Using Lesson Study to Assess Student Thinking in Science

SUMMARY for designing this assessment was the Assessments are process of Japanese lesson study opportunities to study student think- Teachers examine (Fernandez, 2002; Fernandez & ing and analyze teaching practices to fourth-grade students’ Yoshida, 2004; Lewis, 2002; Lewis, understandings of mag- best develop students’ ideas. Perry, & Hurd, 2004, 2009; Lewis, netism through the use Assessments, when tightly linked to Perry, & Murata, 2006; Stigler & of science notebooks. standards and instructional design, Decisions about student Hiebert, 1999). This process is provide information to evaluate: learning outcomes, lesson outlined below. design, and assessments (1) student learning, are derived from the use (2) teaching practice, Japanese lesson study process of a Japanese lesson study (3) the effectiveness of approach. Lesson study leads the team through a curriculum materials, and process which includes a (4) the standards upon live research lesson with which the lesson is observers who gather designed. extensive data on the les- son and outcomes. This forms a cycle of continu- The purpose of this arti- ous improvement in all cle is to describe our pro- aspects of teaching. cess for designing a for- mative assessment of fourth-grade students’ ideas about magnetism through the use of science notebooks. The context

Sharon Dotger is an assistant professor of science education at Syracuse University, teaching pre-service teachers. F. Kevin Moquin is a fourth-grade teacher at Willow Field Elementary School in the Liverpool Central School District and a doctoral student at Syracuse University. Kathleen Hammond is a fourth-level teacher at Willow Field Elementary School in the Liverpool Central School District.

E d u c a t o r ’ s V o i c e n V olume V n P age 2 2 Sharon Dotger, Syracuse University Using Lesson Study F. Kevin Moquin, United Liverpool Faculty Association Kathleen Hammond, United Liverpool Faculty Association to Assess Student Thinking in Science Lesson study begins as teachers work necessary or practical. Step Three together to articulate goals for student begins with one educator from the Lesson study learning. This begins with a broad, team teaching the lesson to a class of begins as non-subject-specific goal that describes students. The other members of the their students as learners. This broad team attend this lesson and observe the teachers work goal can then be framed for a subject students engaging in the task the group together to area, like science, then a unit, like designed. This is called a “live magnetism, and finally a lesson. To research lesson” (Lewis, 2002). articulate goals complete this step, teachers study for student standards and curriculum to determine Step Four occurs after the lesson existing good ideas that use methods implementation. The team meets as learning. that align with their goals and help stu- soon as possible to discuss the out- dents learn. The team in this descrip- come. After this, they go to Step Five: tion is a group of two fourth-grade redesigning the lesson based on the evi- teachers, a special education teacher, dence of student thinking they gathered and a science teacher educator. in Step Three and discussion they had in Step Four. The lesson can be re- In Step Two, the team writes a taught to a new group of students, detailed plan to guide students’ repeating steps Three through Five. learning and specify what observers should look for when they attend the For Step Six, teachers create a report lesson. In this approach, observers are that documents their learning. They invited to view the lesson. Observers can discuss what they know about stu- may be teachers and others who are dents’ ideas, what they know about invited. Examples of plans are available teaching that particular lesson in that from sources such as Lewis and Hurd particular unit, and how their under- (2011). standings relate to teaching generally and the goals and standards upon Steps Three through Five occur as which the lesson was based (see Lewis, many times as the team decides are 2010).

continued on following page

E d u c a t o r ’ s V o i c e n V olume V n P age 2 3 Using Lesson Study to Assess Student Thinking in Science

We needed to Step One: Articulate Student n Magnetism is a force that may Learning Goals and Study attract or repel certain materials gather evidence in Standards (New York State Elementary Science the live research During our lesson study, we worked Core Curriculum, Standard 4, Key with other teachers in our school to Idea 5, Performance Indicator 5.1). lesson that articulate our broad goal: students were These descriptions of what students We will create an engaging should know about magnets are simi- engaged, learning environment to teach students a lar, but they are not identical. There core knowledge, core body of knowledge to become are specifics within each one that independent problem solvers and informed our planning. For example, problem-solving effective communicators. in the American Association for the independently, and Advancement of Science Benchmarks Thus, we needed to gather evidence in communicating for Science Literacy, the effect of a the live research lesson that students magnetic force over a distance is with one another were engaged, learning core knowl- stressed in the phrase “without touch- edge, problem-solving independently, effectively, both ing.” Also, they do not use the term and communicating with one another “force”; instead they describe the force orally and in writing. effectively, both orally and in writing. as a “push” or a “pull.” This resource also distinguishes magnet-to-magnet After establishing our broad goal, we interactions and magnet-to-iron-based studied the Benchmarks for Science object interactions. These distinctions Literacy (American Association for the are maintained in the National Science Advancement of Science, 1994), the Education Standards as well, but not National Science Education Standards in the NYS Elementary Science Core (National Academy of Sciences, 1996), Curriculum. and the New York State Elementary Science Core Curriculum (Grades K-4) to understand the indicators or out- comes of student learning for Step Two: Design Lesson magnetism: From our evaluation of these stan- dards, outcomes, and performance n Without touching them, a magnet indicators, we taught a series of lessons pulls on all things made of iron and about magnets from the unit either pushes or pulls on other mag- Magnetism & Electricity from the Full nets (AAAS, 1994). Option Science System (FOSS). FOSS n Magnets attract and repel each was developed originally by the other and certain kinds of other Lawrence Hall of Science at the materials (NAS, 1996). University of California at Berkeley in

E d u c a t o r ’ s V o i c e n V olume V n P age 2 4 1993 and revised in 2001. (An over- we designed a note- view of the unit can be found at http:// book task in which www.fossweb.com.) students recorded this focus question: In the original unit, students were given magnets to investigate magnet What objects will interactions with objects in the class- stick to magnets? room. Then, students would explore how the magnet interacted with a set of We designed this other items in the kit. The original les- question after study- son called for students to predict first ing the teacher’s guide and discussing stu- by sorting these objects into two piles: F. Kevin Moquin uses a one pile of objects that they predict dents’ ideas from a previous lesson range of visual supports magnets would attract and one that about magnets. We were also con- to enhance student learning. would not. Students were then asked cerned that students were not recording to test the objects and re-sort them their predictions or their observations. based on their tests. Teachers engaged Therefore, we designed the notebook students in a discussion of what they task asking students to record: noticed. Students were then asked to n their predictions about each object, construct an explanation for why a paper clip can stick to a nail that is n the result of their test of that object already touching a magnet. In the orig- with the magnet, inal lesson, students were not asked to record their observations, only to gen- n a claim that identified a pattern in erate an explanation of a phenomenon their data, they might not have observed themselves. n support for their claim with evi- dence from their investigation, We used many of the materials and strategies described above, but we n a conclusion in their notebook that decided to modify the original design began with the statement, “Today I by using science notebook writing. We learned . . .” and think of science notebooks as tools to n a reflection in their notebook to support students’ thinking as they extend their ideas by beginning learn in science and as tools for assess- with the statement, “I wonder what ment (Aschbacher & Alonzo, 2006; would happen if . . .” Gilbert & Kotelman, 2005; McQuitty, Dotger, & Khan, 2010; Ruiz-Prino, Li, Ayala, & Shavelson, 2004). Thus, continued on following page

E d u c a t o r ’ s V o i c e n V olume V n P age 2 5 Using Lesson Study to Assess Student Thinking in Science

The science We taught the lesson to two other n Individual whiteboards to assist stu- groups of students before we arrived at dents with spelling new terms, and notebooks the final design we report on here. informed our During these lessons, we noticed that n Peer-to-peer discussion of ideas as students recorded their ideas, they before, during, and after writing. understanding of changed their predictions as they real- students’ thinking ized they were incorrect. Even though and, as a result, our each student was given only one mag- Step Three: Teach Lesson, net, students shared magnets so they Gather Data lesson design for could play with magnet-to-magnet In addition to the two teachers work- the future. interactions. ing together to teach the lesson, addi- tional adults observed the lesson to Some students were unfamiliar with gather data: the authors of this paper, the names of the 19 objects in the kit. other teachers in the building, under- Thus, we made additional changes to graduate teacher education students, our lesson design. In the final lesson, and district administrators. We: the teacher identified each of the objects in the bag. n gathered data regarding students’ conversations with one another, The live research lesson was co-taught by a general education and a special n described student use of materials, education teacher to a class of 23 fourth-graders. All students were n took photographs of student work Caucasian, ten were female, three had and of their problem solving an Individualized Education Program activities, (IEP), four received Academic Intervention Services (AIS), and six n videotaped the class, and received free or reduced-price lunch. n collected students’ science note- Based on the needs of our students, book entries. we designed the following accommo- dations within the lesson: We will focus the remainder of our discussion on the science notebook A typed list of objects to streamline n and how that informed our under- the prediction and data recording standing of students’ thinking and, as a process, result, our lesson design for the future. Verbal cueing for the task, n An excerpt of a science notebook is shown in Figure 1.

E d u c a t o r ’ s V o i c e n V olume V n P age 2 6 Figure 1 Excerpt of a Science Notebook

Science Notebook Writing and The Common Core Learning Standards

Science notebook writing provides an excellent oppor- and develop over time. Therefore, spelling, terminology, tunity to engage students in content area writing that and sentence construction need not be perfect within aligns with the College and Career Readiness Anchor the science notebook — much as early drafts of many Standards for Writing in the NYS P-12 Common Core authors’ work. Learning Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy: We imagine several ways students could use their sci- “Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of ence notebook as a tool to develop a product so they substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and rel- could share what they’ve learned with others. They evant and sufficient evidence” (p. 18). could create a webpage, a class newsletter, or a school bulletin board to demonstrate their learning using scien- It is important to note, however, that the science note- tific language and traditional writing conventions. book is not a final product. It is a process tool that should be used to give students an opportunity to think

E d u c a t o r ’ s V o i c e n V olume V n P age 2 7 Using Lesson Study to Assess Student Thinking in Science

We studied Step Four: Evaluate the These examples show that the stu- Notebooks and the Lesson dents focused on a singular object to the claims and Our goal was for students to articulate make their prediction. They did not evidence in the a pattern in their predictions. Their discuss a pattern such as magnets will not stick to plastics. We also noticed students’ actual predictions presented us with insights into students’ prior knowl- that Student 3 incorporates the proce- notebooks. edge. Five examples of students’ ideas dure of the investigation into her pre- are below. They illustrate the range of diction. Students 4 and 5 discussed responses from the 23 students in the the relationship between magnets in class. their prediction. They offer two differ- ent reasons for why the phenomenon Student 1: If I stick a magnet to a might occur. brass ring, it will stick because brass is heavy and brass may be gold. When we studied the claims and evi- dence in the students’ notebooks, we Student 2: If I took a washer and put noticed their claims were specific to a magnet on it, I think it will stick individual data points, rather than pro- because from looking at it, it seems to viding a general rule for the phenome- be meadle (metal) to me. non. For example, students wrote:

Student 3: If I had a magnet, I would n “I claim that the yarn does not stick stick it to the opshons (objects) that because it is soft,” they gave me and I would use it on the black rock and the river rock to see if it n “I claim that the washer was made stuck to both of them. of metal,” and

Student 4: If I put two magnets n “If you stick the side of a magnet to together then they would either sepa- another side, they have resistance.” rate or stick together because one of the In each of these cases, students made a sides has something different than the claim about one of the objects, rather other. than a claim about a pattern among Student 5: If I put a magnet on a dif- them. For example, we expected stu- ferent magnet then it would stick dents would say “Objects that do not because the magnetic pulse would pull contain metals will not stick to a mag- them together. net. I know this because the yarn, plas- tic chip, and cotton ball did not stick to the magnet. None of these objects contain metals.”

E d u c a t o r ’ s V o i c e n V olume V n P age 2 8 Step Five: Redesign The Lesson Step Six: Complete Lesson Study Report In debriefing the lesson, we studied the teacher guide again (i.e., While a lesson study report would Magnetism & Electricity, 2001). We address all aspects of the lesson, we noticed that in the original lesson, will focus here on what we learned there was wisdom in two distinct prac- about the science notebook as an tices we had modified. One was the assessment tool. We feel it was an wording of the question. Our question effective component in our assessment had been: What objects will stick to plan for the following reasons: magnets? The manual suggested that 1. The structure of the notebook task the question to open the lesson should was open-ended enough that we have been a statement of a problem could attribute students’ writing to that pointed toward identifying their own ideas, rather than to patterns: prompts that may be embedded in “I’m wondering if there is something directed questions. that is the same about all the objects 2. The structure of the notebook was that the magnet sticks to.” flexible and therefore able to accom- We hoped students would recognize modate the variety of needs and the this pattern when constructing their strategies preferred by our students. claims. While a case can be made for 3. The notebook and the associated both approaches, we now think the lesson were well linked to the stan- original statement would have provid- dards, allowing us to assess stu- ed the level of support that was appro- dents’ learning in a way that linked priate to our goals. the standards to our practices and Another element of redesign was relat- then to their ideas. ed to the materials. If we had the stu- 4. Observing students engage in the dents create groups of objects by task, we learned that the structure of sorting instead of marking a pre-made claims and evidence was difficult for list in their notebooks, they would them and have begun further inqui- have had a group of objects to study to ry into how to help students generate their claims. This may have improve this portion of their scien- helped them see the pattern more tific thinking and writing. effectively than trying to pick like objects from a list they could not sort. continued on following page

E d u c a t o r ’ s V o i c e n V olume V n P age 2 9 Using Lesson Study to Assess Student Thinking in Science

Through our examination of student Author Note ideas using science notebooks and les- We would like to acknowledge our colleagues son study, we were able to study stu- at Willow Field who have supported this work: Jeffrey Bidwell, Deborah Casey, dent outcome data that was directly Colleen Hall, AnnMarie Lynch, Doug linked to our instructional design. McCaffer, Sue Osborne, John Sardella, This linkage gives us important infor- Kelly Vaughn, and Deborah Walsh. mation about how to improve our teaching, for this lesson and for other science lessons we will teach in the future. By studying the notebooks, we were able to determine future goals for student writing, particularly for claims and evidence. Through the lesson study process, we experienced true collaboration with colleagues. We advocate the use of science notebooks and lesson study in classrooms and hope other teachers will publicly share their notebook designs and what they learn from their use.

E d u c a t o r ’ s V o i c e n V olume V n P age 3 0 References Lewis, C.C., Perry, R., & Hurd, J. (2009). Improving instruction through lesson American Association for the Advancement study: A theoretical model and North of Science. (1994). Benchmarks for sci- American case. Journal of Mathematics ence literacy. New York: Oxford Teacher Education, 12, 285-304. University Press. Lewis, C.C., Perry, R., & Murata, A. Aschbacher, P., & Alonzo, A. (2006). (2006). How should research contribute Examining the utility of elementary sci- to instructional improvement? The case of ence notebooks for formative assessment lesson study. Educational purposes. Educational Assessment, Researcher, 35(3), 3-14. 11(3&4), 179-203. McQuitty, V., Dotger, S., & Khan, U. Fernandez, C. (2002). Learning from (2010). One without the other isn’t as Japanese approaches to professional devel- good as both together: A theoretical opment: The case of lesson study. framework of integrated writing/science Journal of Teacher Education, 19(2), instruction in the primary grades. 171-185. National Reading Conference Yearbook, Fernandez, C., & Yoshida, M. (2004). 59, 315-328. Lesson study: A Japanese approach to National Academy of Sciences. (1996). improving mathematics teaching and National Science Education Standards. learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Washington DC: National Academies Associates. Press. Gilbert, J., & Kotelman, M. (2005). Five New York State Education Department. good reasons to use science notebooks. Elementary science core curriculum Science and Children, 43(3), 28-32. (grades K-4). Lewis, C.C. (2002). Lesson study: A handbook Ruiz-Primo, M.A., Li, M., Ayala, C., & for teacher-led instructional change. Shavelson, R.J. (2004). Evaluating Philadelphia, PA: Research for Better students’ science notebooks as an Schools, Inc. assessment tool. International Journal of Lewis, C.C. (2010). A public proving ground Science Education, 26(12), 1477-1506. for standards-based practice: Why we need Stigler, J.W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). it, what it might look like. Education Week, The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s 30(3), 28-30. teachers for improving education in the Lewis, C.C., & Hurd, J. (2011). Lesson study classroom. New York: Free Press. step by step: How teacher learning commu- University of California at Berkley, Lawrence nities improve instruction. Portsmouth, Hall of Science. (2001). Full option science NH: Heinemann. system: Magnetism & electricity. Lewis, C.C., Perry, R., & Hurd, J. (2004). A deeper look at lesson study. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 18-22.

E d u c a t o r ’ s V o i c e n V olume V n P age 3 1