Lesson Planning in Primary School Using Lesson Study and Open Approach


Lesson plans are generally written in a way that helps teachers to layout and run classroom activities. Many researchers have examined how teachers go about planning. This clearly shows that instructional plans play a central role in teaching and creating effective learning environments (Clark & Dunn, 1991; Reiser & Dick, 1996; Shauelson, 1983 cited in Koszalka et al., 1999). In context of school using lesson study and open approach followed conception of Inprasitha (2010), the importance of lesson study processes is collaborative lesson planning. After that the teachers who participate in lesson study group use these lesson plans in the classroom, observe and collect students’ thought and learning processes. And in planning the lessons use problems that students encounter in everyday life, so as to stimulate students to work to achieve the objective (Fernandez & Yoshida, 2004). The data were collected by video and audio recording while the target group were planning and teaching the lessons in lesson study process, then were transcribed to the protocol and analyzed by using theoretical framework of Stigler and Hiebert (1999). The research revealed that the target group discussed during the lesson planning process detailing about exact words, problem situations, materials, the anticipated solutions, students’ thoughts and responses, time used in each part of the lesson, and how to summarize the lesson. In the lesson planning, the exact words used in the problem situations were mostly mentioned. Moreover, in lesson planning, the issue of details of introduction design was discussed a lot. There were some issues which were not discussed during the teachers-included designing of the lesson plan. However, they were discussed while the teacher was using the lesson plan in class during instructional management.

Share and Cite:

Moonsri, A. & Pattanajak, A. (2013). Lesson Planning in Primary School Using Lesson Study and Open Approach. Psychology, 4, 1064-1068. doi: 10.4236/psych.2013.412155.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Fernandez, C., & Yoshida, M. (2004). Lesson study. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[2] Inprasitha, M. (2010). One feature of adaptive lesson study in Thailand: Designing learning unit. In Proceeding of the 45th Korean National Meeting of Mathematics Education Dongkook University (pp. 193-204). Gyeongju: Dongkook University.
[3] Isoda, M., Stephens, M., Ohara, Y., & Miyakawa, T. (2007). Japanese lesson study in mathematics. Singapore: World Scientific.
[4] Isoda, M., & Katagiri, S. (2012). Mathematical thinking: How to develop it in the classroom. Toh Tuck Link: World Scientific.
[5] Koszalka, T., Breman, J., & Moore, M. K. (1999). Sharing lesson plans over the World Wide Web: Important components. Education and Information Technologies, 4, 143-151.
[6] Lee, Y. A., & Takahashi, A. (2011). Lesson plans and the contingency of classroom interactions. Human Studies, 34, 209-227.
[7] Lewis, C. (2002). Lesson study: A handbook of teacher-led instructional change. Philadelphia, PA: Research for Better Schools.
[8] Lewis, C. C., & Hurd, J. (2011). Lesson study step by step. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
[9] Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving in the classroom. New York: The Free Press.
[10] Uhrmacher, P. B., Conrad, B. M., & Moroye, C. M. (2013). Finding the balance between process and product through perceptual lesson planning (pp. 1-27). New York: Teachers College Record.

Copyright © 2022 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.