Teacher’s Assessment for Students’ Learning in Classroom Using Lesson Study and Open Approach

doi:10.4236/psych.2013.412156

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Psychology

2013. Vol.4, No.12, 1069-1072

Published Online December 2013 in SciRes (http://www.scirp.org/journal/psych) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/psych.2013.412156

Open Access 1069

Teacher’s Assessment for Students’ Learning in Classroom

Using Lesson Study and Open Approach

Sirirat Chaona, Narumol Inprasitha

Faculty of Education, Khon Ka en Un iv ersity, Khon Kaen, Thailand

Email: [email protected]

Received September 25th, 2013; revised October 26th, 2013; accep t e d N o ve mber 23rd, 2013

tive Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any me-

dium, provided the original work is properly cited. In accordance of the Creative Commons Attribution License

Previous procrastination research has provided considerable support for procrastination as a failure of

self-regulation. However, procrastination has rarely been examined in relation to models of self-regulated

learning. The purpose of this study was to understand the motives and reasons for academic procrastina-

tion from a self-regulated learning perspective. The current study employed a mixed-methods design in

which participants completed several survey instruments of academic procrastination, self-regulation, and

academic motivation and participated in semi-structured interviews. Findings indicated that academic

procrastination was related to poor self-regulatory skills and defensive behaviors including self-handica-

pping strategies. Only limited support for students’ demonstration of procrastination as an adaptive be-

havior (or, active procrastination) was also indicated. Limitations and implications for future research are

discussed.

Keywords: Assessment for Learning; Open Approach; Lesson Study

Introduction

National Education Act 1999 (the Revised Issue, 2002) men-

tioned that the school had to assess students by considering

their development and behavior, learning behavior observation,

activity participation and testing in aligned with instructional

process based on appropriateness with each level as well as

Educational Model. The teacher played an important role in

evaluating the students’ progress by various techniques appro-

priately with nature of subject, and students’ developmental

level (Ministry of Education, 2008). But, the assessment in

Thailand still emphasizes on learning achievement, especially

the achievement obtaining from testing (Inprasitha, 2003). In

addition, Chiengkoon (2006) stated that teachers could not

promote the students’ learning because the teachers have had

traditional style of teaching as lecturing focused on content as

well as testing for memorization. Since the assessment by test

did not measure students’ real condition, and could not assess

both of product and process which the students had real practice.

Moreover, it could not indicate development clearly. The real

achievement was not assessed only using the test. Leahy et al.

(2005) stated that the information from testing was difficult to

be utilized according to 2 reasons: 1) the short duration of time

in classifying each standard or skill in marking period. So, test-

ing was performed only to investigate the overall learning

achievement rather than to find the cause of students’ specific

weak point, and 2) the existing information was too late to be

utilized, to use the findings in general improvement such as

repetition of teaching, or extending more time in learning unit,

or specify the teacher who succeeded in teaching that unit. If

the academic gave an importance to the evaluation for instruc-

tional development by focusing on details, it would lead to the

real changes in learning and teaching.

The assessment for developing the students’ learning, Rob-

inson & Bartlett (1993) stated that it was in context of instruc-

tional management as the process in trying to understand the

students’ activity participation. It was more than testing since it

should be continuously and regularly performed in order to see

the students’ understanding in the process, interaction, and

application. It was not the last step of instructional activity. But,

it was the starting point for enhancing the students’ learning. It

was supported by Miy auchi (2010) that the childr en’s assessme nt

while they were participating in classroom activity was the most

necessary thing to be done. In order to accomplish curriculum

objective, teacher should collect data of students’ changes and

progress of thought and comprehension. White (2007) sug-

gested that assessment should be seen as a process for gathering

evidence and making judgment about students needs strengths,

abilities and achievements. So, when the assessment was spo-

ken, the process should be emphasized rather than produced. In

classroom using the assessment for supporting one’s learning,

the teacher should adjust teaching continuously in order to see

the students’ changes (Leahy et al., 2005). Black & William

(1998) concluded the research studies regarding to the occur-

rences in class as follows: 1) to set the problem as guidelines

for students to use their skill as well as apply their approach, 2)

to provide opportunity for students to communicate what they

had learned by drawing, acting, role playing, concept mapping,

S. CHAONA, N. INPRASITHA

and writing, 3) to observe by listening to the students while

they were explaining and reasoning, 4) to set question by using

open-ended problem situation as the phrase inviting the stu-

dents to explore their own approach and reason, and 5) to dis-

cuss the words or techniques used by the students.

Inprasitha (2003, 2004) recommended a guideline that for in-

structiona l activ ity ma nageme nt to enhance the students to have

learning process, it was necessary to use the innovation in

learning and teaching. For instance, open-ended problem which

was special being different from other kinds of mathematical

problem since it included broader meaning than general

exercise in Thailand. It was also used in teaching approach by

the Center for Research in Mathematics Education (CRME) in

studying the Japanese Lesson Study to be used in Thailand

since 2002. Inprasitha (2010) brought the Open Approach to be

used as a teaching method focusing on problem solving in the

process of Lesson Study. The 4 phases are consisted of 1) Pos-

ing open-ended problem, 2) Students’ self-learning, 3) Whole

class discussion and comparison, and 4) Summarization of

students’ mathematical ideas emerged in the classroom. These

4 phases were included in 3 steps of Lesson Study as: 1) col-

laboratively planning, 2) collaboratively observation, and 3)

collaboratively reflection. Therefore, in viewpoint of students’

assessment in mathematics class, major issues could be con-

cluded that the evaluation for developing and supporting stu-

dents’ learning should be emphasized. Specifically, for the

assessment in mathematics class using the Lesson Study and

Open Approach, it was necessary to explain evaluation tech-

nique for students’ learning, since the innovation was used by

teachers, as context enhancing the learning in both of teacher

and students (Inprasitha, 2010).

Research Methodology

The qualitative research methodology was administered in

this research. Data were presented by descriptive analysis in

context of schools under the project of Mathematics Teaching

Professional Development through the Lesson Study and Open

Approach. The objective was to explore the teacher’s assessed

for students’ learning in classroom using Lesson Study and

Open Approach. The Lesson Study was implemented based on

Inprasitha’s (2010) including 3 phases of implementation.

In this case, Lesson Study group comprised of a mathematics

teacher and an internship mathematics student. The first phase

of lesson study: collaboratively planning which was the phase

that the teacher and internship mathematics student in school

collaborated in planning the lesson together, Phase 2: collabo-

ratively observation. In this phase an internship mathematics

student as a teacher that teaching in the lesson plan and teacher

was observer. Activities in the classroom were video and au-

dio-recorded for analysis purposes. The group had planned a

50-minute lesson to teach on the topic addition (increase) in

first grade mathematics class. Phase 3: collaboratively reflec-

tion, mathematics teacher and internship mathematics student

reflected about the lesson and student learning.

The researcher was a graduate student in Mathematics

Education program, Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen Univer-

sity, used to be the first cohort of 5-year in Mathematics Educa-

tion Program, Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University. In

2008, the researcher practiced teaching in school for one year,

in the school using Lesson Study and Open Approach, had

experience in learning organizational planning with the Lesson

Study Team, and used the plan in classroom, participated in

reflection after instructional management. After graduating in

Bachelor’s degree, the researcher furthered her studying in

Master’s Degree in Mathematics Education Program, Faculty of

Education, Khon Kaen University, and had experience in

working as well as learning in the Project of Professional De-

velopment based on Lesson Study and Open Approach as a

researcher in the Less on Study team.

Target Group was an internship mathematics student, who

had teaching practices at Ku-Kam-Pittayasan school, Khon-

Kaen province as the schools under the Project of Professional

Development based on Lesson Study and Open Approach con-

ducted by the Center for Research in Mathematics Education,

Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University since 2006, re-

spectively.

Delimitation of the study, in this research, the researcher

determined boundary of what to be explored as the assessment

method used by internship mathematics student in assessing the

students in class administering the Open Approach and Lesson

Study.

Results

Activities: Teacher posed the open-ended problem by show

Figure 1 and asked the students to notice and survey a number

of fish and provided students to tell story about the fishes in the

picture.

In context of Lesson Study and Open Approach, the intern-

ship mathematics students used assessment method for their

students’ learning by considering 4 steps of the Open Approach

as guidelines for teaching, as follows:

Step 1: Posing the open-ended proble m

When teacher set task as an open-ended problem to the stu-

dents, she waste time for students as investigate material and

understand situation that teacher post in the classroom. And she

provided opportunity for students to communicate about prob-

lem and thei r le arning. Teacher assessments were as follows:

1) determine the started problem situation in the guidelines

for students to use their approaches.

2) provide opportunity for students to communicate their

learning.

3) observe or listen to the students’ posing or presentation.

4) set the questions for students to explored their ideas or

reasons.

Step 2: Students’ self-learning.

Figure 1.

Addition (increase) Hitotsumatsu (2005: p. 40).

Open Access

1070

S. CHAONA, N. INPRASITHA

Figure 2.

Teacher posed the open-ended problem.

Figure 3.

Students’ idea about problem situation.

Teacher gave the task for group work. Teacher assessments

were as follows:

1) provide opportunity for students to communicate their

learning by drawing picture, acting, role playing, concept map-

ping, and writing.

2) evaluate by observation including listening to what the

students explained their work, task and reasons.

Step 3: Whole class discussion and comparison

In this step when the student had already group work, teacher

asked them to present the idea or reason about the task to whole

class for learning together. Teacher assessments were as fol-

lows:

1) provide opportunity for students to communicate their

learning by drawing picture, acting, role playing, concept map-

ping, and writing.

2) observed by listening to what the students explained their

work task and reasons.

3) ask question by using the open-ended question as the

phrases persuading the students to explore the ideas or reasons.

4) discuss the wordings or techniques used by students.

Step 4: Summarization through connecting students’

mathematical ideas emerged in the classroom.

In this step after in the classroom discussion have many idea

from the students teacher asked student to summarize the lesson

about what they have to learn. Teacher assessments were as

follows:

1) observe by listening to what the students explained their

Figure 4.

Students communicated idea in small g roup.

Figure 5.

Students explain their work and reasons in small group.

Figure 6.

Discussing words and how students are used.

work task and reasons.

2) ask question by using the open-ended question as the

phrases persuading the students to explore the ideas or reasons.

Open Access 1071

S. CHAONA, N. INPRASITHA

Open Access

1072

Conclusion and Discussion

Open Approach and Lesson Study support teachers in assessing

students’ learning by: listening to how students describe their

work, using open ended questions for students to explore their

ideas, setting problem situation, asking students to communicate

their learning through drawings, actions, diagrams, writing and

discussing words and how they are used. Inprasitha (2013) stated

that an instructio nal activity based on Open Approach illustrating

“how to” assessed students’ mathematical learning processes as

follows: 1) observing, 2) journals, 3) gathering and arranging in-

formation and valuing students’ idea, student’s solution and also

prioritizing st udent s’ prese ntations, 4) questi onin g, 5) setting ta sks,

6) their learning drawing, action, role play, concept mapping as

well as writing.

Acknowledgements

Figure 7. This work was supported by the Higher Education Research

Promotion and National Research University Project of Thai-

land, Office of the Higher Education Commission, through the

Cluster of Research to Enhance the Quality of Basic Education

and Center for Research in Mathematics Education, Faculty of

Education, Khon Kaen University.

Students explained their work and reasons in whole class.

REFERENCES

Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004).

Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the class-

room. Phi Delta Kappan, 86, 8-21.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning.

Assessment in Education, 5, 7-74.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102

Chiengkoon, W. (2006). A report of Thai Education situation 2004/

2005. The root of the problem and guideline for solving.

Hitotsumatsu, S., et al. (2005). Mathematics for elementary school, 1st

grade: Study with your friends. Tokyo: Gekkoh Tosho.

Inprasitha, M., et al. (2003). Mathematical learning process reform in

school by focusing on mathematical process (pp. 2-3).

Figure 8. Inprasitha, M. (2004). Teaching by using open approach in mathemat-

ics classroom of Japan. KKU Journal of Mathematics Education, 1,

Students explained their work and reasons in whole class.

Inprasitha, M. (2010). One feature of adaptive lesson study in Thailand:

Designing learning unit. In Proceedings of the 45th National Meeting

of Mathematics Education (pp. 19-24). Gyeongju: Dongkook Uni-

versity.

Inprasitha, M. (2013). An assessment of students’ mathematical learn-

ing process using teaching and learning based on open approach. In

Proceedings of the 37th Conference of the International Group for

the Psychology of Mathematics Education (5).76. Kiel: PME.

Leahy, S., et al. (2005). Classroom assessment: Minute by minute, day

by day. Assessment to Promot e Learning, 63, 19-24.

Miyauchi, K. (2010). Assessment as a part of teaching. Journal of Ja-

pan Society of Mathematics Edu c at io n , 26-27.

Robinson, G., & Bartlett. K (1993) Assessment and the evaluation of

learning. In R. J. Jensen (Ed.), Research ideas for the classroom:

Early childhood mathem a t ics. New York: Macmillan.

White, A. (2007). Assessment in school mathematics. In N. Idris (Ed.),

Classroom assessment in mathematics education (pp. 43-58). Kuala

Lumpur: McGraw Hill Education.

Figure 9.

Discussing the techniques used by students.

3) discuss the wordings or techniques used by students.