Download Document

---

Disclaimer: This is a machine generated PDF of selected content from our products. This functionality is provided solely for your
convenience and is in no way intended to replace original scanned PDF. Neither Cengage Learning nor its licensors make any
representations or warranties with respect to the machine generated PDF. The PDF is automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS
AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. CENGAGE LEARNING AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY
AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY,
ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE. Your use of the machine generated PDF is subject to all use restrictions contained in The Cengage Learning
Subscription and License Agreement and/or the Gale Academic OneFile Terms and Conditions and by using the machine
generated PDF functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against Cengage Learning or its licensors for your use of the
machine generated PDF functionality and any output derived therefrom.
: 
. 
. 
.
: 
1998 . 
: 
(
118, 
3)
: Project Innovation Austin LLC
: 
: 5739 
.
: 
, 
, 
, 
. 
, 
, 
, 
. 
.
Full Text: 
. 
, 
, 
, 
. 
, 
, 
. 
«
» 
, 
.
«
» 
, 
, 
.
Since the nature of the lesson is complex, it can be analyzed from different positions. The methodological perspective includes an
analysis of approaches, teaching techniques, and methods. The psychological analysis considers the development of the student's
cognitive structure and personality. In order to achieve a high degree of professionalism, a teacher must know how to observe
lessons and be able to analyze the methodology in light of the developmental level and academic potential of the students. The
teacher must be able to identify the factors that determine the success of the pedagogical activity.
The development of preservice teachers' ability to construct, conduct and analyze a lesson is an essential component in their
professional training. In order for aspiring teachers to be able to critically evaluate the pedagogical work of others and themselves,
they must study lesson observation and analysis and acquire a knowledge base that is systematic and clearly differentiated. To
become flexible, dynamic teachers, they must think independently and develop abilities of reflection in order to make decisions about
pedagogical situations in future lessons. In this paper, we consider the psychological and methodological aspects of lesson
observation and analysis.
Analysis of Psychological Factors
Theoretical knowledge from educational psychology and sociology of the classroom merges into a theory of teaching that is woven
together with the discipline content. Current theories of teaching and learning embody (a) cognitive psychology, in acknowledging
prior learning, accepting the active nature of learning, and recognizing that learners construct their understanding; (b) philosophy, in
the unity of thought and action; (c) developmental psychology, in asserting that the mind develops through activity; (d) educational
methodology, through inclusion of exactness and accessibility of the content, systematic presentation approach, and appropriate use
of concrete manipulative materials and visual aids; and (e) leading theories related to content. The teacher, aware that the student
who is learning content is also engaged in the dynamic process of personal development, cannot allow the content of the lesson to be
an end in itself.
The observation and analysis of a lesson from the aspect of students' psychological development must be based on theories related
to development. Observers note first, whether the formation of the lesson's objectives exhibits the teacher's understanding of learning
in terms of scope and sequence of the material and second, whether the interaction of the teacher and students reflects an
understanding of students' personal development, including effects of teacher methods and actions on student development.
Observers look for evidence in the lesson that the teacher reflects on students' activity and evidence that students are provided with

---

an opportunity to look at and analyze their own involvement and learning. Ideally, the teacher's interaction with students, evident to
observers through verbal comments, reflects understanding of students' relationship to the learning, their difficulties, their feelings of
accomplishment, and even their discontent.
Observers who are interested in supporting the development of the teacher along the path from novice to expert analyze the
teacher's self-organization, that is, the degree of mastery in content and pedagogy apparent in the lesson (Hunter, 1994). They look
for content structure in the lesson as well as degree of awareness of the readiness level of the students to receive the content. Aware
that the psychological climate in a classroom contributes to its being a positive or negative learning environment, observers note
whether the teacher's attitude toward the lesson and the students is conducive to learning.
Analysis of Methodological Factors
The schema that observers follow for lesson observation and analysis reflects the dynamism and complexity of the lesson itself.
Observers draw from theoretical content of educational psychology in order to determine the educational, pedagogical, and
developmental goals that underpin the lesson. They identify the teaching methods that are contained in the lesson and evaluate their
contribution to achieving the broader goals. As they attend to student behaviors, observers look for evidence of the teacher's
prompting of logical and dialectical thinking at the higher levels through analysis and synthesis, comparison, generalization, and proof
They consider teacher's actions that support the formation of cognitive skills and record specific instances that illustrate the teacher's
attempts to engage students' cognitive processes. They also review the lesson in its entirety and evaluate its success in achieving its
objectives. As observers look holistically at the teacher's methodological competence, they pay attention to specific methods and
strategies that contribute to the lesson's success or failure.
Current documents (Mathematical Sciences Education Board, 1990; National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 1989; National
Research Council, 1989) note that students are expected to be effective team contributors in the workplace and suggest that
opportunities for team learning be presented in the classroom. Observers note student interaction and cooperative forms of learning.
Generally observers identify the teacher's systems for informal evaluations and methods for eliciting students' understanding,
estimate the objectivity of the approaches, and gauge students' motivation to contribute. At the end of the analysis of the numerous
methodological factors that contribute to a lesson's execution, observers evaluate the degree to which the teacher's lesson plan
agrees with the lesson's delivery.
Lesson Analysis Content
Vignette 1
Mr. X began the class by checking the
homework that was given the day before.
While he was checking, he assigned a
student to erase the board. Some various
problems. After the homework was
reviewed, the topic of probability was
discussed. Mr. X discussed a few
examples before defining the terms. Mr. X
asked several questions to make sure class
understood the material. The class had no
problems answering the questions.
Reflection of initial observation by prospective teacher. When preservice teachers begin to observe other teachers, it is to be
expected that they have difficulty identifying instructional and learning outcomes. They are apt to view the lesson through the
subjective perspective of their own experience rather than relate the observation to objective, theoretical principles. Their analysis
reveals their concrete understanding level of the craft of teaching. In contrast, experts who observe and analyze lessons understand
the theories, both pedagogical and psychological, and apply them as they interpret what they observe in the classroom. Their
effectiveness as analytic observers relates directly to their skill for explaining the observed phenomenon and discussing its impact on
the basis of theory. We assert that prospective teachers must learn how to examine lessons from a theoretical perspective in order to
analyze their own teaching reflectively and effectively (Berliner, 1986, 1988; Borko & Livingston, 1989; Borko & Shavelson, 1990;
Carter, Sabers, Cushing, Pinnegar, & Berliner, 1987).
An expert teacher's process for thinking about a specific lesson for a particular classroom situation shifts between a theoretical level
relative to content and a concrete level for classroom implementation. While elaborating on teaching goals and hypothesizing
outcomes of planned teaching activities, various ideas are considered and leading research is transformed into a plan that reflects
prior teaching experiences and supports the realization of the teaching goals. The mental schemes that the teacher constructs during

---

the planning process, which arise from a highly integrated synthesis of theoretical knowledge and practical experience, are revealed
in the unity of content and pedagogy in the actual classroom situation.
While teaching, the teacher is not conscious of the shift from abstract theory to practical utility. Rather, cognizance of the
transformation emerges later as the teacher reflects on the lesson, a process that Schon (1983) describes as reflection-on-action.
The teacher who completes a reflective analysis considers the relationship between the lesson that was presented and
preestablished purposes by working backward from the actual situation to the concrete plan to the general pedagogical setting to the
theoretical framework and comparing actual performance to mental plan at each level. The thought processes move in a circular path
from theoretical to practical levels of knowledge in lesson planning and from practical to theoretical levels of knowledge in lesson
analysis. Prospective teachers must learn the analytical process that expert teachers use in their thinking about instruction. Through
observation preservice teachers have an opportunity to learn specific techniques that they can adapt for use in their own classroom.
From our perspective, the purpose for which they observe is to learn how to analyze another teacher's lesson so that eventually they
will be able to analyze their own.
Wilson, Shulman, and Richart (1986) provide the model of six components of teaching: comprehension, the process of critically
understanding the ideas to be taught; transformation, when the teacher moves from a personal understanding of ideas to be taught to
an understanding of how to facilitate students' comprehension of these ideas; instruction, the process of facilitating students'
comprehension; evaluation, checking for students' understanding; reflection, evaluation of one's own teaching, learning from
experience; and new comprehension, which is developing as a result of the reflection process.
Lesson analysis is learned through observation of other teachers and through reflection on lessons they themselves teach. Reflection
by preservice teachers upon the lesson's content and presentation is a facet of the art as well as the science of teaching. In the next
section we describe our method of teaching lesson analysis.
Teaching Lesson Analysis
Vignette 2
I. Organization phase.
The time is 12:06 p.m. Students walk in
and look at their quiz grades posted on the
filing cabinet. Without too much noise
they all take their seats. The teacher has
already prepared on the board the Do-Now
exercise and walking around records
whether or not the students have their
homework done. All the students had put
their homework on the left hand side of
the desk. It became obvious to me that this
is an established routine by the teacher.
Then, the teacher reviews the Do-Now
exercise, asking questions to stimulate
students' thinking and evaluating their
performance. Understanding of previous
material is evident. This all takes about 10 minutes.
Fragment from student teacher reflection after instruction in lesson observation and analysis.
Knowing how to plan lessons is a necessary but not sufficient condition for learning the teaching process. Reasons for planning
lessons and instructions for constructing lessons are widespread in the education literature (Armstrong & Savage, 1994; Cooney,
Davis, & Henderson, 1983; Good, Grouws, & Ebmeier, 1983; Johnson & Rising, 1972; Leinhardt & Putnam, 1987; Livingston &
Borko, 1990; Sergiovanni, 1982), and receive attention in most methods courses. Lesson analysis, the reflective counterpart to
lesson planning, is also important to teacher development; however, it receives much less attention. We agree that prospective
teachers must learn how to build lessons, but we assert that they also need to learn how to break them apart. It is through analysis
that teachers learn to isolate sections of the lesson that were not successful and work through appropriate solutions by referencing

---

their theoretical knowledge. We argue that situations that allow aspiring teachers to develop skills in observation and analysis of
lessons taught by another teacher must be incorporated into formal methods courses. We believe that novice teachers need
opportunities to relate the instructional methods observed in actual lessons to theoretical principles in cognitive psychology and
teaching methodology. Prospective teachers must learn to identify problems within the lesson they observe, elaborate reasons for the
problem's existence, and suggest possible resolutions. They should attempt to relate their ideas about observed lessons to the
teacher's lesson plan. Finally, teachers-to-be must practice what they learn in order to build their own teaching style.
Theory base. The conceptual framework for our method of lesson analysis is based on the notion of pedagogical reasoning
(Shulman, 1987). Pedagogical reasoning includes the identification and selection of strategies for representing key ideas in the
lesson and the adaptation of these strategies to the characteristics of the learner. Like pedagogical content knowledge, it is unique to
the profession of teaching and is relatively underdeveloped in student teachers. Breaking apart--postactive reasoning--of a lesson
through analysis is the reverse of planning the lesson--preactive reasoning (Jackson, 1968). The ability to transform from one form to
another is an important factor in the development of abstract thinking. Clearly, learning how to perform an analysis of a lesson
requires a high level of thinking in order to return to and reflect on the original lesson construction.
We assert that preservice teachers who observe and analyze lessons with the support of a teacher educator are able to see more
deeply into classroom practice and become aware of a broader range of issues than they can achieve by themselves.71be capacity
to learn from instruction is a fundamental attribute of human beings, and interactions with mentors and peers are crucial for the
internalization of ideas.
Learning to teach is constructed as a process of learning to understand, develop, and use oneself effectively (Combs, 1965). The
teacher's own personal development is a central part of teacher preparation. For prospective teachers, the skills of observing and
analyzing are not mature. As teacher educators instruct prospective teachers in lesson analysis, they facilitate making connections
between preservice teachers' prior knowledge about teaching and the reality of classroom observation. Shapiro (1988) supports
informal exchanges with peers and supervisors. Supervisors, in their role as mentors, help student teachers function in the field and
relate experiences there with what they are learning in courses. Feiman-Nernser (1989) argues, from the practical orientation to
teaching, that learning to teach comes about through a combination of first hand experience and interactions with peers and mentors
about troublesome situations. Through such experiences, novices are inducted into a community of practitioners and a world of
practice.
Another outgrowth that emerges from pre-service teachers' analyses of lessons is a metacognition or awareness of their own thinking
about the interdependency of teaching and learning. As prospective teachers begin to exercise self-control in order to complete the
lesson analysis, two essential components of self-reflection, self-analysis and self-evaluation, also emerge.
The task of teacher educators is to prepare aspiring teachers to be reflective practitioners, a term defined by Donald Schon
(1983,1987) and applied by us to the practice of teaching. In a practicum situation, student teachers engage in activities that stimulate
their decision-making analysis under the guidance of a supervisor. Teachers who perform lesson analysis engage in the final of three
processes that Schon says are necessary for an epistemology of practice, knowing-in-action, reflection-in-action, and reflection-on-
action.
Preparation process. Ideally, preservice teachers should learn techniques to analyze a lesson as part of their theoretical and practical
preparation for teaching. We agree with Joyce and Showers'(1980, 1984) components of effective teacher training. First, teachers
should learn about the theory or rationale behind a given strategy or procedure. Second, they should see a demonstration. Third,
teachers need a chance to practice and get feedback on their performance. Finally, teachers need help transferring the new
behaviors to the classroom from a supervisor.
Before prospective teachers undertake lesson analysis, special preparation is required. During the methods course, they ought to
gain experience solving pedagogical problems that model concrete teaching situations and performing microanalyses, of lesson
fragments. The use of mini-lessons and videotapes of actual classroom experiences are effective teaching tools during early stages
of learning lesson analysis. Practice using videotapes promotes the formation of an approach to analysis of pedagogical phenomena
that is based on psychological and methodological theoretical knowledge and results in a logical resolution of concrete pedagogical
problems. In doing so, prospective teachers integrate theoretical and practical knowledge. The integrated knowledge they form
becomes the basis for their analysis of real-time lessons and, ultimately, their own classroom decision making.
As a part of the formal methods course, student teachers in secondary mathematics visit a school to observe a mathematics class
with their instructor. The model teacher and the college instructor plan the lesson to be observed cooperatively. Before the
observation, the instructor gives student teachers specific directions, explains the purpose and procedures of working with checklists,
and presents a series of open-ended questions. The student teachers observe the class and record all the information from the
lesson, using a variety of organizers to help them focus their attention and reflect on pedagogical phenomena.
The postlesson discussion contains three phases. In the first, the model teacher reflects on the lesson taught, gives the demographic
characteristics of the class, addresses special features of the students in the class, and evaluates his/her performance based on
pedagogical and psychological foundations of lesson planning and delivery. Second, student teachers ask questions and express
their opinions, practice their analytical skills and vocabulary, and continue to work with the organizers in order to attend to the salient
points of the lesson. Finally, the instructor summarizes and evaluates positive aspects and drawbacks of the lesson, emphasizes
significant points, helps clarify areas of confusion, and maintains a positive supportive atmosphere.
It is the task of the mentor to facilitate awareness in prospective teachers for the effectiveness of lesson analysis. The prospective
teacher's own experiences as a student in a classroom are insufficient preparation for performing lesson analysis. If one can imagine
how difficult it would be to learn to drive a car only from reading a textbook, one can also appreciate that one does not become a
teacher unless one has had opportunities to teach and reflect upon the teaching. Pedagogical experiences that include preliminary

---

observations of teaching situations are critical to budding understanding of the teaching process. The teacher educator must prompt
preservice teachers to figure out the place of the particular lesson in the curriculum plan, as well as the purpose of and goals for the
lesson; to develop their skills in identifying major lesson components and important minute details; and to relate observed
phenomena to their emerging knowledge of existing pedagogical theories. As they become more knowledgeable in methodology,
they realize that they need to understand the subject content, the phases of a lesson, and know how to construct a lesson with
attention to the phases. In order to become reflective practitioners, prospective teachers need to develop an analytical lens through
which they observe. They also require support to become critical thinkers with respect to teaching practice and opportunities to
practice observation and analysis of lessons.
Although the schema of lesson analysis can be effectively presented in theoretical courses, prospective teachers begin to internalize
the procedures when they observe and analyze lessons presented by model teachers. We contend that when student teachers begin
to observe other teachers, they have difficulty knowing where to focus their attention (see Vignette 1).
By way of illustration, suppose there is an observation whose purpose is classroom communication between teacher and student. If
communication difficulties are observed, student teachers should attempt to determine their cause. Did the classroom teacher
misunderstand the students' level of readiness or fail to perceive other cues that indicated development related learning barriers? Did
the classroom teacher neglect to monitor the interactions with students so that a communication mismatch resulted? Did the
classroom teacher's communication reveal insufficient knowledge of the instructional material? Did the personality of the classroom
teacher limit the student teacher relationship or affect the classroom atmosphere? Did the classroom teacher display a weak
communication style during interactions with colleagues? Once communication errors are identified, novice observers need to try to
understand which communication principles were violated or ignored by the classroom teacher, an exercise that requires observers to
access their theoretical understanding of communication patterns. Observers then attempt to mentally construct ideal communication
interactions for the students and teacher in the classroom and anticipate possible future communication patterns in the class if ideal
models are implemented.
Generally, individuals who are preparing to analyze a lesson for the first time benefit from using an organizer, which is designed to
focus their attention on broad topics, while describing the results of the observation (see Figure 1).
Figure 1 Lesson Observation Guide
1. Describe the major purpose of the lesson. 2. Describe the organizing framework revealed at the start of the lesson. 3.
Determine the type of lesson (developmental, lecture, review, guided discovery, small-group discussion, enrichment
lessons, etc.) and provide a rationale for the teacher's use of it. 4. Identify the phases in the lesson and the
instructional goals of each phase. 5. Describe the methods the teacher used to foster active involvement in constructing
meaning from new material. 6. Describe how the teacher organized the material in order to provide opportunities for
mastery of current material and movement into new ideas. 7. Describe how the teacher incorporated assigned homework into
the lesson framework. Did the teacher actively involve students during this phase so they revealed their
misunderstandings?
Similarly, in an observation whose purpose is to focus on a specific pedagogical principle employed by the teacher during lesson
delivery, a rating scale with room for elaboration and explanation prompts preservice teachers to be reflective while observing. In
Figure 2, we present a rating scale to guide an observation that focuses specifically on accessibility to the lesson's content. It
contains a five-point Likert type rating scale, +2 to -2, upon which observers can rank the teacher from excellent to poor on each
point. A +2 rating indicates that the classroom students or teacher exhibits the skill or action at a maximum level, whereas a -2 rating
indicates minimal exhibition. Observer gives a score of 0 when uncertain about the skills and actions that are observed. We claim that
just recording events and marking scores are inadequate and mislead the analysis of conduct that occurred in the class. Student
teachers are prompted to construct meaning from what they encountered.
Figure 2 Rating scale for observation of lesson that focuses on accessibility to information.
1. The content of the lesson was presented in a logical sequence. +2+10-1-2 2. The teacher's presentation took into
account: a. Students' prior knowledge +2+10-1-2 b. Students' life experience +2+10-1-2 3. The teacher provided a variety
of examples and illustrations of new terms and asked students to describe the terms in their own words. +2+10-1-2 4. The
teacher included mechanical aids for enhancing understanding: a. Demonstrations +2+10-1-2 b. Tables, schemes, graphs
+2+10-1-2 c. Overhead projector +2+10-1-2 d. Manipulative material +2+10-1-2 5. The teacher used questions skillfully to:
a. Review previous material +2+10-1-2 b. Explain new material +2+10-1-2 c. Assess mastery of material +2+10-1-2 6. The
teacher presented new information from a variety of viewpoints. +2+10-1-2 7. The teacher's remarks included: a. Praise
+2+10-1-2 b. Constructive criticism +2+10-1-2 c. Assessment judgment +2+10-1-2
Taxonomy and its use in observation and analysis
We summarize our approach to teaching lesson observation and analysis in a taxonomy (see Figure 3) arranged according to the five
phases of a lesson: organization, determination of prior knowledge, preparation of students for assimilation of material, mastery of
material, and setting of expectations for the next class (Henak, 1984; Posamentier & Stepelman, 1995). These five phases guide
individuals who observe and analyze the lesson to reveal the classroom teacher's procedures.
Figure 3 Lesson analysis taxonomy.
1. Organization Goal: to prepare students to engage in the lesson content 2. Assessing of prior knowledge Goal: to
ascertain content readiness of students to grasp the new material 3. Preparation of students for active, conscious
assimilation of material Goal: in recognition that students learn through active involvement, prepare students to
actively participate in the learning situation 4. Preparation for mastery of material Goal: to guide students through
assimilation process and prepare them for accommodation 5. Setting expectations for the next class Goal: through
assignments, prepare students for the next lesson while providing reinforcement for the one just completed

---

The taxonomy can be used in a variety of ways to develop skill in lesson observation and analysis. One suggestion, presented here,
requires the supervisor who is instructing prospective teachers to develop a set of statement pairs for each phase of the lesson. The
statement pairs emerge from theories of students' psychological development, readiness to learn, and pedagogical effectiveness that
are criteria of effectiveness. Each statement pair presents opposite sites of a five point rating scale, described earlier. Prospective
teachers who are learning to observe and analyze lessons react to each statement pair by rating the skill or action they observe.
Examples of statement pairs to be rated by an observer are presented for each phase in the taxonomy. In each pair, the preferred
behavior appears in the left column.
Organization phase. Since the purpose of this phase is to prepare students for involvement with the lesson, the observed teacher
shows through personal behavior that there is a plan to engage students. Possible statements that the observer rates are presented
in Figure 4.
Figure 4 Statement pairs for the organization phase of the lesson.
The teacher appears ready +2+10-1-2 The teacher is not to conduct the lesson: ready to conduct the lesson objectives and
lesson. learning outcomes are shared with students; warm-up activity, handouts, demonstration materials, and other
teaching aids are available. The teacher gives +2+10-1-2 The teacher does not attention to students' consider students'
preparation for the lesson: preparation for the notebooks, textbooks, lesson or issue. homework, instruments. The
students are ready to +2+10-1-2 Students are not ready begin the lesson: settled to begin the lesson, and down, have
class they do not settle down materials, show attention quickly. to teacher.
Phase of assessing prior knowledge. In this phase, the teacher checks previously assigned work and discerns whether students have
the necessary content base upon which to build the new lesson. Students demonstrate their understanding while the teacher
assesses their readiness for new material (see Figure 5).
Figure 5 Statement pairs for checking for prior knowledge.
Understanding of previous +2+10-1-2 Understanding of previous material is evident (brief previous material is not
questions, warm-up evident. exercise). Students' +2+10-1-2 Students' misunderstandings and misunderstandings and their
causes are apparent their causes are not through questioning. revealed. Assigned work is +2+10-1-2 Assigned work does not
organized so that students contain the organization reinforce their necessary so that understanding. students reinforce
their understanding. Assessment of students' +2+10-1-2 Assessment of students' knowledge has been knowledge has not been
motivated by the teacher. motivated by the teacher.
Preparation for active, conscious learning of new material phase. In order to grasp new content, students must have a framework
through which to understand new material, be engaged in the learning process, and be in an environment that is conducive to
learning. Students need guidance, resources, and time for learning. The teacher's role is to present information, motivate
involvement, facilitate students' knowledge construction, and organize the learning environment. Statement pairs that guide the
analysis of this phase of the lesson appear in Figure 6.
Figure 6 Statement pairs for analyzing teacher preparation of students to learn new content.
The teacher provides +2+10-1-2 The teacher does not students with the provide students with foundation necessary for the
foundation necessary new content. for new content. The teacher motivates +2+10-1-2 The teacher fails to students to
listen, read motivate students to write, think, discuss, listen read, write, manipulate, abstract, and think, discuss
generalize. manipulate, abstract, and generalize. The teacher's mode of +2+10-1-2 The teacher's mode of presentation is
within presentation is beyond students' ability to grasp. students' ability to grasp. The teacher makes +2+10-1-2 The
teacher fails to available manipulative make available materials materials, models, and appropriate for other materials
supporting students' appropriate for learning. supporting students' learning.
Mastering of content phase. In order for students to absorb the material, they must interact with it. If they are to master content, they
must engage in varied experiences and applications, and have sufficient time to reach conclusions. In a well taught lesson, there
should be an observable progression of students' interactions with and applications of the material. Prospective teachers can use the
statement pairs in Figure 7 to guide the analysis of this phase.
Table 7 Statement pairs for analyzing content mastery.
The teacher represents +2+10-1-2 The teacher ignores and illustrates the students' prior learning concept in terms of in
presenting new students' prior learning. concepts. The formation of concept +2+10-1-2 The formation of concept
presentation includes presentation does not visual representations, include visual abstract representations,
representations, and generalizations. abstract representations, or generalizations. The presented new +2+10-1-2 The
presented new content content includes a content fails to reasonable amount of acknowledge scope of concepts and
procedures students' ability to as well as activities that absorb new material. enhance understanding (puzzles, problems,
applications).
Preparation for the next class phase. Students may view the lesson in isolation unless the teacher sets expectations for the next
meeting. A common practice is through a homework assignment that grows out of the performance during the presented lesson. A
well-planned assignment is a meaningful part of the learning, and statement pairs (see Figure 8) are useful for analyzing this part of
the lesson.
Table 8 Statement pairs for analyzing teacher's setting of expectations for the next class.
The teacher states +2+10-1-2 The teacher does not homework expectations state homework clearly and highlights
expectations clearly nor potential areas of highlights potential confusion. areas of confusion. The chosen exercises
+2+10-1-2 The chosen exercises agree with the lesson's ignore the lesson's objectives, are varied, objectives, are all
the and can be completed same types, and do not within a reasonable time indicate teacher's frame. understanding of
reasonable time frame. The teacher includes +2+10-1-2 The assignment does not exercises for enrichment contain exercises

---

for and exercises that lead enrichment. into the content of the next class.
Comprehensive observation. We suggest that the rating scales that student teachers completed during observations are useful as
they complete a comprehensive observation and analysis. The task, which may be the final one in a series, includes all components
of the lesson. We offer the following questions to serve as a useful organizer.
1. Upon what educational, teaching, and developmental goals was the lesson based?
2. What common teaching methods were observed during the presentation of the lesson? Describe each and their pedagogical
usefulness.
3. Describe salient features of the teacher's and students' behavior.
4. Discuss the content and character of students' independent work (reproduction, searching, creating) during each phase of the
lesson.
5. Describe methods employed to develop cognitive interest and the exhibition of various teaching roles:
a) demonstration of novel content;
b) historical context for the content;
c) demonstration of the practical role for the content;
d) renewal and deepening of prior knowledge;
e) orientation to work being presented (formation of objectives, actualization of cognitive requirement);
f) stimulation of emotional and motivational states (achievement of success, self-satisfaction upon achievement of success);
g) creation of cognitive problem for students;
h) inducement to learning activity.
6. Discuss the formation of teacher's skids:
a) selection of major content components;
b) planning of related activities;
c) conduct of activities.
7. Discuss formation of logical, critical and higher order thinking:
a) analysis and synthesis;
b) comparison;
c) generalization;
d) proof.
8. Discuss formation of cognitive skills:
a) statement of the problem;
b) elicit necessary assumptions;
c) apply knowledge to new situation;
d) check correctness of solution.
9. How were learning aids used in the lesson to enhance knowledge construction (audio-visual equipment, visual aids, manipulative
materials)?
10. Discuss the correlation of general education and professional preparation, creating connections to other disciplines (incorporating
knowledge of adjacent disciplines as a medium for support, using problems that are induced through real-life situation).
11. What methods were employed to activate prior knowledge and prior life experience in order that students might grasp new
content more easily?
12. Describe how the teacher's and students' actions during the lesson reflected the teacher's plan for the lesson. Discuss the gaps in

---

students' understanding revealed through their individual work and the resulting accommodations that the teacher made in the
lesson.
13. Discuss the structure of the lesson and its pedagogical expediency.
14. Discuss homework assignments in terms of content, character, and depth. Describe how the teacher prepared students to
complete their homework.
15. Present a summary evaluation of the lesson. Include discussion the degree of success attained in meeting stated objectives and
the students' gain in knowledge, their habits and skills. Conclude the analysis with concrete suggestions for improving the lesson.
Discussion
The preceding pages reflect our belief in the importance of a prospective teacher's active participation in the building of a conceptual
framework for the theory of teaching. We acknowledge that such a construction often progresses from the concrete to the abstract.
Consequently, we advocate for the inclusion of opportunities to observe, discuss, and analyze a variety of teaching methods and
strategies. We view the role of the college supervisor as a facilitator and mentor who assists preservice teachers to construct their
own understanding and belief system of teaching and learning. Our view is grounded in the social nature of learning as well as in
theories of constructivism that emphasize the active role of learners in building their own understanding of reality.
In order to help prospective teachers organize their thinking, while they observe and analyze lessons and develop their pedagogical
vocabulary, we suggest the use of guides, rating scales, and statement pairs to support their building ideas of teaching. In using
these tools, student teachers do not search for the "right answer" that someone corrects later on. The tools are not intended to limit
student teachers' perception, impressions, thoughts, or opinions. Rather they are to support the construction of knowledge about the
science of teaching.
Construction of meaning is an increasingly abstract process. Real classroom situations contain unexpected events that may require
very prompt thinking, quick reactions, and immediate action. The organizers are flexible guides that promote prospective teachers'
investigation, examination, and interpretation of the events they observe. Prospective teachers need to learn to analyze the concrete
classroom situation with regard to the psychological significance of what is occurring and to consider possible reasons, a process that
is more extensive than just recording incidents. Through their recording of discrete characteristics and discussions with peers and
professionals, they learn how to build a complete, integral, comprehensive analysis.
Finally, interpretation is the process of making theoretical sense out of what has been seen and described. Therefore, interpretation
must explicate the relationships between events and explain through the use of appropriate theories, models, generalizations, and
concepts what has transpired at levels that are beneath the surface of observable classroom events. Prospective teachers who learn
how to do this, through the process of observation and analysis of lessons, are en route to becoming reflective practitioners.
References
Armstrong, D. G., & Savage, T.V. (1994). Secondary education: An introduction (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan College Publishing.
Berliner, D. C. (1986). In pursuit of the expert pedagogue. Educational Researcher, 15,5-13.
Berliner, D. C. (1988). Implications of research on pedagogical expertise and experience for mathematics teaching. In D. A. Grouws,
T. J. Cooney, & D. Jones (Eds.), Effective perspectives on research on teaching (pp. 67-95). Reston, VA: National Council of
Teachers of Mathematics.
Borko, H., & Livingston, C. (1989). Cognition and improvisation: Differences in mathematics instruction by expert and novice
teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 473-498.
Borko, H., & Shavelson, R. (1990). Teachers' decision making. In B. Jones, & L. Idols (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and cognitive
instruction (pp. 311-346). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaurn.
Carter, K., Sabers, D., Cushing, K., Pinnegar, S., & Berliner, D. (1987). Professing and using information about students: A study of
expert, novice, and postulant teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 3, 147-157.
Combs, D. (1965). The professional education of teachers. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Cooney, T. J., Davis, E. J., & Henderson, K. B. (1983). Dynamics of teaching secondary school mathematics. Prospect Heights, IL:
Waveland Press.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (1989). Teacher preparation: Structural and conceptual alternatives. The National Center for Research on
Teacher Education (Issue paper 89-5). Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education.
Good, T L., Grouws, D. A., & Ebmeier, H. (1983). Active mathematics teaching. New York: Longman.
Henak, R. M. (1984). Lesson planning for meaningful activity in teaching. Washington, DC: National Educational Association.
Hunter, M. (1994). Knowing, teaching, and supervising. In Hosford, P. (Ed.), Using what we know about teaching (pp. 169-190).
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

---

Jackson, P. W. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York: Hold, Rinehart, and Winston.
Johnson, D. A., & Rising, G. R. (1972). Guidelines for teaching mathematics. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1980). Improving inservice training: The message of research. Educational Leadership, 37, 379-385.
Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1984). Power for staff development through research on training. Washington, DC: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Leinhardt, G., & Putnam, R. T (1987). The skill of learning from classroom lessons. American Educational Research Journal, 24,
557-588.
Livingston, C., & Borko, H. (1990). High school mathematics review lessons: Expert-novice distinctions. Journal for Research in
Mathematics Education, 21, 372-387.
Mathematical Sciences Education Board. (1990). Reshaping school mathematics: A philosophy and framework for curriculum.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA:
Author.
National Research Council. (1989). Everybody counts: A report to the nation on the future of mathematics education. Washington,
DC: National Academy Press.
Posamentier, P. A., & Stepelman, J. (1995). Teaching secondary school mathematics (4th ed.). Englewood aiffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Sergiovanni, T. J. (Ed.). (1982). Supervision of teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Shapiro, E. (1988). Teacher: Being and becoming. New York: Bank Street College.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-Z.
Wilson, S., Schulman, L., & Richart, A. (1986). "150 different ways" of knowing: Representation of knowledge in teaching. In J.
Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers' thinking (pp. 104 124). Eastbourne, England: Cassell.
New resource from Kids Can Make a Difference inspires students to fight hunger and poverty
World Hunger Year announces the publication of "Finding Solutions to Hunger: Kids Can Make a Difference" a source book of
engaging, interactive and challenging lessons for middle and high school students on the causes and solutions to hunger. The guide
examines contemporary development projects, the media, famine vs. chronic hunger, and the working poor.
J. Larry Brown, Director of the Center on Hunger, Poverty & Nutrition Policy at Tufts University, described the guide as a "remarkable
investment in the belief that social progress depends on youth--children who see old injustices and determine to change them."
Regina Panasuk specializes in professional development of preservice and inservice teachers. Mary Sullivan teaches mathematics
and statistics and investigates in students' conceptual understanding in those areas.
Copyright:  COPYRIGHT 1998 Project Innovation Austin LLC 
https://projectinnovationaustin.com/
Source Citation (MLA 9th Edition)
Panasuk, Regina M., and Mary M. Sullivan. "Need for lesson analysis in effective lesson planning." Education, vol. 118, no. 3, spring
1998, pp. 330+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A20494595/AONE?u=googlescholar&sid=bookmark-
AONE&xid=a03754bb. Accessed 21 July 2023.
Gale Document Number: GALE|A20494595