Journal of Physics: Conference Series

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

Lesson study as a means of transforming classroom discourse and

student cognitive engagement in science classroom
To cite this article: M U Hajar and S Hendayana 2019 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1157 022050

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 191.96.22.82 on 12/03/2019 at 12:21

International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education (ICMScE 2018) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1157 (2019) 022050 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022050

Lesson study as a means of transforming classroom discourse

and student cognitive engagement in science classroom

M U Hajar1* and S Hendayana2

1
Sekolah Pascasarjana, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Jl. Dr. Setia Budhi No. 229,
Bandung 40154, Indonesia
2
Departemen Pendidikan Kimia, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Indonesia

*[email protected]

Abstract. This study deals with the impact of lesson study focused on classroom discourse and
student cognitive engagement in science classroom. Lesson study has been used as a professional
development program where teachers will be able to improve on teacher instructional practices.
In this study, lesson study was conducted in two junior high schools for two cylces which a cycle
starts from build a lesson design, implementation lesson design in science classroom, reflection,
and revise the lesson design. A qualitative approach design in this study provides a detailed look
at each aspect of lesson study which showed the impact on classroom and student cognitive
engagement in science classroom. Classroom discourse and student cognitive engagement
analyzed form transcribed video recordings and measured by EQUIP (The Electronic Quality of
Inquiry Protocol). The result showed an increase in student cognitive engagement and the
following aspect of classroom discourse : questioning level, complexity of questions, and
communication pattern. In general, lesson study was effective to help teacher reflect the lessons
and revise the lesson design as a part of lesson study was effective to improve classroom
discourse. This study contributes to upgrade teacher instructional practices and student cognitive
engagement in the science classroom.

1. Introduction
Student outcomes such as achievement, motivation, and efficacy have been associated with multiple
aspects of teacher instructional practices in the classroom. Verbal communication between teachers and
students in classrooms shapes the learning environment by influencing the type of talk that students
engage in during instruction [1-3]. This classroom discourse often guides students in making meaning
of science concept [4-7]. Specifically, teacher questioning has been identified as a critical factor in
facilitating effective classroom discourse during instruction [8-11]. Teachers’ questions can establish a
learning environment that promotes student learning and collective sense-making. Teacher question, can
help student understand the reason for using particular scientific practices.
The evidence in previous research based on larger samples has consistently shown that teachers ask
students a large number of questions that are mostly closed-ended or certain answers are seen as correct
and it is the students' task to produce these answers. These questions are typically characterised by a low
level of cognitive demand, requiring students merely to show that they remember subject matter
presented to them earlier. Student answers are short and simple and are usually lists of learned facts,
corresponding to the requirements of the teacher's questions. The teacher's feedback is usually a brief
response to the correctness or otherwise of the student's answer. The development of a student's answer

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education (ICMScE 2018) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1157 (2019) 022050 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022050

or suggestions for further consideration are generally absent [12-14]. It is important to bear in mind that
classroom interaction is shaped by cultural norms “limiting the times at which students can talk, the
topics they can legitimately address, and the ways in which they can express themselves” [15-17]. The
only way that can be used to break its cultural norms is guidance the teachers through professional
development programs.
A professional development program where teachers will be able to improve on teacher instructional
practices especially teacher question in the classroom is lesson study or collaborative lesson research
and development. In lesson study, research lessons will be refined and improved through a question as
part of the improvements on teacher instructional practices in the classroom [18-20]. Repeated lesson
implementations coupled with post lesson discussions can provide opportunities for the teachers to
improve their question as part of the improvements on teacher instructional practices in the classroom
[21-24]. The next question is, how utilizing lesson study can improve classroom discourse especially
teacher question and student cognitive engagement in junior high school science classroom. The aims
of current study explored how the lesson study process can be instrumental in equipping teachers in
facilitated effective discourse and developing their question as part of the improvements on teacher
instructional practices and student cognitive engagement in the science classroom.

2. Method
A qualitative case study approach used to explore how the lesson study process can be instrumental in
equipping teachers in developing their question as part of the improvements on classroom discourse,
teacher instructional practices and student cognitive engagement in this study. Participants of this study
are 2 science teacher and 128 students. Each teacher teaches at two junior high schools in Sumedang,
West Java (School A & School B). The topics that taught by different teachers are about the food chain
(School A) and cells (School B). Its difference topic that used in the study is intended to let researchers
could compare the results of teacher question and student cognitive engagement in the different science
topic. The teacher selected for this study because they have participated in lesson study as learning
community that sustained professional development program that focused on improving quality of
instructional practice in science education. The lesson study starts with build a lesson design,
implementation lesson design in the science classroom, reflection and lesson analysis to get information
about the teacher’s question and student cognitive engagement and revise the lesson design.

Build the lesson 1st implementation 1st Reflection and

design and observation lesson analysis
during the lesson

2nd Reflection 2nd implementation

and lesson and observation Revise 1st
analysis during the lesson lesson design

Figure 1. Lesson study pattern in this study.

In each lesson observed by lesson study team. Lesson study team consisted of two science teacher
educator, math teacher educator, two science master student and teachers who teach at the school.
During the lesson process, all students and teacher activity recorded using voice recorder and video
recorder. The video recordings were transcribed and divided into several episodes. Teacher discourse
included in classroom discourse measurement. Classroom discourse and student cognitive engagement
analysed form transcribed video recordings and measured by EQUIP (The Electronic Quality of Inquiry
Protocol). The Electronic Quality of Inquiry Protocol (EQUIP) is a valid and highly reliable instrument
designed to measure the quantity and quality of inquiry-based instruction. The discourse scale and

2
International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education (ICMScE 2018) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1157 (2019) 022050 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022050

teacher question is comprised of the following factors: questioning level, complexity of questions, and
communication pattern. The EQUIP was also used to measure the cognitive level facilitated by the
teacher at 5-min intervals as part of the Time construct [25].

3. Result and discussion

3.1. Classsroom discourse and student cognitive engagement on learning about food chain topic
through lesson study

3.1.1. Lesson study stages on learning about food chain topic. The first lesson study stages that
undertaken in this lesson about food chain topic is made a lesson design. Lesson design are made by a
joint discussion between teacher who taught the lesson, two science teacher educator, math teacher
educator, two science master student and teachers who teach at the school. Lesson design that made in
this research is different from lesson design in general. The design consists of lesson activity or
deductive situation created by the teacher, prediction of student’s response, and teacher’s anticipation.
The objective of the lesson in this topic is the student be able to analyse the role of producers or
autotrophs and consumers or heterotroph in the food chain surrounding their environment. In the
learning stage some students’ role played performed about food chain in rice fields and the food chain
maps are described by students in group discussion. After the lesson design completed, Teacher
implemented the learning and lesson study team conducted learning observations. At first reflection as
third stages on lesson study, lesson study team and teacher who taught the lesson discuss about how
student learn in the classroom and how teachers facilitated students to learn. At this reflection stages,
they discussed about how students can be more active in discussions by raising questions that given by
teachers. It is due to the discovery of a learning observation that only a few students are active in the
discussion. In the revise lesson design as next stage of lesson study, they discussed about teacher
question and how teacher delivered the question in the classroom based on the student characters. In this
stage, learning media is discussed by the lesson study team. They found that the media used in the
learning did not make it easier for students to create a food chain map. they replaced the media of
learning with Styrofoam and pins that easier to remove and rearrange than the glue and paper as media
in the learning before. After revise the lesson design, Teacher implemented the second learning and
lesson study team conducted learning observations. The second learning are used to explore how the
revised lesson design can improve learning quality. This learning used the same topic on the revised
lesson design but with different student. On the second reflection, they found that student more active
in group discussion than previous learning.

3.1.2. Classroom discourse and student cognitive engagement on learning about food chain topic
through lesson study. After the first and second implementation, data in figure 2 obtained after
transcripting and applying the recorded sound and video into EQUIP format.
Based on the results of data analysis, it is known there has been an increase of student cognitive
engagement in the second implementation. Student cognitive engagement on average was the first level
(receipt of knowledge) in the first implementation in which the teacher's explanation of the food chain
is heard by the students and it has increased one level (recall, remember, understand) in the second
implementation. the highest increase occurred in minutes to 35-40 in which student cognitive
engagement students increased from level 1 to level 3. At the 30-45 minutes in the first implementation,
the students delivered the results of the group discussion. while the second implementation, students
analyzed the role of components in the food chain.

3
International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education (ICMScE 2018) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1157 (2019) 022050 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022050

Figure 2. Student cognitive engagement on learning about food chain topic in the first and second
implementation (School A).

Based on the results of interviews with teachers who taught in the learning, the improvement of
student cognitive engagement is caused by the revise the lesson design which is part of the lesson study.
at the time of reflection in the first implementation, there were some passive students in the group
performance where it became one of the reference factors during the process of revise lesson design.
The process of revising the lesson design together with used the reference of previous reflection result
is very effective to improve student cognitive engagement. Therefore, student cognitive engagement in
subsequent learning is better than previous learning. Whereas, the analysis of classroom discourse
(indicator: questioning level, complexity of questions, and communication pattern) obtained the
following results (figure 3).

Figure 3. Classroom discourse on learning about food chain topic in the first and second implementation
(School A).

Based on the results of data analysis, it is known there has been an increase of classroom discourse
(indicators: questioning level, complexity of question and communication patter) in the second
implementation. Significant increase in classroom discourse is shown in episodes of time in minutes 20-

4
International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education (ICMScE 2018) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1157 (2019) 022050 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022050

25, 25-30 and 30-35. The following transcript classroom discourse in minutes to the second
implementation:
Teacher : Now this group, if phytoplankton is gone, who does not eat?
Student 1 : Zooplankton
Teacher : Then, who will not eat?
Student 2 : Big fish and Small fish
Student 3 : Human will die
All Student : All will die mom
Student 4 : Because there is no food
Teacher : Well, all already understand?

Based on the results of interviews with teachers who taught in the learning, the increased level of
questions of teachers in the second implementation caused by the reflection of learning on the first
implementation. In reflection of the first implementation, it is found that the students tend to be passive
because the questions given by the teacher are short closed ended questions so that the students are not
tried to think of the answer (the recall level). Therefore, in the second implementation, the teacher took
the initiative to change the questions that given to the students by writing questions before they were
implemented and questions are higher than the recall level (applying or analyse level). Increasing the
level of questions and the complexity of questions by teachers in the second implementation leads to an
increase in the communication pattern in which previous learning is only controlled by the teacher into
a student-led discussion. Reflection is one part of lesson study where the teacher can know the
description of learning experienced by the student based on the observer's note during the observation
of learning. it can be used by the teacher as a reference for further learning [26].

3.2. Classroom discourse and student cognitive engagement in cells topic through lesson study

3.2.1. Lesson study stages on learning about cells topic. The objective of the lesson in this topic is the
student be able to describe cells as the smallest part of life. In the learning stage some students made a
plant preparation of Rhoeo discolor and drew its cell shape. After the lesson design completed, Teacher
implemented the learning and lesson study team conducted learning observations. At the reflection of
first implementation, discussed about how students can be more active in discussions by raising
questions that given by teachers. In the revise lesson design as next stage of lesson study, discussed
about teacher question and how teacher delivered the question in the classroom based on the student
characters. In this stage, learning objective is discussed by the lesson study team. Learning objectives
used in previous learning are very comprehensive, so students are difficult to accept the learning. they
replaced it into a simple learning objective and learning stages. After revise the lesson design, Teacher
implemented the second learning and lesson study team conducted learning observations. On the second
reflection, they found that students are more actively answered questions given by teachers and
performed practical work in classroom.

3.2.2. Classroom discourse and student cognitive engagement on learning about cells topic through
lesson study. Based on the results of data analysis, it is known there has been an increase of student
cognitive engagement in the second implementation. It occurred because of the differences in syntax
that used in the first and second implementations. In the first implementation, students made plant
preparation without examples given by the teacher, whereas in the second implementation, teacher
demonstrated how to make plant preparation first before students have the discussion. After a
demonstration by the teacher, the construct of a cell description is made by the student. The change is
based on the first implementation reflection that students have difficulty to make plant preparations and
is used as a reference for revise of lesson design. Reinforced by result of interview, student cognitive
engagement improvement is caused by the revision of lesson design as part of lesson study.

5
International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education (ICMScE 2018) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1157 (2019) 022050 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022050

Figure 4. Student cognitive engagement on learning about cells topic in the first and second
implementation (School B).

Figure 5. Classroom discourse on learning about cells topic in the first and second implementation
(School B).
Based on the results of data analysis, it is known there has been an increase of classroom discourse
in the second implementation. Significant increase in classroom discourse is shown at 40th-75th minutes
with questioning level and complexity of question aspect and communication pattern has increased from
20th minute to the end of learning. Based on the interview result, the improvement of communication
pattern in the second implementation is caused by the demonstration of how to make a plant preparation
by the teacher at the beginning of the learning. The student's knowledge leads to changes in
communication patterns previously dominated by teachers being student-centered. The following
transcript classroom discourse in minutes to the second implementation:
Teacher : From the results of your observations had different results, what is the cause?
Student 1 : Its incision is thickness sir
Student 2 : No light
Student 3 : Incisions of preparations must be more thin
Teacher 4 : Why it makes a difference?
All Student : Because the tissue is drawn, not the cells
Teacher : Okay, the difference is caused by some of the factors you mentioned earlier, so after this
study you can make a good preparation of plant and can be observed under the microscope
well.

6
International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education (ICMScE 2018) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1157 (2019) 022050 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022050

Based on the results of interviews that have been done, the increase in the level of questions and the
complexity of question teacher is directly caused by the discussion conducted by lesson study team on
the lesson design revision. In the discussion the teacher gained feedback on how to make questions with
higher level questions to make students more thoughtful to answer the question and teachers are shown
how to ask the question to be accepted by the students well. During the discussion the teacher practiced
how to ask questions in front of the lesson study team. Therefore, in the second implementation, the
question given by the teacher has a higher level and complexity than before. Reflection and revision of
lesson design as part of lesson study is an important factor to improve the effectiveness of classroom
discourse in learning.

4. Conclusion
Lesson study can be used as tool to improve classroom discourse and student cognitive engagement.
The most part of lesson study that can improve classroom disourse and student cognitive engagement
was reflection and revise the lesson design. Through reflection activities in lesson study, the teacher can be
aware of how the learning process has been done, how the teacher interaction with students or students with the
students during the learning process in classroom discourse. In revise of lesson design, teachers can also overcome
the problems that occur during the learning process, either in terms of classrooom discourse and student cognitive
engagement.

Acknowledgments
We want to express our gratitude to team of lesson study learning community (LSLC) in Sumedang who
are listening to the journey and help of research process. The retrospective nature of this research
reminds us of all the wonderful teachers, colleagues, and students we’ve worked with over the past
several years.

References
[1] Connor C and Michaels S 2017 Supporting Teacher in Taking up Productive Talk Moves: The
Long Road to Professional Learning at Scale International Journal of Education Research 30
40
[2] Kawalkar A and Vijapurkar J 2013 Scaffolding Science Talk: The Role of Teachers’ Questions
in The Inquiry Classroom International Journal of science education 35 12
[3] Smart J and Marshall J 2013 Interaction between Classroom Discourse, Teacher Questioning,
and Student Cognitive Engagement in Middle School Science International Journal of Science
Education 13 24
[4] Dantonio M and Paradise L 1988 Teacher question-answer strategy and the cognitive
correspondence between teacher questions and learner responses Journal of Research and
Development in Education 21 3
[5] Morge L 2005 Teacher-pupil interaction: A study of hidden beliefs in conclusion phases.
Research report International Journal of Science Education 27 8
[6] Pehmer A, Groscher A and Seidel T 2015 How Teacher Professional Development Regarding
Classroom Dialogue Affects Students Higher-Order Learning Journal of Teaching and
Teacher Education 47 108
[7] Tan R 2015 Improving The Use of Physical Manipulatives in Teaching Science Concept through
Lesson Study International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies 25 67
[8] Chambers A, Kademian S, Davis E and Palincsar A 2017 Guiding Student Towards Sense
making: Teacher Question Focused on Integrating Scientific Practices with Science Content
International Journal of Science Teacher Education 39 15
[9] Chin C 2007 Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches That Stimulate Productive
Thinking Journal of Research in Science Teaching 44 6
[10] Marshall J, Smart J, Horton R, 2010 The design and validation of EQUIP: An instrument to assess
inquiry-based instruction International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 8 2
[11] Smart J and Marshall J 2013 Interaction between Classroom Discourse, Teacher Questioning, and

7
International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education (ICMScE 2018) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1157 (2019) 022050 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022050

Student Cognitive Engagement in Middle School Science International Journal of Science

Education 13 24
[12] Kiemer K, Groschner A, Pehmer A, Seidel T 2015 Effect of a Classroom Discourse Intervention
on Teachers’ Practice and Student’s Motivation to Learn Mathematics and Science Journal of
Learning and Instruction 35 94
[13] Reinsvold L and Cochran K 2012 Power Dynamics and Questioning in Elementary Science
Classrooms International Journal of Science Education 10 23
[14] Roth W 1996 Teacher questioning in an open-inquiry learning environment: Interactions of
context, content, and student responses Journal of Research in Science Teaching 33 7
[15] Forman E, Deltoro V, Brown L and Passmore C 2017 Discursive Strategies that Foster an
Epistemic Community for Argument in a Biology Classroom Journal of Learning and
Instruction 48 32
[16] Sedova K, Sedleck M and Svaricek S 2016 Teacher professional Development as Means of
Transforming Student Classroom Talk Journal of Teaching and Teacher Education 57 14
[17] Trilling B and Fadel C 2009 21st Century Skills, Learning for life in our times (San Fransisco:
John willey & Sons, Inc) p 31
[18] Dudley P 2011 Lesson Study: A Handbook, University of Leicester Retrieved February 2018 from
www.lessonstudy.co.uk.
[19] Edyani A, Supriatna A, Komalasari L 2017 Utilization of Lesson Analysis as Teacher Self
Reflection to Improve the Lesson Design on Chemical Equation Topic Journal of Physics:
Conf. Series 8 12
[20] Tan R 2015 Improving The Use of Physical Manipulatives in Teaching Science Concept through
Lesson Study International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies 25 67
[21] Kumpulainen K and Rajala A 2016 Dialogic Teaching and Students Discursive Identity
Negotiation in The Learning of Science Journal of Learning and Instruction 19 1
[22] Lotter C, Rushton G and Singer J 2013 Teacher Enactment Patterns: How Can We help Move All
Teacher to Reform-Based Inquiry Practice Through Professional Development International
Journal of Science Education 10 24
[23] Rowe M Teaching Science as Continuous Inquiry: A Basic (USA: McGraw-Hill Pub)
[24] Trilling B and Fadel C 2009 21st Century Skills, Learning for life in our times (San Fransisco:
John willey & Sons, Inc) p 31
[25] Marshall J, Smart J and Horton R 2010 The design and validation of EQUIP: An instrument to
assess inquiry-based instruction International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education
82
[26] Hendayana S, Suryadi D and Muchtar A 2007 Lesson Study: suatu strategi untuk meningkatkan
keprofesionalan pendidik (pengalaman IMPSTEP-JICA) (Bandung: UPI PRESS) Chapter 3 p
47-55