfortunately, throughout the semester the student teachers “heard, observed, and participated in multiple teaching and learning processes that perpetuated inequitable education practices for ELLs” (Daniel, p.13, 2014). Mentor teachers did not discuss or model effective pedagogy for working with ELLs, nor did they model supportive dispositions and beliefs about ELLs. Student teachers internalized mentor teachers’ beliefs and deficit thinking about ELLs and provided little or no attention to, or accommodations for, the ELLs in their classrooms. Daniels (2014) proposes that it is not only important for student teachers to engage in fieldwork in schools with ELLs, mentor teachers need to be experienced in working effectively with ELLs and maintain strong connections with university instructors.

Lesson Study in Elementary Pre-service Teacher Preparation

Lesson Study is a promising practice in pre-service teacher preparation, as it connects theory and practice through collaboration and reflection among pre-service teachers, university instructors, and classroom teachers in elementary schools. The practice of including pre-service teachers in lesson study is new; therefore, the research base is small. Typically, university instructors of education methods courses conduct the studies to discern the impact of lesson study on pre-service teachers’ professional growth in pedagogical knowledge and skills in specific academic content areas. In two such studies, teams of pre-service teachers in mathematics methods courses collaboratively planned, observed, taught, and then debriefed research lessons (Chassels & Melville, 2009; Pothen & Murata, 2007). Results indicate that pre-service teachers’ professional growth was positively impacted by the lesson study experiences. Specifically, pre-service

teachers’ mathematical content and pedagogical knowledge improved, due to the lesson study experience (Chassels & Melville, 2009; Pothen & Murata, 2007). In addition, Chassels & Melville (2009) found that pre-service teachers expanded their knowledge of effective instructional strategies, including accommodations for diverse learners. Post and Varoz (2008) studied the impact of a lesson study program on the professional growth of classroom teachers and pre-service teachers in their mathematics methods courses. Teams of classroom and pre-service teachers planned, debriefed, revised, and retaught research lessons. Classroom teachers taught the first lesson, while pre-service teachers taught the revised lesson. Post and Veroz (2008) reported improvement in mathematics content and pedagogical knowledge and skills in both pre-service and classroom teachers. Marble (2007) also studied the effects of lesson study on pre-service teachers’ professional growth, though the focus was on science pedagogical knowledge and skills and reflective practice. Teams of three pre-service teachers in Marble’s (2007) science methods course completed the lesson study cycle three times to ensure all team members had the opportunity to teach the research lesson. Marble (2007) reports significant improvements in preservice teachers’ ability to plan lessons, create positive learning environments, and assess student learning. In addition, pre-service teachers’ confidence and ability to reflect on teaching practice increased over time.

Michaels (2015) studied the impact of a lesson study program on pre-service teachers’ pedagogical knowledge and skills in four content areas (math, science, reading, and art) and in learning to teach ELLs. Classroom teachers planned and taught research lessons observed by pre-service teachers and university instructors. Pre-service and classroom teachers collaboratively debriefed the lesson facilitated by the university instructor. Results indicated that pre-service teachers’ pedagogical knowledge and skills improved, due to the lesson study sessions. Unfortunately, pre-service teachers learned little about teaching ELLs, even though lesson studies took place in classrooms with predominately ELLs. However, Michaels (2015) reports that pre-service teachers learned the most about the pedagogical knowledge and skills of focus, and recommended consideration of this finding in lesson study programs and future research.

The literature in preparing elementary pre-service teachers to teach ELLs and in lesson study in pre-service teacher preparation is small, yet evolving. This study contributes to the body of literature by intentionally connecting learning to teach ELLs to the collaborative practice of lesson study in a teacher preparation program. Key features of both areas of research are a combination of pedagogy, collaboration, and reflective practice. The collaborative, reflective nature of lesson study, which also integrates effective pedagogy into fieldwork, may serve to develop pre-service teachers’ pedagogy and pedagogical skills in learning to teach the growing population of ELLs.

Methodology

This study took place in a small, private university in California and in the elementary schools in a small city adjacent to a large metropolitan area. Survey-research methodology was used to measure the impact of collaborative research lesson planning sessions and subsequent lesson study sessions on student teachers’ professional growth.

Participants

Participants were 70 student teachers in the elementary teacher preparation program at the university. Student teachers were undergraduate seniors (n = 31) and graduate students (n = 39) during their final semester in the program and were 68% White, 26% Latina, and 6% Asian. All were enrolled in one of seven student teaching seminar courses, while concurrently student teaching full-time in one of five public elementary schools serving ELLs; 41% - 85% of the schools’ student populations were ELLs. Classrooms of predominately ELLs were chosen for the lesson study sessions. Specifically, in three classrooms, 95% of the students were ELLs, while two classrooms held ELL populations of 85% and 66%, respectively. Seven student teachers were chosen by university instructors of the seminar courses to teach the lesson study sessions. Lead student teachers collaborated with their mentor teachers to choose the academic

content area of focus and the date of the lesson study session on the school site. University instructors invited mentor teachers to participate in the research planning session on the university campus; all mentor teachers chose to do so.

Instruments

Three post-surveys were used to measure the lesson study program’s impact on student teachers’ professional growth following participation in the research lesson planning sessions and subsequent lesson study sessions: Research Lesson Planning Survey, Lesson Study Survey, and Lesson Study Survey for Lead Student Teachers. The researcher and university instructors collaborated to create the surveys grounded in California CTC’s Teacher Performance Expectations (2016). Teacher Performance Expectations (TPEs) are research-based pedagogical knowledge and skills student teachers are required to demonstrate prior to earning a teaching credential. Therefore, the TPEs served as research-based constructs for the surveys. The three surveys were piloted with one seminar class of 16 student teachers. The researcher and university instructors analyzed and discussed the resulting data and recommendations for improvement provided by student teachers and their instructors, and then revised the surveys accordingly. Content validity was established through these multiple reviews of the surveys. A measure for reliability was not used, similar to lesson study research in the literature review. The post-Research Lesson Planning Survey measured the extent to which planning sessions developed student teachers’ pedagogy and pedagogical skills, specifically in planning for and teaching ELLs, and teaching the academic content of the lesson. The survey also measured the planning sessions’ impact on student teachers’ confidence and collaborative practice. These pedagogical skills were chosen as areas of focus because they influence the way student teachers work with ELLs (Bollin, 2007; Pu, 2012; Villegas et al., 2018), are key features in the research base, and are research-based constructs in TPEs (California Commission on Teacher Credentialing, 2016). The post-Lesson Study Survey measured the impact of the lesson study session on the same pedagogy and pedagogical skills and also included making content accessible to ELLs and developing as a professional educator, two additional TPE requirements (California Commission on Teacher Credentialing, 2016). A different post-Lesson Study Survey for Lead Student Teachers was administered to lead student teachers, that is, those who taught the research lessons. The post-Lesson Study Survey for Lead Student Teachers measured the impact of the lesson study session on their pedagogy and reflective practice.

Procedures

A research lesson planning session was held during a regular class meeting of the student teaching seminar courses. University instructors administered the post-Research Lesson Planning Survey to student teachers immediately after the planning session. The following week, lead student teachers taught the research lessons at their elementary school sites, while the student teachers in their seminar course observed and participated in the lesson, which was facilitated by the university instructor. University instructors administered the post-Lesson Study Survey and post-Lesson Study Survey for Lead Student Teachers following the lesson analysis and reflection sessions.

Data Analysis

Due to the small sample size, descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data collected from three surveys. Means and percentages of student teachers and lead student teachers survey responses were aggregated and calculated for the research lesson planning sessions and lesson study sessions. Data are represented on Tables 1-6.

Protocol for the Redesigned Lesson Study Program with Student Teachers

A description of the redesigned university lesson study program is below. The purpose of providing the protocol is to clarify and share the procedures used in the teacher preparation program to prepare student teachers to meet the academic needs of ELLs.

Research lesson planning session. Prior to student teaching, student teachers take a foundations ELLs course and methods courses for teaching academic content. The purpose of the planning session is to provide student teachers the opportunity to use the knowledge and skills learned in prior coursework to collaboratively plan a lesson that meets the academic needs of all ELLs in the class. Therefore, the research focus of the lesson is teaching ELLs. To begin, the university instructor of the seminar course asks a student teacher making consistent progress in the teacher preparation program to be the lead student teacher for the lesson study experience. Lead student teachers check in with their mentor teachers before confirming this responsibility then together choose an academic area of focus for the lesson. The

university instructor invites the mentor teacher to participate in the research lesson planning session on the university campus. Participants in the collaborative planning session are the university instructor, all student teachers enrolled in the seminar course, and one mentor teacher. The university instructor facilitates the collaborative planning session and ensures all participants have access to a digital and hard copy of California’s English Language Development standards (2012) for the grade level of focus. The lead student teacher creates a handout that describes the academic content and objectives for the lesson and includes a description of the ELLs in the class. Lead student teacher and mentor teacher provide background information about the class and more specific information about ELLs. The university’s lesson plan format is used to guide the discussion and planning of lessons to teach all students, with a focus on best pedagogical practices for teaching the ELLs in the class. Plans are also made for how the student teachers may participate during the upcoming lesson; participation depends on lesson activities, and the academic and social needs of the elementary students.

Lesson study session at an elementary school. The following week, the lead student teacher teaches the research lesson, while the university instructor, mentor teacher, and student teachers observe and participate as planned. The university instructor and student teachers take notes on the lesson, gather evidence of student learning, and record questions and observations. Immediately following the lesson, student teachers, the university instructor, and the mentor teacher meet to collaboratively analyze and reflect on the lesson. Mentor teachers are not always able to participate, as they are responsible for teaching their students. The university instructor facilitates the collaborative session with a focus on ELLs’ experiences and learnings. As in traditional lesson study, the lead student teacher begins the session with comments and reflections about the lesson. Following the lead student teacher’s reflections, student teachers share their observations and experiences. The conversation centers on observations, reflections, and questions on ELLs’ learning of the lesson objectives, teaching ELLs, teaching academic content, and pedagogical practice. Participants also discuss the successes of the lesson and how it could be revised for improved student learning. During the next seminar course class meeting, the university instructor leads a final reflective discussion

about the lesson study session.

Results/Findings

Data were analyzed to answer the following research question: What are the effects of a lesson study program on student teachers’ professional growth? Descriptive statistics were generated from survey responses and organized into tables that include percentages and means. Survey responses to open-ended questions were analyzed quantitatively and are reported simultaneously with descriptive statistics. A 4-point Likert-type scale was used on each survey, with the weight of 4 given to the response with the most positive result. Specifically, responses were coded: a great deal = 4, to some extent = 3, minimally = 2, not at all = 1 or strongly agree = 4, agree = 3, disagree = 2, strongly disagree = 1. Survey results are reported on Tables 1-6, organized by student teacher group (i.e., student teachers and lead student teachers), research lesson planning session (tables 1-4), and lesson study session on the school site (tables 5-6). Overall, student teachers reported that their professional growth was positively impacted by the both the lesson planning and lesson study sessions, with lead student teachers consistently reporting greater impact.

Impact of Research Lesson Planning on Student Teachers’ Pedagogy

Student teachers reported that participating in the research lesson planning session impacted their pedagogy (Tables 1 and 2). Lead student teachers’ results were consistently in the “a great deal” category, while the student teachers reported results in the “to some extent” category, even though the university instructor, not the lead student teacher, facilitated the planning session. For example, 86% of lead student teachers and 47% of student teachers reported that the planning session impacted their ability to plan instruction for ELLs “a great deal” (M = 3.86 and M = 2.95) with 43% of student teachers reporting it impacted their ability to plan for ELLs “to some extent.” Similar results were reported for teaching ELLs and teaching the academic content. Eighty six percent of lead student teachers indicated that the planning session impacted their ability to teach ELLs (M = 3.86) and teach the academic content area “a great deal” (M = 3.86), while student teachers indicated that the planning session impacted their ability to teach ELLs and the academic content “to some extent” (M = 2.91 and M = 3.03,

respectively). However, it is important to note that over 40% of the student teachers reported that their ability to teach ELLs and the academic content was positively impacted “a great deal.” Only 10% of student teacher indicated that the planning session “minimally” impacted their ability to plan for and teach ELLs. Student teachers’ ability to collaborate was also positively impacted: 100% of lead student teachers and 56% of student teachers indicated that participating in the lesson planning session greatly impacted their ability to collaborate with colleagues and mentors (M = 4.00 and M = 3.12, respectively), although 7% of student teachers reported their ability was impacted “minimally.” At the end of the planning survey student teachers were asked to list new teaching strategies they learned. Nearly all student teachers listed at least two new strategies they learned for teaching ELLs and some added comments to demonstrate they not only learned new strategies, but understood the rationale for their use. For example, a student teacher commented that she learned to “front load lessons with what students already know (access prior knowledge), this gets them engaged and ready, confident for the teaching that’s coming” (personal communication, February 7, 2018). This comment and others were surprising, as it is expected that student teachers learn this pedagogical knowledge in the foundations ELLs and methods coursework prior to student teaching. For example, student teachers commented, “There’s a difference between things needed for emerging students vs. expanding ELLs” (personal communication, September 26, 2018); I learned the "importance of teaching math vocabulary to ELLs” (personal communication, March 14, 2018); and “I learned how important it is to explicitly teach writing skills” (personal communication, February 7, 2018).

Impact of Research Lesson Planning on Student Teachers’ Pedagogical Skills

Student teachers’ pedagogical skills, that is, confidence, planning, and collaborative practice were impacted by collaboratively planning the research lesson (Tables 3 and 4). Lead student teachers’ results were consistently in the “strongly agree” category, while student teachers reported results in the “agree” category. For example, all student teachers agreed that they are more confident in lesson planning for all students; lead student teachers “strongly agreed” while student teachers “agreed” with this statement (M = 3.71 and 2.79, respectively).

The one time the results were nearly the same was in planning for ELLs, both lead student teachers and student teachers strongly agreed that due to the planning session they are more confident in planning for ELLs (M = 3.86 and 3.83, respectively). All lead student teachers (100%) “strongly agreed” that they learned new strategies for working with students (M = 4.00), while 58% of student teachers “strongly agreed” they learned strategies (M = 3.08). All student teachers reported that their collaborative practice was impacted through participation in the planning session. Student teachers agreed that they better understand how to collaboratively plan with colleagues and are more likely to plan with colleagues (M = 2.98 and 3.11, respectively), while nearly all lead student teachers strongly agreed that they better understand how to collaboratively plan with colleagues and are more likely to plan with colleagues (M = 3.86 and 3.71, respectively). Lastly, lead student teachers strongly agreed that they know more how to work with their mentor teacher (M = 3.71), while student teachers were more mixed in their responses. Fifty three percent agreed, but 20% disagreed that they learned more about working with their mentor teachers.

Student teachers were asked to comment about their learnings at the end of the research lesson planning surveys. Many commented on the benefits of collaboration. A lead student teacher commented, “I learned that collaboration between teachers is beneficial for everyone involved in the lesson” (personal communication, September 26, 2018). Another lead teacher explained, “Planning with other teachers gives more opportunities to learn and use new strategies” (personal communication, March 14, 2018). A student teacher explained that she “liked collaborating because it helped me remember strategies and instilled more thought in different components of lesson planning. It is also a good way to become more creative with lesson planning” (personal communication, March 14, 2018). However, some student teacher comments make it clear that they see that collaboration takes work, “Collaborating with other teachers is important but not always easy” (personal communication, September 26, 2018). Many student teachers commented on the planning session’s impact on their future practice, for example, a lead student teacher stated, “Collaboration in the workplace is a crucial part of being successful and this experience was good preparation for our future careers in teaching” (personal communication, March 14, 2018).

Impact of Lesson Study Session on Student Teachers’ Pedagogy

Student teachers’ professional growth was positively impacted by the lesson study sessions, in particular their pedagogy for working with ELLs (Table 5). Student teachers learned “a lot” about teaching ELLs and planning instruction for ELLs (M = 3.18 and 3.12, respectively). The highest result was for making content accessible, 57% of student teachers reported learning “a great deal” about making content accessible for ELLs (M = 3.32). Student teachers also learned “a lot” about the teaching the academic content and collaboration with colleagues and mentors (M = 3.09 and 3.12, respectively). Lastly, student teachers reported that they were developing as professional educators (M = 3.09) due to the lesson study session. Student teachers were asked to comment on the most meaningful thing they learned during the lesson study session. Most commented on learning to differentiate instruction, for example, “I learned new ways to utilize grouping and volunteers to maximize the learning for ELLs in the classroom” (personal communication, February 14, 2018). Student teachers also commented on their observations that using effective ELL strategies also enhanced the learning of other students in the class, “I loved watching (lead student teacher’s) strategies for working with her students. It was neat to see how well her strategies for teaching ELL students transferred to her whole class as a way of making content accessible to everyone” (personal communication, October 3, 2018). A student teacher was explicit about the importance of observing effective teaching strategies in schools as she stated the most meaningful thing for her was the “instruction for ELLs - and seeing it done, not just reading about it” (personal communication, February 14, 2018).

Impact of Lesson Study on Lead Student Teachers’ Pedagogy and Reflective Practice

Lead student teachers’ reported that their professional growth was positively impacted by the lesson study experience (Table 6). Lead student teachers strongly agreed that leading a lesson provided them with the opportunity to reflect on their own teaching practice (M = 3.86) and the experience will improve their practice (M = 3.86). Lead student teachers also agreed that they learned a lot about their own teaching (M = 3.57) and would like to lead a lesson study again (M = 3.43). They also reported that lesson study impacted other participants; lead student

teachers strongly agree that their students benefitted from the lesson study session (M = 3.86) and their colleagues will student teach more successfully due to their participation (M = 3.71). Lead student teachers provided very positive responses on their survey about their learning. A typical survey ended with, “I really enjoyed this experience and am very grateful for the opportunity” (personal communication, March 21, 2018). Most also commented on lesson study’s impact on their future career, such as, “The experience of leading this lesson study was impactful on who I am as a teacher now and the teacher I will be in the future” (personal communication, October 3, 2018).

Discussion

Summary of Findings

While both student teachers and lead student teachers’ professional growth was positively impacted by the research lesson planning and lesson study sessions, perhaps the most compelling finding is how much more lead student teachers were impacted. Specifically, collaborating to plan research lessons to meet the needs of ELLs impacted lead student teachers’ pedagogy in teaching ELLs, planning instruction for ELLs, teaching academic content, and collaboration to a higher degree than participating student teachers. However, the research planning session greatly impacted both student teachers and lead student teachers’ confidence in planning for ELLs. And due to the planning session, all student teachers are more confident in their lesson planning for all students, know more how to work with their mentor teachers, and are more likely to plan with their colleagues. Similar findings in professional growth were reported after the lesson study sessions. Due to the lesson study session in lead student teacher classrooms, participating student teachers learned a lot about teaching ELLs, making content accessible for ELLs, and planning instruction for ELLs. Lastly, teaching the research lessons provided lead student teachers the opportunity to reflect on and improve their teaching practices.

Conclusions

Since the population of ELLs in US schools continues to rise, pre-service teachers need to

be prepared to meet the academic needs of these students. In this study, a university’s lesson study program was redesigned to address this need by incorporating collaborative planning of research lessons with a focus on teaching ELLs. Student teachers, mentor teachers, and university instructors collaboratively designed lessons taught by lead student teachers followed by reflective debriefing conversations in diverse elementary schools, thereby impacting the professional growth of all student teachers. Specifically, student teachers are more confident in planning instruction for ELLs and are better able to teach ELLs and the academic content, due to participation in the lesson study program. In addition, student teachers have a greater understanding of how to collaboratively plan with peers and mentors and are more likely to do so in the future.

Lead student teachers, in particular, benefitted from the lesson planning sessions and the opportunity to teach the research lessons for their peers. Perhaps taking on a leadership roll with more responsibilities provided the opportunity for this greater impact. Even though it added a layer of stress, lead student teachers consistently expressed that they enjoyed and learned from the experience, as demonstrated by this comment, “Before the lesson, I was nervous to have my peers watch me, but I definitely think it is both a wonderful learning experience as well as a rewarding experience” (personal communication, October 3, 2018). In order for all student teachers to have this learning experience, the researcher will work with university instructors to incorporate Marble’s (2007) approach to lesson study, that is, small groups of pre-service teachers collaborating on a research lesson in three iterative cycles so that all have the opportunity to plan, observe, reflect, revise, and teach the lesson. Preparing teachers to work effectively with ELLs is a current focus of teacher preparation programs, although many are struggling to do so (Hallman & Meineke, 2016, Hutchinson, 2013; Liu & Ball, 2019). This study contributes to the body of research by intentionally connecting learning to teach ELLs to the collaborative practice of lesson study in a teacher preparation program. The framework for providing facilitated, collaborative planning, teaching, and reflection sessions focused on teaching ELLs provides the needed link between theory and practice, foundation ELLs courses and authentic teaching, that can pave the way for student teachers to become successful classroom teachers of ELLs.

However, there are two limitations to this research. First, due to the small sample size,

results in this study and those reported in the literature review may not be generalizable to other teacher preparation programs. Future research that includes a larger sample of pre-service teachers in more than one teacher preparation program will improve the generalizability of results. Second, the current study is missing the effects of lesson study with ELLs on student teachers’ future practice. How does the impact of the lesson study program transfer to actual teaching practice for successfully teaching ELLs? A more in-depth, longitudinal approach is necessary to elucidate this process.

Implications

Results of this study can provide guidance for teacher preparation programs engaged in preparing pre-service teachers for their future careers in working with ELLs. It is recommended that teacher preparation programs adopt some form of lesson study to enrich the way they are preparing pre-service teachers to teach ELLs. University instructors working with student teachers can introduce this program as a way to partner more closely with fieldwork schools and mentor teachers. Programs that already provide lesson study opportunities for pre-service teachers can invite mentor teachers to share their expertise on teaching ELLs during university coursework, thereby deepening partnerships with elementary schools as modeled by this study and Post and Varoz’s (2008) research. At the very least, it is recommended that teacher preparation programs connect foundation ELLs courses to guided fieldwork with ELLs in schools that welcome collaboration with the university and that this guided collaboration and attention to teaching ELLs continue throughout the student teaching semester. In this research, traditional Japanese lesson study practice was integrated into the final semester of a university teacher preparation program. Through participation in a collaborative lesson study program, student teachers are learning the pedagogical skills necessary to become confident, reflective educators of diverse student populations.

Author Biography

Dr. Rosemarie Michaels is an Associate Professor of Education at Dominican University of California in San Rafael. She is chair of the Education Studies Teacher Preparation Program.

An experienced classroom teacher, Rosemarie has taught in higher education for over 20 years and is dedicated to developing university-school partnerships, both locally and abroad. She was a visiting professor at the University of Tokyo, Japan in spring 2019, where she worked closely with professors and graduate students on professional development through lesson study. Rosemarie recently received the Francoise Lepage Award for Global Innovation and Global Education. Her professional interests include effective, equitable pedagogy in teacher education and K-12 classrooms, collaborative lesson study, and the 21st century skills.

References

Bollin, G. G. (2007). Preparing teachers for Hispanic immigrant children: A service learning approach. Journal of Latinos and Education, 6(2), 177-189. California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (2016). California teacher performance expectations. https://www.ctc.ca.gov/docs/default-source/educator prep/standards/adopted-tpes-2016.pdf California English Language Development Standards (2012). https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/er/documents/eldstndspublication14.pdf Chassels, C., & Melville, W. (2009). Collaborative, reflective, and iterative Japanese lesson study in an initial teacher education program: Benefits and challenges, Canadian Journal of Education, 32(4), 734-763. Daniel, S. M. (2014). Learning to educate English language learners in pre-service elementary practicums. Teacher Education Quarterly, 41(2), 5-28. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Powerful teacher education: Lessons from exemplary programs. Jossey-Bass. Durgunoglu, A. Y., & Hughes, T. (2010). How prepared are the U.S. pre-service teachers to teach English language learners? International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 22(1), 32-41. Fairbain, S., & Jones-Bo, S. (2010). Differentiating instruction and assessment for English language learners. Caslon Publishing.

Hallman, H. L., & Meineke, H. R. (2016). Addressing the teaching of English learners in the United States: A case study of teacher educators’ response. Brock Education Journal, 26(1), 68-82. Hutchinson, M. (2013). Bridging the gap: Pre-service teachers and their knowledge of working with English language learners. TESOL Journal, 4(1), 25-54. Jimenez-Silva, M., Olson, K., & Hernandez, N. J. (2012). The confidence to teach English language learners: Exploring coursework’s role in developing pre-service teachers’ efficacy. The Teacher Educator, 47, 9-28. Lewis, C. C. (2009). What is the nature of knowledge development in lesson study? Educational Action Journal, 17(1), 95-110. Lewis, C. C., & Hurd, J. (2011). Lesson study step by step: How teacher learning communities improve instruction. Heinemann. Liu, K., & Ball, A. F. (2019). Critical reflection and generativity: Toward a framework of transformative teacher education for diverse learners. Review of Research in Education, 43, 68-105. Lucas, T., & Villegas, A. M. (2011). A framework for preparing linguistically responsive teachers. In T. Lucas (Ed.), Teacher preparation for linguistically diverse classrooms: A resource for teacher educators (pp. 55-72). Routledge. Marble, S. T. (2007). Inquiring into teaching: Lesson study in elementary science methods.

Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 935-953. Markos, A. M. (2012). Mandated to learn, guided to reflect. Pre-service teachers’ evolving understanding of English language learners. Issues in Teacher Education, 21(1), 39-57. McMahon, M. T., & Hines, E. (2008). Lesson study with pre-service teachers. The Mathematics Teacher, 102(3), 186-191. Michaels, R. (2015). Bringing lesson study to teacher education: Simultaneously impacting pre-service and classroom teachers. Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Education, 4(1), 46 73.

National Center for Education Statistics (2019). English language learners in public schools. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgf.asp

Post, G., & Varoz, S. (2008). Lesson study groups with prospective and practicing teachers. Teaching Children Mathematics, 14(8), 472-478. Pothen, B. E., & Murata, A. (2007). Transforming teachers’ knowledge: The role of lesson study in pre-service education. In Lamberg, T., & Weist, L.R. (Eds). Proceedings of the 29th

annual meeting of the North American Chapter for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, NV, 231-238. Pu, C. (2012). Narrative inquiry: Pre-service teachers’ understanding of teaching English learners. AILACTE Journal, 9(1), 1-18. Villegas, A. M., SaizdeLaMora, K., Martin, A. D., & Mills, T. (2018). Preparing future mainstream teachers to teach English language learners: A review of the empirical research, Education Forum, 82(2), 138-155. Wright, W. E. (2015). Foundations for teaching English language learners. (2nd ed.). Caslon Publishing.

Table 1

Impact of Research Lesson Planning on Student Teachers’ Pedagogy, in percentages

Pedagogy A great deal To some Minimally Not at all Extent M

Planning instruction for ELLs 47 43 10 - 2.95

Teaching English learners 41 48 10 - 2.91

Teaching academic content 42 54 3 - 3.03

Collaboration with colleagues and mentors 56 37 7 - 3.12

Note. (n = 59)

Table 2

Impact of Research Lesson Planning on Lead Student Teachers’ Pedagogy, in percentages

Pedagogy A great deal To some Minimally Not at all Extent M

Planning instruction for ELLs 86 14 - - 3.86 Teaching English learners 86 14 - - 3.86

Teaching academic content 86 14 - - 3.86

Collaboration with colleagues and mentors 100 - - - 4.00

Note. (n = 7)

Table 3

Impact of Research Lesson Planning on Student Teachers’ Pedagogical Skills, in percentages

Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree M

I learned new strategies for working with students. 58 49 3 - 3.08

I am more confident in lesson planning. 24 64 12 - 2.79

I am more confident in planning for ELLs. 83 17 - - 3.83

I know more how to work with my mentor teacher. 27 53 20 - 2.74

I better understand how to collaboratively plan with colleagues 39 56 5 - 2.98

I am more likely to plan with colleagues. 54 39 7 - 3.11

Note. (n = 59)

Table 4

Impact of Research Lesson Planning on Lead Student Teachers’ Pedagogical Skills, in percentages

Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree M

I learned new strategies for working with students. 100 - - - 4.00 I am more confident in lesson planning. 71 29 - - 3.71

I am more confident in planning for ELLs. 86 14 - - 3.86

I know more how to work with my mentor teacher. 71 29 - - 3.71

I better understand how to collaboratively plan with colleagues 86 14 - - 3.86

I am more likely to plan with colleagues. 71 29 - - 3.71

Note. (n = 7)

Table 5

Impact of Lesson Study Session on Student Teachers’ Pedagogy, in percentages

Pedagogy A great deal A lot A little Nothing M

Teaching English learners 44 44 11 - 3.18 Making content accessible to ELLs 57 33 10 - 3.32 Planning instruction for ELLs 44 41 11 3 3.12

Teaching academic content 37 51 13 _ 3.09

Developing as a professional educator 43 38 19 - 3.09 Collaboration with colleagues and mentors 40 48 13 – 3.12

Note. (n = 63)

Table 6

Impact of Leading the Lesson Study on Lead Student Teachers’ Pedagogy and Reflective Practice, in percentages

Pedagogy and Reflective Practice Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree M

I learned a lot about my own teaching. 57 43 - - 3.57

I would like to lead a lesson study again. 43 57 - - 3.43

My own students benefitted from the lesson study session. 86 14 - - 3.86

I reflected on my own practice during the experience. 86 14 - - 3.86

Leading a lesson study will improve my own practice. 86 14 - - 3.86

I benefitted from the research planning session. 71 29 - 3.71

I expect my colleagues will student teach more 71 29 - - 3.71 successfully due to their participation.

Note. (n = 7)