Lesson study in physical education: a collaborative and contextualised approach to initial teacher training

ABSTRACT

Lesson study is a collaborative and contextualised approach to professional learning that involves small groups of teachers working together to design and reflect on the teaching of a research lesson. Although it is a well-established approach to professional learning in classroom-based subjects, research on its effectiveness within physical education (PE) initial teacher training (ITT) and in the general practice of PE teachers is scarce. This study examines the views of 18 secondary PE associate teachers (ATs) who completed a lesson study cycle as part of their one-year postgraduate ITT programme. A questionnaire and semi-structured interviews – conducted at the end of the lesson study and six months later at the end of the programme – were used to generate data. Thematic analysis was then used to interrogate the data and identify patterns of response. The findings revealed that the ATs benefitted from the experience in similar ways to established teachers. They developed their understanding of lesson research and engaged in elevated levels of critical reflection that helped to change and develop their approaches to teaching and learning. Moreover, the ATs recognised that their learning was enhanced when they could rehearse the phases of the cycle before starting the lesson study in their placement school. They also understood the value of a mentor who could support their progress and ensure their full engagement in all phases of the lesson study cycle. These findings have implications for providers of ITT as the considered inclusion of lesson study contributed to the immediate aim of developing ATs’ teaching competencies while also promoting the skills needed for them to manage their own ongoing learning as fully qualified teachers.

KEYWORDS:

• Lesson study
• physical education
• associate teachers
• initial teacher education
• professional learning

Introduction to professional learning

Professional learning is any activity that is designed to improve the practice of established teachers and transform the learning of the pupils in their care (Jones, 2021). The education profession has shown increased interest in varied forms of professional learning (Kihara et al., 2021), but linear and transmissive approaches are still dominant in schools. Typically, a teacher learns from a designated expert at a professional development event and then transfers that learning into their own classroom (Jones, 2022). This linear approach can be valuable, but one-off, generic professional learning events can also be harder to transfer and replicate when they have less relevance to the teachers’ particular needs and situation.

In contrast, a non-linear approach characterised by context, collaboration, active engagement, and duration is often more transformational. Providing teachers with the time and space for collaboration and critical reflection on contextualised experiences enhances their confidence and develops teaching skills that impact pupils’ learning (Armour et al., 2017; Kihara et al., 2021; Russell, 2005; Slade et al., 2020). Furthermore, professional learning is thought to be more authentic when it starts with teachers’ existing understanding and links to their own professional context (Karlsen, 2022). Indeed, this distinction adheres with the notion suggested by Guskey (2003) that teachers will not incorporate new theoretical ideas into their own practice until they have witnessed their effectiveness in the classroom.

Within PE, professional learning is also typically experienced as a liner and transmissive approach that is disconnected from the teachers’ previous learning and individual context. This one-off, generic approach to professional learning falls short of the recognised principles of effective practice (Jones, 2022; Karlsen, 2022; Kihara et al., 2021). To be more effective, professional learning should be situated in the context of the teacher’s classroom so that teachers are fully included and have positive real-world experiences of change (Armour et al., 2017; Guskey, 2003). It should also be collaborative so that teachers have social support and work with others to access professional knowledge and resources that may otherwise have remained hidden (Cajkler et al., 2013; Slingerland et al., 2021). Finally, it should take place over a longer time frame, allowing teachers to develop their thinking about pupil learning and apply coherent theories in practice (Kihara et al., 2021; Slingerland et al., 2021).

Lesson study is a non-linear approach to professional learning that adheres to the principles of effective practice. It is thought to be a more transformative approach in classroom-based subjects, but research on its effectiveness within PE is scarce (Slingerland et al., 2021). Similarly, while general interest in lesson study is developing within education, less research examines its impact within ITT (Lamb & King, 2021). Lesson study is a well-established approach to professional learning (Kihara et al., 2021), but there is comparatively little research on its use in PE and even less on its use within PE ITT (Lamb & King, 2021). As such, this research will analyse the views and experiences of PE ATs (also known as preservice or trainee teachers) who completed a lesson study to achieve master’s level accreditation as part of their year-long postgraduate ITT programme. The research will aim to understand the potential value of lesson study as a means of promoting professional learning and bridging the theory-practice gap that exists between university and school-based experiences in ITT (Cajkler et al., 2013; Darling-Hammond, 2017). It will also aim to identify the features of lesson study that support the ATs’ progress and allow them to maximise their learning when adopting this approach.

Lesson study

Lesson study is a collaborative and contextualised approach to professional learning. It involves small groups of teachers working together to design, teach, observe, and reflect on a research lesson taught to the teachers’ pupils in their own classrooms (Kihara et al., 2021). The aim of the research lesson is to develop new pedagogical understanding through collaboration and shared learning. Working with others allows for joint reflection on the practical application of theories and provides access to professional knowledge and resources that may otherwise have remained hidden (Ko, 2019; Marcos et al., 2009; Slingerland et al., 2021).

Lesson study typically begins with a group of teachers deciding on a clear learning aim for the investigation based on the priorities of their particular context. They then engage in wider reading and consultation to generate ideas that culminate in the collective design of a research lesson (Slingerland et al., 2021). The wider research findings help bridge the theory-practice gap and provide additional perspectives that contribute to the group’s collective knowledge. The wider reading and consultation also counter any concerns that the process is limited to practice and only informed by the teachers’ existing knowledge (McMillan & Jess, 2021). One teacher normally leads the lesson during the teaching phase while the others observe and gather data on pupil learning (Hervas & Medina, 2020; Karlsen, 2022; Ni Shuilleabhain & Bjuland, 2019). However, different teachers could lead different parts of the lesson as the observation focuses on the learners rather than the teacher. In this way, the approach differs from traditional surveillance practices as it focuses on how the intended learning translates into practice (Ko, 2019; McMillan & Jess, 2021). Indeed, the shared observation of pupil learning makes lesson study distinct from other similar approaches to professional learning. The post-lesson reflection similarly focuses on aspects of pupil learning. It is typically the part of the lesson study cycle that provides the most insights and learning for the participants (McMillan & Jess, 2021). All teachers contribute to this stage by sharing experiences and comparing observations of learning. In doing so, they begin to make sense of the findings and develop new understandings that can improve the lesson or teaching more generally (Kihara et al., 2021; Slade et al., 2020). At this point, the participants can choose to replan and teach the lesson again or conclude the cycle and share their learning (Dudley, 2013; Hervas & Medina, 2020; Ni Shuilleabhain & Bjuland, 2019). Finally, the participating teachers compile and disseminate their findings to the broader school or educational community (Hervas & Medina, 2020). In doing so, they move away from an isolated study of teaching and deliberately contribute to the wider professional understanding of other colleagues in the school community. In addition, the recording and reporting of findings may help establish an ethos of collaborative learning and encourage other teachers to engage in similar forms of professional learning (McMillan & Jess, 2021).

While lesson study is portrayed as a simple and orderly cyclical process, the progress of those involved within and between each stage of the cycle is more complex. The unpredictable nature of the classroom means that teaching episodes are rarely enacted as intended during the lesson design phase, meaning that there is endless potential for revisiting and replanning. Teachers could always find reasons to deconstruct and reconstruct the research lesson based on an evaluation of its impact (Hervas & Medina, 2020). In addition, a further complexity is that individual teachers will bring their own involvements and understandings to the lesson study and experience the process differently (McMillan & Jess, 2021). While individuals will interact, progress, and make sense of the process in their own ways, this is considered a strength, not a weakness, of lesson study. The structured and collaborative approach to inquiry allows teachers to share their thinking and learning (Ni Shuilleabhain & Bjuland, 2019). Different thoughts and experiences are woven together to enhance shared knowledge and pedagogical practice and ultimately improve pupil outcomes (Dudley, 2013).

Lesson study in initial teacher training

Lesson study is becoming more common in ITT, but there are difficulties in applying the practices faithfully in a different context. Lesson study requires additional planning and training time for PE ATs and mentors, which can be difficult to organise within busy ITT programmes (Lamb & King, 2021). Lesson study also depends on collaborative relationships, which can be difficult to establish when they are imposed by the necessity of completing a lesson study (Ni Shuilleabhain & Bjuland, 2019). Finally, variation in practice can lead to inequity of experience; thus, the tutor plays an important role in facilitating the process and providing support in accordance with needs (Slingerland et al., 2021).

In this study, the PE cohort was a part of a larger group of secondary ATs who completed a lesson study as part of their year-long postgraduate ITT programme. The PE ATs were introduced to the lesson study by a team of teacher educators before working through a collaborative plan, teach, and review cycle at a local school. This initial preparatory experience, undertaken with a peer over a shorter period of three days, was designed to mimic a lesson study cycle and introduce the ATs to the phases they would complete with their mentor at their placement school. The mentor was a more experienced school-based colleague who played a central role in the AT’s teacher education. They supported the AT’s progress and collaborated with them during the lesson study cycle. Finally, the PE tutor, the teacher educator who was also conducting this study, also worked with the subject cohort to facilitate the whole process and provide additional support as it was needed.

The lesson study at the placement school began with the identification of a clear learning aim for the investigation. The mentors supported this process and helped the ATs reflect on their classroom experiences and identify an aspect of their existing practice that stimulated curiosity and led them to seek more creative solutions. The AT then engaged in wider reading and consultation with the tutor and others in their learning network to inform their thinking before designing the research lesson with their mentor. The research lesson was then taught, normally by the mentor but sometimes with the assistance of the AT. During this phase, the ATs’ main role was to observe and gather data on the pupils’ learning, although the mentors also engaged in this process, especially if the ATs took a turn leading a different part of the lesson. The mentor and AT also collaborated in the post-lesson discussion, sharing experiences and reflecting on the pupils’ learning. Finally, the AT identified and shared any new understandings that could be used to improve the lesson or teaching more generally as a written summary of their findings.

Methods

This research aimed to analyse the perceptions of PE ATs to develop an understanding of the potential value of lesson study as a means of promoting professional learning within ITT. It also aimed to identify the features of the lesson study that supported the ATs’ progress and allowed them to maximise their learning when adopting this approach. Ten male and eight female ATs agreed to participate in the study during their one-year secondary PE postgraduate teacher education programme. Purposive sampling was used to recruit the ATs, where potential participants were selected based on their relevance to the purposes of the investigation (Jones, 2015). 18 ATs were invited to participate in the study as they were all learning to teach PE at the same university ITT partnership in the north-west of England. All ATs had completed a lesson study at their placement schools as part of their teacher education programme and were well placed to share their perceptions of the process. The sampling strategy enabled the researcher to develop an understanding of the PE ATs’ views and experiences and proved to be a useful means of analysing the potential value of including lesson study within ITT (Denscombe, 2017). All participants provided appropriate informed consent, and ethical approval for the study was gained from the University of Chester Faculty of Education and Children’s Services Ethics Committee (Reference: 17221PE) on the 17th of February 2021.

Questionnaires and semi-structured interviews were used to generate qualitative data and develop an understanding of the features of the lesson study that supported the PE ATs’ progress and allowed them to maximise their learning. The questionnaire was completed after the ATs had finished the lesson study in school and submitted their findings. It was designed to capture the ATs’ immediate perceptions of the lesson study process as open questions were asked about their experiences of planning and reflecting on the research lesson with their mentor. The questionnaire also asked about the wider impact of undertaking a lesson study and how the process influenced their mentor relationships, professional status, and ability to learn through the practical application of theoretical ideas. Questionnaires are widely used in evaluations of teaching and learning (Farrow et al., 2020) and in this study, they were adopted as a convenient and efficient means of recording the participants’ initial thoughts about their experience. However, while questionnaires are a commonly adopted approach, there are some significant disadvantages. For example, the participants may have misunderstood the questions or not responded in sufficient depth of detail. As such, semi-structured interviews were also undertaken by the subject tutor six months later, towards the end of the year-long programme (Denscombe, 2017). An analysis of the initial responses informed the selection of the questions asked during the semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis was used to review the original data, a process repeated at the end of the study and explained in more detail below. In addition, the data was analysed independently by another researcher who acted as a ‘critical friend’. They offered a different perspective and engaged in critical dialogue to challenge and develop interpretations (Smith & McGannon, 2018).

The semi-structured interviews revisited the initial areas of inquiry and also included further questions about the ATs’ use of the research method and their adoption of any new approaches that they had learned through their involvement in the lesson study. All 18 interviews were conducted in a quiet office space at the university, each lasting 41 minutes on average. The interview questions revisited the initial areas of inquiry and allowed the participants to review their experiences and reflect on their initial answers. In addition, the follow-up questions provided an opportunity for the ATs to clarify understanding, elaborate on areas of interest, and explore any new insights or understandings of practice that they had gleaned from their involvement in the project (Farrow et al., 2020; Smith & McGannon, 2018).

Semi-structured interviews may help uncover findings that would otherwise have remained hidden, but this creates the challenge of comparing nonstandard responses (Jones, 2015). In this study, the transcriptions of the audio-recorded semi-structured interviews were arranged alongside the initial responses from the questionnaires. Thematic analysis was then used to identify, analyse, and report patterns in the data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Thematic analysis is a flexible approach commonly used within qualitative research to provide a comprehensive and nuanced account of the participants’ responses (Braun & Clarke, 2006). It was adopted in this study as an appropriate means of analysing the AT’s experience of conducting a lesson study. Initially, any preliminary thoughts and ideas were noted when reading and re-reading the data. Next, the data were coded to identify features that were pertinent to the aims of the study. These codes were used to identify higher-level patterns and rearranged so that the data were clustered into themes. Finally, the themes were reviewed to clarify their content and test interpretations (Braun & Clarke, 2019). The themes were used to write up the analysis of the data, and in the discussion of findings that follow, the individual ATs are identified by a pseudonym, followed by an ‘I’ or ‘Q’ to denote whether the data was generated through the interview or questionnaire.

The impact of lesson study on the associate teachers’ learning

This research aims to understand the impact of the lesson study on ATs’ learning and identify the features of the approach that helped maximise their progress. The discussion of findings will begin by examining the impact of the different phases of the lesson study cycle, starting with the design of the research lesson.

One challenge encountered in ITT is that university-based learning disconnects from ATs’ experiences in the classroom. However, in this study, all ATs agreed that the design phase helped them link theory to practice, with one explaining, ‘We’d looked at Rosenshine at university, and I was trying to apply those ideas in my lesson study. I researched the modelling and questioning, and that underpinned my approach’ (Andy Q). Another AT similarly noted that her study on differentiation was informed by ‘the STEPS model that we looked at in one of our first university sessions’ (Poppy Q). The lesson design phase was informed by wider research introduced to the ATs at the university and developed in consultation with their mentors. As such, it seemingly helped bridge the theory-practice gap that can exist for ATs between their university and school-based experiences (Armour et al., 2017; Cajkler et al., 2013; Darling-Hammond, 2017). In addition, ATs tended to refer to their earlier experiences when judging the impact of the design phase (Kihara et al., 2021). One explained that he appreciated ‘working collaboratively to design a lesson, especially when it was a sport I wasn’t particularly familiar with’ (Joe Q). Another AT similarly noted that ‘formally planning netball lessons is something I had not done before, so it gave me a better understanding to how this should be done’ (Bess Q). The ATs valued the opportunity of co-designing a lesson, especially when they had less experience or were less knowledgeable about either the activity area or the process of planning a lesson.

The ATs also recognised the value of the teaching and observing phase of the cycle, although the latter was more frequently referred to; ‘It was useful being able to observe how effective the lesson plan we designed was in terms of meeting learning objectives’ (Jacob Q). This stage of the lesson study seemingly helped ATs develop assessment approaches that supported pupil progress (Lamb & King, 2021). One AT recognised that it ‘improved my ability to notice the impact of differentiation on motivation and participation levels, especially in lower ability students’ (Poppy I). The observation also allowed ATs the space to observe the pupils and understand their needs; ‘I was able to observe how specific pupils reacted to a practice or to each other. I knew what was coming, and that helped me see the behaviour of the group in a way that I’d not noticed before’ (Ken I). Thus, the teaching phase ostensibly helped the ATs develop their teaching in a way that accounted for individual pupils’ learning needs (Cajkler et al., 2013; Lamb & King, 2021).

The final post-lesson reflection phase undertaken with the mentor was the part of the lesson study that the ATs found most immediately impactful. When asked where they had learned most, one AT noted that it was ‘through the review, I was able to think in more of a structured way how it went and how specific pupils reacted’ (Max Q). The ATs also commented on the collaborative aspect of the process. They valued the post-lesson reflection as it provided a space for shared critical dialogue (Kihara et al., 2021). One AT noted that the impact was more significant ‘when you’re doing it with someone who was in the lesson, and you get to gain an insight from their perspective too’ (Sian Q). Another AT explained, ‘I really enjoyed that part as you got to see your mentor’s thinking about what they had done, and what we’d decided on together’ (Andy Q). Finally, while the post-lesson review promoted more detailed discussions, it also considered pupils’ learning as the focus of professional learning (Kihara et al., 2021). One AT explained the impact of the reflective process and how it aligned her teaching with pupil progress; ‘It showed me that they hadn’t got it, there was no point progressing just to push through the unit of work. It’s made me think more about the pupils and not following a bit of paper’ (Eve Q).

When ATs were asked at the end of the project about the impact of the lesson study, they all referred to the phases involved in the cycle. The ATs’ initial responses suggested that lesson study is one way of facilitating their immediate understanding of how to design and reflect on pupils’ learning in a research lesson (Kihara et al., 2021). This finding is consistent with other studies that identify the post-lesson reflection as the part of the cycle that provides the most insights and learning for the participants (McMillan & Jess, 2021). However, when ATs were asked, at the end of the programme, if they had learnt anything from the lesson study that they still used, they focused more specifically on their own teaching. For example, one AT noted that he had included some of Rosenshine’s principles in his project and that ‘moving into second placement I’ve carried on using those ideas from the lesson study’ (Andy I). Another AT similarly focused on modelling in her lesson study and said that her mentor ‘suggested demonstrating from two perspectives, and I do that all of the time now. What I learnt then has been embedded in my practice. I do it without thinking now’ (Bess I). The ATs did recognise the influence of the lesson study on their development as teachers (Cajkler et al., 2013; Kihara et al., 2021), but their responses also revealed a difference between the short – and long-term impact of the project. Involvement in the study promoted the ATs’ immediate understanding of the different phases. However, the longer-term impact related more specifically to the teaching ideas they had incorporated into their everyday practice.

The impact of lesson study on the associate teachers’ status and relationships

The lesson study led to positive learning outcomes for all ATs in relation to the phases of the cycle. However, the project also had a broader impact on their status and relationships, as it ensured that the ATs were given more responsibility and worked more closely with their mentors.

The ATs noted three associated areas of change concerning their status. First, the ATs recognised that they had more meaningful responsibility; ‘we worked collaboratively, but she was willing to listen to me. She allowed me to take the reins and built on my ideas’ (Bess I). The greater responsibility led to the ATs feeling included within the department; ‘it helped me feel like part of the team because we talked through it together and he listened to my ideas’ (Max I). Finally, these elements of inclusion and greater responsibility helped promote the ATs’ confidence; ‘The lesson study enabled me to feel like a proper teacher, it gave me confidence going forward’ (John I). For most ATs, involvement in the lesson study helped move them from being more passive recipients of information to playing a more active role in the process. As a result, they began to exhibit more confidence and agency (Coleman et al., 2021; Kihara et al., 2021). That said, all ATs did not respond this way. Two of the ATs felt that the lesson study had no effect on their status, while another three claimed that they had already established themselves in the department; ‘I’d worked at the school the year before as a TA, so I was already part of it’ (Lauren Q).

A similar response emerged when ATs described the relationships established with their mentors. Three ATs stated that because of prior experiences, the lesson study had no impact on their relationship; ‘I knew him well anyway, so no, it didn’t change much’ (Pem Q). That said, the other ATs felt that the collaborative experience of planning and reflecting on a research lesson did influence their relationship with their mentor. One AT typified the general response by saying that ‘it was early in the placement when we did the study, and it really built our relationship. It was just talking about ideas, spending time together, finding out about each other and our beliefs’ (Andy I). The collaborative aspect of planning and reflecting together was most effective in strengthening relationships and developing understanding. One AT claimed that ‘it showed me how my mentor plans her lessons and gave us a chance to discuss and come up with ideas. It helped our relationship because we were able to understand each other and how we like to work’ (Joe I). It seems that the shared dialogue and collaboration around the research lesson created an empathetic space for shared thinking and critical reflection (Jones et al., 2018; Russell, 2005). It led to greater reciprocal understanding and developed an awareness of the learning approaches that were taking place (Kihara et al., 2021).

The ATs also commented on the timing of the lesson study as it came relatively early in the placement when they were still becoming familiar with the school and the mentor. One stated, ‘It broke the ice. It boosted our collaboration and gave us something to focus on together’ (Jacob I). Another similarly claimed that ‘it was a real steppingstone, it helped us get to know each other and move from just being there to actually teaching’ (Eve I). The collaborative aspect was particularly important to the ATs as the focus of the observation was not ‘all on me; it was shared. We both had responsibility’ (Max I). This point was only evident at the end of the programme when the ATs had experienced more pressured lesson observations. One AT recognised that the research lesson was a ‘nice introduction to lesson observation, as they were looking at the pupils and making judgements about their own work as well as mine’ (Eve I). Traditional lesson observations can provoke anxiety in ATs as they are often perceived as being high-stakes assessments (Jones et al., 2021). In the lesson study, the collaborative approach eased the fear associated with the lesson observation. It was a joint venture where the focus was on the pupils and how the intended learning translated into practice (McMillan & Jess, 2021). As such, the lesson study helped minimise professional isolation. It raised the ATs’ status and integrated them into the departmental practices they would experience during their placement (Cajkler et al., 2013; Lamb & King, 2021).

Issues with the introduction of the lesson study

The ATs were overwhelmingly positive in their response to the lesson study. They claimed that it led to positive outcomes concerning their status, relationships and learning at each stage of the cycle. That said, they associated a few notable limitations with the project. The most obvious issue was that it was perceived to add to the workload of the ATs and mentors. The ATs tended to accept the demands on their own time; ‘It wasn’t too disruptive, you’re always busy anyway’ (Nell I) but were more concerned for their mentors; ‘I felt guilty putting more on his plate, asking him to do more for me’ (Peter I). For one AT, the impact on their mentor was more significant; ‘Trying to find time with your mentor was hardest part. So many things were happening, it was difficult to find five minutes to go through it. For me, it didn’t end up as being as collaborative as it should have’ (Bob I). While lesson study is seen to be a collaborative and contextualised approach to professional learning (Kihara et al., 2021), the performative nature of teaching seemed to create some difficulties that inhibited the progress of ATs. In some cases, it limited the time and attention the mentors could dedicate to them and the project (Jones, 2022).

Although there were some inconsistencies, the inclusion of the lesson study in a university module ensured the mentors’ involvement. The university tutor met with them and their AT to explain the process and help with the project’s design phase. However, ensuring familiarity with the lesson study did create some logistical challenges (Ni Shuilleabhain & Bjuland, 2019), particularly when some ATs began their lesson study before this meeting had taken place. One AT explained that it was quite difficult ‘working with my mentor initially, trying to overcome his limited understanding of the lesson study’ (Peter I). While another felt it was difficult for an AT to take the lead at a time when the power dynamic would normally dissuade them from doing so (Ni Shuilleabhain & Bjuland, 2019). He explained that ‘it was tough trying to inform an experienced teacher about what is required through the lesson study. I felt he didn’t totally know, and I wanted to say appropriate things and not talk down to him’ (Bob I).

The lesson study demanded more time and resources from everyone involved (Slingerland et al., 2021). It also created the logistical challenge of arranging meetings and familiarising mentors with the process (Cajkler et al., 2013; Ni Shuilleabhain & Bjuland, 2019). That said, Darling-Hammond (2017) highlights the importance of the connection between schools and universities in providing effective ITT. The lesson study promoted dialogue between all parties and nurtured closer cooperation between schools and universities. In addition, it helped develop a community of co-learners where ATs, mentors and university tutors could collaborate and support the ATs’ development (Elliot & Campbell, 2015; Gonçalves et al., 2022; Ni Shuilleabhain & Bjuland, 2019).

Aspects of the lesson study that maximised learning

The ATs identified three features of the lesson study as aspects that supported their understanding and allowed them to maximise their learning. They valued the introduction to the project at the university, the support they gained from the mentor and their full involvement in all stages of the cycle.

Firstly, the lesson study was part of a university module that provided ATs with a theoretical introduction to the research method and an opportunity to complete an initial lesson study cycle with peers at a local partnership school. One AT noted, ‘It was the experience through university and completing a practice run that prepared me for the real lesson study cycle’ (Andy I). Another AT similarly stated, ‘It was the preliminary work we did. Seeing the whole process beforehand had an impact on the study. Without that, it would have been difficult’ (Bess I). Learning to teach is a difficult experience as ATs encounter numerous learning challenges as they progress towards QTS (Lamb & King, 2021). Although lesson study is thought to be beneficial for ATs (Cajkler et al., 2013; Ni Shuilleabhain & Bjuland, 2019), it is still an additional learning challenge that must be introduced with care. In this case, ATs developed their understanding of lesson study through their different experiences in different contexts. They learnt to locate theory in practice as their initial lesson study experience was conducted at the university campus and a placement school (Darling-Hammond, 2017; Ni Shuilleabhain & Bjuland, 2019). Moreover, the process was supported by the tutor and PE teachers, who accompanied the ATs as they worked together to teach their research lessons. One AT explained, ‘The first three-day practice at that school was really helpful. Doing it with a peer and having that extra staff support. It made it that much clearer as I’d done it with someone else first’ (Jacob I). Collaborating with a peer helped develop the ATs’ understanding and confidence in the process (Lamb & King, 2021). In addition, the university tutor and PE teachers could guide and support the ATs’ engagement and help them complete all phases of the cycle (Elliot & Campbell, 2015; Gonçalves et al., 2022; Ni Shuilleabhain & Bjuland, 2019).

The second feature that supported the ATs’ understanding of the lesson study process and allowed them to maximise their learning was the collaboration with their mentor (Jones et al., 2021). Having an effective mentor who understood the process and was committed to collaboration was appreciated by the ATs. One noted that ‘he was willing to give me the time to do it properly, and I think that helped me get much more out of it’ (Jacob I). When the mentors invested in the process, the ATs felt the benefit; ‘it allowed me to have more thinking and talking time with my mentor’ (Ken Q), ‘it means you talk more, learn more, and it’s more of a joint experience’ (Hannah Q). When mentors engaged with the study, they modelled good practice and showed that they also valued learning (Jones, 2022). The mentors helped centre the ATs’ thinking on pupil learning (McMillan & Jess, 2021) and encouraged them to be critical of shared practice without ruminating on mistakes (Kihara et al., 2021). One AT noted that ‘it showed me not to panic if something goes wrong. You follow the steps and fix it for the future. It’s calming in a way’ (Lauren I). The ATs appreciated the potential contribution of a mentor who understood and valued the lesson study process. As such, they wanted the mentors to be trained and supported in their role, with one AT noting that ‘you have to inform the mentor as much as you can’ (Peter I). The performative nature of teaching was a barrier for some mentors who had less time to devote to the project (Jones, 2022). This difficulty made the university tutor’s role more important as a facilitator and source of support from outside the group (Ni Shuilleabhain & Bjuland, 2019).

The final feature of the experience that maximised the ATs’ learning was their full engagement in all stages of the cycle (Ni Shuilleabhain & Bjuland, 2019). To begin with, one AT stated that you must ‘find an area that you really want to improve on. No point otherwise; just picking a random one. It has to have clear meaning’ (Nell I). According to Ni Shuilleabhain and Bjuland (2019), the inclusion of a clear research question is likely to be an important structural element that highlights the value of lesson study to ATs as a means of promoting their own development. Another AT similarly noted that it was ‘good to identify an area and do the research to develop that background knowledge and give ideas for the lesson plan. I liked that’ (Sian I). The involvement of the ATs in the design and focus of the research lesson also helped inform their understanding of what they noticed as the lesson was taught. One AT appreciated that ‘as I’d been involved in the planning, I was more invested in noticing. It was different to a standard observation; you can watch from inside’ (Joe I). Finally, another AT recognised the impact of observing pupils’ learning. He noted that ‘it allowed me to reflect in depth and identify misconceptions that I hadn’t always been able to spot. I did this in far more detail in the lesson study. It added that detail’ (Jacob I). The ATs were fully involved in all stages of the lesson study cycle. They initiated the research and used wider reading and insights from their mentor to design a research lesson. They observed pupil learning while their mentor taught the lesson and engaged in joint reflection on the findings. The level of the ATs’ engagement in all phases of the cycle supported their understanding of the lesson study process and developed their approaches to teaching and learning (Ni Shuilleabhain & Bjuland, 2019).

Conclusion

This research analysed the views and experiences of 18 PE ATs who completed a lesson study as part of their year-long postgraduate ITT programme. The research aimed to contribute to existing knowledge of professional learning in PE ITT. More specifically, it aimed to understand the potential value of lesson study and identify the features that supported the ATs’ progress and allowed them to maximise their learning.

The ATs’ made progress when they were introduced to the theory of lesson study at the university and then allowed to experience the process with peers at a partnership school. These collaborative experiences developed the ATs’ understanding and prepared them to work with their mentor. The ATs also learned from working with more knowledgeable others who could support their progress. For example, mentors who understood and were fully invested in the process supported the ATs and maximised their learning. Similarly, the tutor had a role in strengthening university-school links and facilitating the process in accordance with needs. Finally, the ATs’ full engagement in all phases of the lesson study helped maximise their understanding of lesson research and develop their approaches to teaching and learning.

The ATs’ learning was apparent in all phases of the cycle. The design phase enabled them to collaborate with their mentors and apply the teaching ideas introduced at the university. In doing so, the ATs developed their understanding of the planning process and bridged the theory-practice gap that can exist between university and school-based experiences (Cajkler et al., 2013; Darling-Hammond, 2017; Elliot & Campbell, 2015). The ATs could also engage in shared critical reflection and solve learning problems with their mentor. While this phase of the cycle was initially the most impactful, the enduring learning related to teaching ideas that the ATs developed through the lesson study and incorporated into their everyday practice.

The effect of engagement in the lesson study was not limited to the development of teaching competencies; it also impacted the ATs’ status and relationships. Involvement in the research process helped move the ATs from being passive recipients of information to more active participants in the department. In addition, the further responsibilities given to ATs led to feelings of inclusion, confidence, and greater interdependency with the mentor.

Future research could examine the mentors’ experience of the lesson study project to understand their perspectives on its capacity to develop shared understanding and build relationships. Further research could also explore the longer-term impact of the study on the ATs’ capacity to self-regulate. The project developed the ATs’ understanding of all phases of the lesson study cycle and, in doing so, developed skills that support autonomy and self-regulation. This is potentially a more potent aspect of lesson study as it extends the boundary beyond developing teaching competencies to include skills needed for ongoing independent professional learning (Coleman et al., 2021; Jones, 2021). Further research could investigate the longer-term impact of the project to see if the ATs used the skills developed through the lesson study to inform their practice as fully qualified teachers.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).